Help Needed! Please can I get some feedback on my defence.

KeithP

Skysurfer69 said:

Coupon-mad said:

Skysurfer69 said:

Okay, another couple of months and there's been some movement finally. 

I received a Notice of Allocation today for a hearing in December so I guess that gives me time to get my defence lined up and squared away. 

You mean your WS bundle.  That Order tells you the deadline for filing & serving that.

Thanks for clarifying, yes, exactly this. 

I have until 3 days before the hearing to do this, so I have time and will definitely come back next month. 

Three days before the hearing??

That seems remarkably close to the hearing.
Are you sure you have interpreted the Notice of Allocation correctly?

Skysurfer69

KeithP said:

Three days before the hearing??

That seems remarkably close to the hearing.
Are you sure you have interpreted the Notice of Allocation correctly?

My bad, confusingly, the last paragraph states that any docs for hearing need to be sent at least 3 clear working days before the hearing. 

14 days before the hearing is correct. 

Coupon-mad

That's better. It is never 3 days before.

And do come back here anyway at the end of this month please, to take part in the DLUHC's Consultation.  I am sure you want the Government to hear about your experience in order to stop this rip-off culture.

All is explained in the 2022 replies in the top sticky thread by MSE_JC.  Read that first if you don't know what I'm talking about.

You will hopefully also get the advantage of some damning words in the new draft Impact Assessment from the DLUHC that you will want to include in your WS bundle.

Skysurfer69

Hi again folks, starting to look at my WS again and have been reading baz417's example, which I've begun adapting for my purposes. 

The one challenge I'm having here (and hoping someone can point me in the right direction) is that it seems that in my case at least there is no dependance on the claimant's part on a ticketing system or P&D of any sort.
baz417's WS goes to great lengths to discuss the pitfalls and traps of VRM, ANPR, keypad failure etc. but none of this is relevant to my case as there are no tickets issued at the location in my case. This site is all about not leaving the site while your vehicle is parked.

It seems my primary defence is the bad signage placed high up on poles but there must be something else to support me.
**ETA: Aside from the obvious they have no evidence that I left the site of course.

Think I'm going to need to enlist your help again to make sure I'm not putting in anything irrelevant.

Is there a link to the DLUHC findings I can start to read up on please?

**ETA2: Don't know how important this is but I've just noticed that in their Particulars of Claim, they state "the driver agreed to pay within 28 days but did not". I have a photo of their sign and there is nothing in their "contract" that says this explicitly.

B789

What evidence do they have that you left the site? I'll bet it's none.

Le_Kirk

Skysurfer69 said:

**ETA2: Don't know how important this is but I've just noticed that in their Particulars of Claim, they state "the driver agreed to pay within 28 days but did not". I have a photo of their sign and there is nothing in their "contract" that says this explicitly.

That is standard but if it is not on any of the signs then you could not agree to abide by it.  They usually state that by continuing to park, once you have read the signs, you agree to be bound by that.
Witness statement exemplars are just that, examples for style and format.  You just need to put the back-up for your defence into the WS written by @baz417 and add your evidence.  As other has said, does the claimant have evidence that you "left site"?  Is there a line in the sand, well in the car park, with a large sign above it that states - "If you cross this line, I want £100" If not, you've gottem.  Have you photos of the car park showing no such signs.  Very hard for claimants to prove "leaving site" cases.

Coupon-mad

https://www.gov.uk/government/calls-for-evidence/private-parking-code-of-practice-call-for-evidence#:~:text=The%20call%20for%20evidence%20is,alongside%20the%20call%20for%20evidence.

Two threads on it:

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6463361/dluhc-private-parking-code-government-launches-call-for-evidence-discussion-thread/p1


https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6471857/please-reply-to-question-4-of-the-governments-call-for-evidence-re-the-level-of-parking-charges

Coupon-mad

Skysurfer69 said:

Hi again folks, starting to look at my WS again and have been reading baz417's example, which I've begun adapting

I see your hearing is in December.

The latest exemplar WS is now the one by @vincentvega27 which includes the latest breaking news: the CEL v Chan judgment.

That silver bullet should see off many parking claims. Attach it as an extra exhibit and do your WS bundle now.  Early.

We predict it will cause UKPC & DCB Legal to discontinue your claim. Scam over!

Skysurfer69

Coupon-mad said:

Skysurfer69 said:

Hi again folks, starting to look at my WS again and have been reading baz417's example, which I've begun adapting

I see your hearing is in December.

The latest exemplar WS is now the one by @vincentvega27 which includes the latest breaking news: the CEL v Chan judgment.

That silver bullet should see off many parking claims. Attach it as an extra exhibit and do your WS bundle now.  Early.

We predict it will cause UKPC & DCB Legal to discontinue your claim. Scam over!

Hi and thanks for this, I have begun the process of creating my WS and have a few questions/concerns about the forgoing information that I'm using as per your advice. 

1. I assume that the Fairlie v Fenton case does not apply to me and should be removed? 
2. Beavis' Hidden Terms is looking tenuous to me as the image I have for evidence might potentially prove the opposite is true.

Should I just put all my evidence in and submit it so we can pull it apart?

Coupon-mad

What "image you have as evidence"? I'd never use a full image close up of a sign!

You can see by reading them whether cases are relevant to you.  Another recent good WS example is by @_blueberry_