Defence review

Help_a_girl_out

I can’t answer that for the time the PCN was issued. At present the permit spaces  are for local (non retail) businesses, so I presume they have an in house process To obtain one.

Coupon-mad

Ok.

I think your defence should refer to the fact that how a driver might get a 'permit' for this site is opaque, unexplained and the term appears void for impossibility. Further, the signage is overly cluttered and wordy, such that from the headline (most obvious) information, it appears drivers can park for 4 hours free as long as they are users of the businesses and don't walk off site.  The crucial term about permits is almost an afterthought and you had to squint to try to read it, when reviewing UKPC's grainy photos from the material date.  As such... (then copy some wording you will find about PACE v Lengyel when you search the forum for those words!).

Help_a_girl_out

Coupon-mad said:

Ok.

I think your defence should refer to the fact that how a driver might get a 'permit' for this site is opaque, unexplained and the term appears void for impossibility. Further, the signage is overly cluttered and wordy, such that from the headline (most obvious) information, it appears drivers can park for 4 hours free as long as they are users of the businesses and don't walk off site.  The crucial term about permits is almost an afterthought and you had to squint to try to read it, when reviewing UKPC's grainy photos from the material date.  As such... (then copy some wording you will find about PACE v Lengyel when you search the forum for those words!).

My original defence refers to there being no obvious signage, should I reference the fact upon receiving the PCN that the driver went looking for a sign and then state the particulars of the sign were not clear for the reasons you mention above?
 

Coupon-mad

You mean your original appeal (not defence).

And no - just refer to the grainy images supplied by the Claimant (my suggested words above say this).

At WS stage DON'T use your husband's photo at all, it is far too clear and readable! Use UKPC's grainy pictures at WS stage.

Le_Kirk

In your defence paragraph 2, you should put all those sentences together else you need to number each separate sentence as if they are paragraphs.  This is done so that you can easily refer to them in a hearing - "I refer to paragraph 2" is easy to understand whereas "I refer to the second sentence after paragraph 2 but before paragraph 3" is clumsy and could lead to confusion!

Help_a_girl_out

Could you please help me further with what wording from PACE v LENYEL I should be be referring to?  I have had a look at the court document, but am unsure on it.  I have updated with the guidance from Coupon-Mad, but mainly in my own words:

2. It is admitted that the Defendant was the registered keeper of the vehicle in question.  It is denied the Defendant was driving the vehicle in question at the time the Parking Charge Notice was issued. The driver of the vehicle was, in fact, the Husband of the Defendant.

3. On 28/04/2017 the driver of the vehicle in question was attending the local shopping centre.  On receiving the NTK (Notice to Keeper), the Defendant enquired with the driver, who stated they did not see any external signage upon entry to the car park, nor did they see any obvious signage in the vicinity of where the vehicle was parked.  Having used the adjacent car park a number of times previously (and with no conspicuous signage to suggest otherwise) the driver believed that this car park operated under the same contract. 

4. From the grainy images supplied by UKPC on the date the PCN was issued it is hard to distinguish how the driver was able obtain a permit for the site and the term appears void for impossibility. The signage appears overly cluttered and wordy.  Using the zoom function and squinty it appears that drivers can park for 4 hours for free as long as they remain on site. The crucial term about a permit is not clear from this image.

Help_a_girl_out

Sorry, not sure how to edit my posts, but should read 'squinting' not squinted.

Le_Kirk

Help_a_girl_out said:

Sorry, not sure how to edit my posts, but should read 'squinting' not squinted.

If you have a small wheel to the RHS of the blue banner on your post, click on it and you will see edit/delete.  You only receive this device when you have reached a sufficient number of posts - determined by a formula not shared with posters!

Help_a_girl_out

Thank you, does the above amendment look ok to you?  I would really liked get this sent off before 4pm today and enjoy my weekend!

Le_Kirk

Yep, go for it.