Guidance on next steps - Witness Statement Submission

BBL70

Draft Witness Statement (redacted)

Context

1.       The car park at [...] (‘the site’) is a free-to-use car park serving a number of local shops

2.       As the registered keeper of the vehicle I received the Parking Charge Notice (PCN), but was not the driver of the vehicle

3.       Having lived close to the site for approximately 8 years at the time of the PCN, the driver parked in a familiar place within the car park, often used by other customers. At no point during that 8 year period has she (the witness) or I (the defendant) received a PCN.

Sequence of Events

1.       On the 10th July 2019 the driver parked at the site in order to visit Tesco Express.

 

2.       As Tesco Express is a small, local store the duration of the visit to the site is estimated to be approx. 10-15 minutes

 

3.       Nothing at the time suggested to the driver (e.g. new signs, yellow lines or advice from a parking enforcement officer) that it was not acceptable to park in this location

 

4.       Based on previous experience the driver assumed that this part of the car park formed part of the ‘A Designated Parking Area’ mentioned in the parking signs

 

5.       At the time there were no parking enforcement cameras at this location and so the photographs submitted by the claimant can only have been taken by someone working for, or associated with the claimant. This suggests that no grace period was offered, and no attempt was made by this individual to advise the driver of their potential error

 

6.       The PCN was subsequently received by post, on or around [...] 2019

 

7.       After receiving the PCN I confirmed at the time that there is no indication beside the kerb that parking is not allowed and that parking there caused no obstruction to other visitors.

 

8.       It is my position that this amounts to serial predatory ticketing of visitors to this car park. The Claimant is put to strict proof that, at the time of the parking event that the signage was both compliant and unambiguous.

 

9.       I refer to Exhibit 1 (which was submitted by the claimant) which shows the locations of Parking Signs, but fails to illustrate the definition of ‘A Designated Area’. Furthermore this photograph appears to shows a car or van parked in the same location (as the photograph is undated I assume this was not taken on 10th July 2019).

 

10.   Exhibit 2 is a screenshot of the site taken from Google Maps (Sept 2016) showing a car parked in a similar location. This illustrates that parking in that part of the site does not cause an obstruction

 

11.   Exhibit 3 (submitted by the claimant) illustrates both that there is no markings to indicate that parking is not allowed in that part of the site and that the car was not causing any obstruction

 

12.   Exhibit 4 which shows a copy of one of the signs at the time, clearly displaying the logo of the BPA (British Parking Association).

 

13.   Exhibit 5 shows correspondence from the BPA to another motorist who received a PCN at the site confirming that  UK Car Parking Management were not members of their organisation at that time

 

14.   Exhibit 6 is the findings of an appeal to the Independent Appeals Service by another motorist who received a PCN issued by UK CPM at the site. The IAS noted as part of their response that ‘This is not the first appeal I have dealt with regarding this site, and the same comments apply – the signage is inadequate…’ I have contacted the IAS to request evidence of other similar appeals at the site, but have not received a response.

 

15.   Exhibit 7 is a screenshot taken from Google Street View in 2018 showing that the signs in question were the same in the appeal, as used by the claimant for this PCN

 

16.   Exhibit 8 shows that UK CPM claimed in their letter (incorrectly dated ‘09-01-18’) that ‘the signage clearly states, “YOU MUST PARK WHOLLY WITHIN A MARKED BAY. NO PARKING ON ROADWAYS”. However as illustrated in Exhibit 4 (again, submitted by the claimant) this is not the case.

 

17.   The claimant asserts in paragraph 14 of the ‘The Particulars’ that, ‘if there were no preventative measures in available … could have a negative effect … on the parking facility … and any business it supports. In fact the contrary is true. Exhibit 9 shows a selection of posts from local residents on ‘Nextdoor’ and a local Facebook group ‘Epsom and Ewell Families’ illustrating the aggressive issuing of parking tickets at this site. It is disappointing that UK CPM or its legal representative, Gladstones are not planning to attend the hearing as it would be relevant to understand how many tickets UK CPM issue at this site on a monthly basis as this anecdotal evidence suggests many motorists are confused by the parking rules and as a result of UK CPM are actively avoiding the businesses they claim to be protecting.

 

18.   It is therefore denied that the witness entered a legally binding contract, as the signage was neither compliant nor clear.

Coupon-mad

OK, and what have you used (kept in) and what have you culled (to avoid verbatim duplication of the defence wording) from the WS by aphex007, the WS bundle you are advised to base yours on?

Remove 12 and 13 from your WS because UKCPM are entitled to show the rectangular BPA member logo because they are corporate (but not AOS) members of that organisation.

They are also AOS members of the IPC.

And a Judge won't care about trade body logos, this will be all about the placement and wording on the signs.

Remove all mention of guessing that the car was likely there for 15 minutes because that immediately bins the D's argument about a 'lack of a consideration/grace period'.

Add here:

2.       As the registered keeper of the vehicle I received the Parking Charge Notice (PCN), but was not the driver of the vehicle.  A separate witness statement signed by the driver is included within this bundle.

BBL70

Coupon-mad said:

OK, and what have you used (kept in) and what have you culled (to avoid verbatim duplication of the defence wording) from the WS by aphex007, the WS bundle you are advised to base yours on?

Remove 12 and 13 from your WS because UKCPM are entitled to show the rectangular BPA member logo because they are corporate (but not AOS) members of that organisation.

They are also AOS members of the IPC.

And a Judge won't care about trade body logos, this will be all about the placement and wording on the signs.

Remove all mention of guessing that the car was likely there for 15 minutes because that immediately bins the D's argument about a 'lack of a consideration/grace period'.

Add here:

2.       As the registered keeper of the vehicle I received the Parking Charge Notice (PCN), but was not the driver of the vehicle.  A separate witness statement signed by the driver is included within this bundle.

Thanks again - working on updating everything now.

Before I remove the section regarding the sign I just wanted to double check that you don't think this is useful?

B789

BBL70 said:

Before I remove the section regarding the sign I just wanted to double check that you don't think this is useful?

You can probably highlight it as a concern as to their honesty/intent to mislead but I think it may not be a winning point on its own.

BBL70

B789 said:

BBL70 said:

Before I remove the section regarding the sign I just wanted to double check that you don't think this is useful?

You can probably highlight it as a concern as to their honesty/intent to mislead but I think it may not be a winning point on its own.

I need to check but I think I can also show that the signs were changed shortly after this

BBL70

I've just realised I never came back to this forum after my court date. The short story is I won and was awarded some costs by the judge.

I just wanted to thank everyone who took the time to comment on my posts and for everyone that offered templates, wording and precedents.

As a first timer at challenging a PCN it was confusing at times, took some time investment to get the case in order a weird to be in a court - but worth it in the end!

Coupon-mad

BBL70 said:

I've just realised I never came back to this forum after my court date. The short story is I won and was awarded some costs by the judge.

I just wanted to thank everyone who took the time to comment on my posts and for everyone that offered templates, wording and precedents.

As a first timer at challenging a PCN it was confusing at times, took some time investment to get the case in order a weird to be in a court - but worth it in the end!

Yay, thanks for the update, that is brilliant news. Well done!

ANOTHER UKCPM ONE BITES THE DUST!

Did you win on signage?

BBL70

I won on the basis that they alleged I hadn't parked in a 'Designated Parking Area' and the judge decided that the parking company hadn't clearly defined what this was - so how could I know/comply?

By coincidence (and unrelated to my case), the company has now lost the contract to enforce parking restrictions at that location (it's currently unregulated and working just fine) so an added bonus!

Coupon-mad

Perfect!