Won in court today—-(Previously) A little help and advice please.

berty50

Thanks…I got the links from the Parking Pranksters case law page and they’re all relevant to this case. So I assume I can use them but do I need to include the transcripts in the bundle or just quote the hearing reference and the relevant paragraphs….sorry I’m still a little confused over that one.

Coupon-mad

Like I said:

The whole transcripts of both.

berty50

Thanks…I’ve got a case where the car park was full it was three days before Xmas so really busy and it took ages to park and also exit. The signage is UKPC so £100 not clear from the vehicle and it’s ANPR with a 12 minute overstay. I’ve also got additional costs everything else is fine in terms of PCN service, landowner agreement ect.

My approach was to argue the ANPR time isn’t parking and because of the Vicissitude of the busy blocked car park as described in Jopson v Homeguard which also defines parking that would be a useful case. The ANPR time not being the parking time is also used in Parking Eye v Mrs X so I felt that would be useful as well used with the code of practice and the DLUHC codes. A contract can’t be formed until out of the car and signage read etc.

I’ve also got the charges for recovery on top of the parking charge so double recovery, abuse of process which I feel is my strongest hand. I’m clear with the Beavis and ParkimgEve v Somerfield I understand I can just quote and show the relevant paragraphs for those cases as they were from more senior courts. I’ll use the additional POFA and other codes of practice aids as well. I’ve also got Excel v Wilkinson but assume as it’s county court I’ll need the whole transcript for that one.

Once I’ve finally documented it, I’ll post it all up for help and advice but I’ve researched the materials and completed a dummy bundle just to see the size which at 76 pages in a 10.7MB PDF seems massive and I was trying to get it smaller hence the question re dropping the CC hearing summaries if I could just quote like Beavis etc.

One last thing…I didn’t include the original court notice which shows the added costs for recovery, in this case £82 as I assumed they were court issued documents, on file and available for reference if needed. As this is my strong hand, should I have included that? 

Coupon-mad

You can't drop them.

Don't know what you mean by this letter?

"I didn’t include the original court notice which shows the added costs for recovery, in this case £82 as I assumed they were court issued documents, on file and available for reference if needed. As this is my strong hand, should I have included that? "

berty50

This was the original county court claim form issued by the CCBC which shows the particulars of the claim as this is where they add the £82 described as additional contractual charges. I was thinking if I needed to refer this this, for example of the judge thought the £182 was the whole parking charge I’d need to show them it wasn’t and if that claim form wasn’t in my bundle could I still refer to it as it’s a court issued document?

if I need to include this means I’ll have to manually scan the whole lot again which I’m trying to avoid if possible. 

I apologise for asking a lot of dumb Qs and I know you prefer to start at the very beginning, so I do appreciate your time and understanding with a vague and generic overview.. 

Coupon-mad

No need to include the claim form. The Judge has got that in the file already!

berty50

Just a quick update, I was asked by the person I’m helping, who’s elderly and a little old fashioned not to post documents online. I explained they were anonymous but I don’t think he understands so I’ve had to adhere to his wishes hence the reason I haven’t posted the witness statement or the Claimants W.S.

I do need a little help though If that’s okay?

The claimant have included an amended landowner contract that’s dated a year after the alleged offence. I’m not sure how strong that is in terms of a challenge, because whilst is an amendment I would have though we’d need to see the original executed agreement?

Also they’re quoting VCSL V Adam Percy where the appeal judge ruled that the additional charge was fair. See quote below.

 In addition, in relation to the recoverability of administration charges, the recent appeal of Vehicle Control Services Ltd v Adam Percy (28 September 2021) handed down by His Honour Judge Saffman at paragraph 61-62 states “61. I do not think that the term, albeit that it seeks an unquantified amount, causes a significant imbalance in the parties’ rights and obligations. As HHJ Moloney observed, the motorist is being given the valuable privilege of parking on private land in return for a promise to pay a specified sum in the event that he/she fails to display a ticket and, in this case, an additional sum if he/she fails to pay the specified sum. 62. In the consideration of all the circumstances (as one is required to do under s62(5)(b)), it is right to note that the motorist has a choice. He/she can choose not to park in the car park but also the motorist has a choice to pay the PCN or appeal, in which event no additional charges arise. This is not a charge which the motorist is obliged to pay at the whim of VCS irrespective of the conduct of the motorist. It is right to say that the motorist even knows what the additional charge is. It is specified in the PCN7 and he/she can avoid paying it by paying the initial charge of £100 or £60 if he/she pays quickly enough”.

Reading that extract the judge says that the additional costs were specified in the PCN, so I’d like to know if their POC would have shown the actual specie figure of the addition costs?

In the WS the additional costs are quoted as 

£100.00 – The balance of the PCN

£70.00 – The administrative costs incurred pre-issue
£12.00 – Litigation trace fee

£35.00 – Claim fee

£50.00 – Fixed legal costs upon issue

£27.00 - Hearing Fee

TOTAL £294.00

I’m struggling to find anything on PCSL v Adam Percy so any thoughts on this would be appreciated.

Many Thanks Berty.

Coupon-mad

VCS v Percy is already mentioned in the template defence.  Useless decision that Judges are generally ignoring.

berty50

I’d not read that defence as I’d already put in a holding type defence before arriving at this helpful forum. I’ve now read that in the defence section but it’s not clear from that what the legal counter argument is other than trumping it with the DLUHC Parking Code which I’ve used and quoted the escalation of costs section. 

Fruitcake

Additional costs are against the PoFA 2012 and against the Supreme Court decision in Beavis v ParkingEye. The judges in the highest court in the land said the parking charge includes debt recovery costs and profit.

In addition, debt collectors work on a no win no fee basis, so if they fail to collect then the PPC has not incurred any additional costs.