Parking on a private road with a No parking sign close by. Grace period?

Vism

Are you saying I have no case @KeithP?

Should the defence loads of legalese?

Vism

Should I just state that I stopped there for 4 minutes and the signs weren't obvious?

Gotta say, I'm struggling to decide what to say.

KeithP

Vism said:

Are you saying I have no case @KeithP?

No, definitely not.

I am saying that you have not used any legal argument explaining why you are not liable for the charge.

What you have done is described what happened, but that doesn't explain why a court should dismiss the case.

As I said earlier, look at other threads. There are threads discussing the content of a Defence posted here every day. See how others have managed.

Coupon-mad

Yep you have a strong defence.  But what you've written reads like a witness statement.  Learn from reading a good ten or 12 other defences.

Mouse007

Your defence is that the Defendant did not seen any signs, there were none near where he parked and no clear signs at the entrance to the road. The Defendant did not agree to any (uncommunicated) terms and conditions. Liability is denied.

Your defence should include that the Defendant was a legitimate customer collecting an order, not parking.

That could be a single paragraph (just 2 sentences) and then the rest of the template.

Later (witness statement stage) you tell your story and argue that if you did not see any signs you did not read them and therefore could not have agreed to the terms and conditions therein.

You can then also expand upon stopping to collect an order is not parking, it is stopping to attend to a vicissitude of short duration (the vicissitude being the store car park was full - the short duration was 4 minutes). Read paras 20 and 21 of Jopson v Homeguard.

Vism

So I've just been too verbose?
Is this better?

2. It is admitted that the Defendant was the registered keeper and driver of the vehicle in question.

 

3.1 The defendant states that having attempted to park in the business's car park but failed due to lack of room he parked on Hiron Way for no more than 4 minutes.

3.2 There was no sign or double yellow lines where the defendant parked, 2 signs were some way to the front and rear of where parking occurred. No sign was visible on the approach to the road from the public highway.

3.3 The defendant argues that this ticket is completely inappropriate due to poor signage, both at the parking location and on the entrance to the private road, lack of double yellow lines and the length of time parked.

Mouse007

Vism said:

So I've just been too verbose?
Is this better?

Much more like it.

Personally I would not mention the 2 signs, be silent about that.

Vism

Thanks a million.

I'll hold off on submission for a bit.
Does anyone else have suggestions to improve further?
Have I missed anything important? 

I'm working through other defences at the moment.

KeithP

Vism said:

3.1 The defendant states that having attempted to park in the business's car park but failed due to lack of room he parked on Hiron Way for no more than 4 minutes.

Perhaps the word 'parked' in that sentence should be replaced by 'stopped' and the paragraph could/should be adjusted to add something about stopping is not parking. 

Maybe something like...
3.1 The defendant states that having attempted to park in the business's car park but failed due to lack of room he stopped on Hiron Way for no more than 4 minutes. The purpose being to load goods. Jopson v Homeguard [2016] B9GF0A9E explains that loading/unloading is not parking.

(that paragraph might need some refinement)

Vism

Well, well, just looked at Google Street View and the parking restrictions have been removed.
Is it worth mentioning that?