G24 - Everyman Cinema Winchester - Claim Form Received

Cryptjitsuu

Hello again, 

I am back again to fight another parking "charge" (invoice). 

Writing this thread mainly so other people do not pay these con artists and aren't scared to take it to the court! 

As demonstrated in my previous post the driver of the vehicle has been to court before and won against a different company so plan to do the same here. 

NEWBIE Thread Steps Completed 

SAR Submitted to G24 

A claim was issued against you on 10/01/2023

Your acknowledgment of service was submitted on 19/01/2023 

Details & Where I am looking for guidance: 

The driver had a life threatening Dental Emergency, the space parked in was in a local cinema (the closest available parking to the emergency OOH Dental Practice), the cinema was not open. 

I have checked Google Street View and believe the images are outdated as vaguely remember there being ANPR which isn't shown on street view. 

Obviously I will submit the traditional defence related to inflated charges.

Question - Despite the cinema not being open is it worth submitting to the landowner in an attempt to get this cancelled is it too late?

Things I will take responsibility for: 

- Late submission of SAR so unsure if I will receive this before needing to submit a defence (however I can easily get images of the correct signage)

- Should have submitted to land owner sooner 

- Delays in responding to the PCN has come from the car being registered at my business & previous home address (I still receive all mail but with delays) 


Despite said delays and my lateness to address this I am still confident I will win so if you are in a similar situation reading this at a later date DO NOT PANIC PAY.

Coupon-mad

Is the named Defendant your company?  Or you?

SAR is more useful at WS stage so no worries if no reply before you defend.

No point complaining to landowner in your case.  You were not a patron and they probably object to their car park being used (understandably).

Cryptjitsuu

"No point complaining to landowner in your case.  You were not a patron and they probably object to their car park being used (understandably)" 

Yeah thought this would be the case 

The named Defendant is myself and not a business/company

KeithP

Cryptjitsuu said:

A claim was issued against you on 10/01/2023

Your acknowledgment of service was submitted on 19/01/2023 

With a Claim Issue Date of 10th January, and having filed an Acknowledgment of Service in a timely manner, you have until 4pm on Monday 13th February 2023 to file your Defence.

That's over three weeks away. Plenty of time to produce a Defence, but please don't leave it to the last minute.

To create a Defence, and then file a Defence by email, look at the second post in the NEWBIES thread.

Don't miss the deadline for filing a Defence.

Do not try and file a Defence via the MoneyClaimOnline website. Once an Acknowledgment of Service has been filed, the MCOL website should be treated as 'read only'.

Cryptjitsuu

Directions Questionnaire Received  

Cryptjitsuu

Another one bites the dust 

Judge ruled in my favour stating that due to there being no images of where I parked and there being no signs upon entry from the road & a large section of supposed “car park” that it was entirely plausible I had not seen the signs due to them only being where the spaces are marked. 

Costs awarded 

Umkomaas

Nice one, and well done.🥂  

When you've fully gathered your thoughts, perhaps you can give us some further details of the hearing - which court, Judge's name, who did the PPC field to represent them, what did they have to say, what did the Judge have to say, did you have to speak?  I note you were awarded costs, were these the basic costs - £95 + a bit of travel expenses, or something more significant?

This information really does help us to understand the courts' and Judges' thinking which in due course helps other motorists who inevitably fall foul of litigation-rampant PPCs. 

B789

Excellent news. Another prime example of someone just following the guidance and getting on with it. All on a single thread page.

Looking forward to the full court report.

Coupon-mad

Cryptjitsuu said:

Another one bites the dust 

Judge ruled in my favour stating that due to there being no images of where I parked and there being no signs upon entry from the road & a large section of supposed “car park” that it was entirely plausible I had not seen the signs due to them only being where the spaces are marked. 

Costs awarded 

Well done you!

Please tell us a bit more about how it felt, and what the other side's rep said, etc.

And PLEASE do this.  Only TWO WEEKS LEFT:

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/80289837/#Comment_80289837