County Court Judgment

63realfan

Supplementary Witness Statement 

Date Monday 3rd April 2023

CLAIM No: XXXXXX BETWEEN: 

PARKINGEYE LTD (Claimant)


 -- and --


XXXXXX (Defendant) 

I am XXXXX and I am the defendant in this matter. This is my Second Supplementary supporting Statement to my application dated 10/02/2023 and to be used alongside my first witness statement. I have now seen DCBL Witness Statement for the first time and finally know what this was about therefore would like to add extra information to support my witness statement submitted on 10/02/2023.

                

 

1.   The defendant always intended to defend this if ParkingEye had ever sued but they didn't. Two letters sent within a week of each other a month after the alleged offence then no claim in 2021 and nothing for 18 months until a letter from DCBL in November 2022 that bore all the hallmarks of a scam, adding a false £70 that was never on the sign.

 

2.   The Defendant reiterates strongly that no Claim form from CCBC arrived AT ALL and the defendant would not have ignored court claim, which has never arrived and appears to be part of a CCBC batch that went astray during the postal strikes before Christmas. 

 

3.   The defendant is asking for a set aside under CPR 13.3 because the defendant did not receive the claim (at all) it was inflated by DCBLegal way beyond the alleged 'contract' on the signage. 

 

4.   The defendant works for the police & has his own business so would have replied to a court claim, to not risk any harm to my business/work caused by a CCJ. 

 

5.   The defendant acknowledges that he could have paid an extra £25.28 and cleared the CCJ off his record however is defending for the set aside as the defendant has genuinely and truthfully not received the claim form from CCBC that resulted in the default CCJ and as mentioned believes he has a strong defence against the original PCN. 

 

6.   The defendant believed it was a scam because the car was only there for 10 minutes, which is within a reasonable grace period set by landowners at most locations. There was no breach and the contract wasn't £170 - this is an abuse in itself. 

 

7.   In response to DCBL witness statement ‘’you didn't 'act promptly' as soon as you heard about the CCJ. ‘’ Respectfully, the defendant did because he filed his N244 on Friday 10th February and (within mere days of finding out) after ringing the CCBC three times, first time end of January and they failed to answer, then 2nd February where the defendant recorded the call (as included with set aside application documents) and the gentleman at the CCBC said (when asked by the defendant

 

**5 minutes and 30 seconds into the call recording**

 "do you think it was down to the postal error?") 
 


 

Response from CCBC: 
 


 

 "Most likely as it's only been across where the royal mail postal strikes have been happening and people haven't been receiving their claim forms'"  
 

 

8. Third call was to get a copy of the POC that the defendant needed in order to understand a bit more about the PCN. 


 

9.  The second call is recorded and the issue date of 9th December is EXACTLY the same date as others online have been reporting the same issue - no claim form served. One person with a missing 9th December claim had their CCJ set aside on 8th February 2023. It is too much to be a coincidence and the recorded call shows the CCBC know "people haven't been receiving their claim forms" of which the call recording proves the CCBC are aware of the same issue around the dates of early December 2022. 
 

 

10.    The defendant, whilst on the second phone call to CCBC of which was recorded asked **2 minutes 35 seconds into the call recording** 

 

‘’if the royal mail strikes were planned and I cannot believe that something like that which is quite serious is not registered post especially with the strikes going on would of come out and that I have still not received anything’’  
 

 

With a response from the CCBC: 
 


‘’They are all automatically sent as soon as we receive them so it does look like it was lost through the royal mail because unfortunately what the courts are doing they aren't really taking into considering the postal strikes’’ 
 


 

11.    The defendant continues to express his concern to the CCBC customer service agent that a CCJ was lodged against him in default whilst he was unaware and not having the chance to reply to the claim form which was never received and how serious this is. 


 

12.    I am prepared to swear on oath that the claim was not served and that is still the position to date. I work for Surrey Police where I can also reference the oath I swear on as an employee to uphold honest and integrity at all times both whilst on duty and off duty. 

I believe that the facts stated in this witness statement are true. I understand that proceedings for contempt of court may be brought against anyone who makes, or causes to be made, a false statement of trust without an honest in its truth. 

 

63realfan

IN THE COUNTY COURT

Claim No:  XXXXX

 

Between

Parking Eye Limited

(Claimant) 

- and -  

XXXXX

 (Defendant)

_________________

DEFENCE

 

1.     The parking charges referred to in this claim did not arise from any agreement of terms. 

The charge and the claim was an unexpected shock. The Defendant denies that the Claimant is entitled to relief in the sum claimed, or at all.  It is denied that any conduct by the driver was a breach of any prominent term and it is denied that this Claimant (understood to have a bare licence as managers) has standing to sue or form contracts in their own name. Liability is denied, whether or not the Claimant is claiming 'keeper l liability', which is unclear from the Particulars.

 

2.     The facts as known to the Defendant:

            
It is admitted that on the material date the Defendant was the registered keeper of the vehicle in question, but liability is denied.

In response to received DCBLegal's Witness Statement received last week on Thursday 30th March. The Defendant now recalls that it was COVID-19 lockdown (3rd lockdown) and this site is a pub where strict rules were in place for many social places including pubs where pub in correspondence may have been closed for public safety reasons in line with government guidelines.

The defendant did not 'stay' as alleged.

The Defendant recalls dropping a passenger off at the time and duration of the alleged offence and car was not ‘’left’’ at any time.

The Defendant is in a very busy profession and with all the pressures of lockdown, including family issues, did not appeal but the case went silent for 23 months so, the Defendant concluded that Parking Eye had cancelled it.

 

4. The facts were that the PCN was from 2021 when the pub may have been closed due to COVID-19 and the car was stopped for less than 10 minutes and given the event merely involved dropping a passenger off this was not parking at all. There was no contract, no agreement and no breach, the car did not 'stay' (it was not 'left' parked) and any contract based purely upon the words quoted by DCBLegal: "patrons must enter their full, correct VRM into the terminal in the main bar on arrival to obtain a permit for the duration of their stay" was void for impossibility.  The claim should be struck out as the elements of a contract are absent. The Defendant avers that this is a plainly extortionate charge with no legitimate interest to support it, which is most likely why ParkingEye did not pursue this one themselves as they usually do with their in-house legal team and solicitor.

 

5. This looks like part of a batch of old registered keeper data farmed out to DCB Legal in 2022 in the hope of enhancing the monies to £170 (to share between them) and either frightening Defendants into paying that sum - despite the fact it was not on the signs - or to achieve CCJs by default, which most old parking cases do.  This is not a situation where there is any genuine commercial value to be protected as a result of the Defendant’s actions. The Claimant has not suffered loss or pecuniary disadvantage and nor did the pub. The 'penalty' charge is unconscionable in this context, with the leading Supreme Court case of ParkingEye v Beavis distinguished.

Coupon-mad

This is my Second Supplementary supporting Statement

No it isn't!

You don't have a first 'SUPPLEMENTARY' one...

Everything is looking better now but in your defence you have overlooked the link I gave you earlier today, about editing to suit & adding in words about the definition of parked.  And that you were in fact, only briefly stopped for LESS than ten minutes purely to safely set down a passenger & belongings.

1505grandad

Should WS be written in first person?

63realfan

Coupon-mad said:

In the BPA Code of Practice, which you just Google.

Is this the BPA code of practice you're on about? Found it on one of the forums you linked. Can't find specifically what you mean on google. I'm not educated with BPA etc so don't have a clue what I'm looking for unless you've got that part about address's and bank statements confused with someone else's case as I'm totally confused about that part and what evidence I have to add to do with that

FrankCannon

BPA Code of Practice ......

https://www.britishparking.co.uk/code-of-practice-and-compliance-monitoring

63realfan

1505grandad said:

Should WS be written in first person?

1505grandad said:

Should WS be written in first person?

Thanks for pointing that out. Was going to be used in defence hence why. Massive thanks!

63realfan

Coupon-mad said:

This is my Second Supplementary supporting Statement

No it isn't!

You don't have a first 'SUPPLEMENTARY' one...

Everything is looking better now but in your defence you have overlooked the link I gave you earlier today, about editing to suit & adding in words about the definition of parked.  And that you were in fact, only briefly stopped for LESS than ten minutes purely to safely set down a passenger & belongings.

Yeah sorry I'll remove. Yeah I looked on the link but the details we're completely different to my situation. I cannot put about stopping briefly as from what I was aware is I dropped someone off/or I left the car with the passenger still in and went into a shop next-door and came back 5 minutes later. A lot of what I added was truthful but also some of what you've recommended to put. I can't recall exactly what happened as it was over 2 years ago but I remember having someone with me in the car and at least one of us stayed in the car. 

I don't want you to have to spoon feed me anymore as you've been absolutely amazing with everything but is the wording I've currently got adequate? 

Just need this and the BPA stuff ironed out and then I'll send this off tonight. Thank you

Coupon-mad

The bank statement and/or utility bill & council tax showing your current address is relevant to any set aside application where a claim form went to an address where you don't live!

It is standard stuff to go with a CCJ set aside WS.

I am surprised this isn't obvious... that you need this evidence in your application bundle. Clearly (if it is your case that the claim went to an old address) you must evidence the NEW address and the month/year when you moved, and state that you were 'there to be found' had the C properly done the checks that the BPA Code requires them to do.

Yeah I looked on the link but the details we're completely different to my situation. I cannot put about stopping briefly.

Yes you can...

63realfan

Coupon-mad said:

The bank statement and/or utility bill & council tax showing your current address is relevant to any set aside application where a claim form went to an address where you don't live!

It is standard stuff to go with a CCJ set aside WS.

I am surprised this isn't obvious... that you need this evidence in your application bundle. Clearly (if it is your case that the claim went to an old address) you must evidence the NEW address and the month/year when you moved, and state that you were 'there to be found' had the C properly done the checks that the BPA Code requires them to do.

I understand what you're saying but I've not moved address since I was born so is that really viable for my case? I don't have any old address, I've always been at the same address and never changed my address. I do have a apartment in Reading but my sister lived there and I never went there or put that address down as there. Is there any need for me to include any of that?