DCB Legal / UKPC County Court Claim Received

KeithP

Has something has gone wrong with paragraph 38?

Coupon-mad

Looks very good.

troublemaker22

In paragraph 10, you write that the entrance sign “now” states 3 hours. Unless you’re absolutely certain that the Claimant’s evidence proves that it stated a shorter period at the relevant time, why not omit the word “now” and say that the Claimant has produced no convincing evidence that it said anything else at the time?  If they have produced convincing evidence of a shorter period on signage at the time, I’m not sure why you are making this point. 

Does the Claimant’s evidence include a clear time and date stamped photo of the sign with a shorter period taken on or after the relevant date?  

fryster

troublemaker22 said:

In paragraph 10, you write that the entrance sign “now” states 3 hours. Unless you’re absolutely certain that the Claimant’s evidence proves that it stated a shorter period at the relevant time, why not omit the word “now” and say that the Claimant has produced no convincing evidence that it said anything else at the time?  If they have produced convincing evidence of a shorter period on signage at the time, I’m not sure why you are making this point. 

Does the Claimant’s evidence include a clear time and date stamped photo of the sign with a shorter period taken on or after the relevant date?  

Thank you for the feedback. They've provided a picture of a the sign stating 2 hours maximum stay only in their exhibits. It's dated 26 Nov 2021 and time stamped. Therefore is it best to remove the sentence? I thought that whilst not relevant to the terms that were in place at the time, combined with all the other things it may make one ask what difference an overstay makes when under the current terms the driver wouldn't have received the PCN's. 

fryster

KeithP said:

Has something has gone wrong with paragraph 38?

Thanks, I'll have a look at it and see where I've pasted wrong!

Coupon-mad

fryster said:

troublemaker22 said:

In paragraph 10, you write that the entrance sign “now” states 3 hours. Unless you’re absolutely certain that the Claimant’s evidence proves that it stated a shorter period at the relevant time, why not omit the word “now” and say that the Claimant has produced no convincing evidence that it said anything else at the time?  If they have produced convincing evidence of a shorter period on signage at the time, I’m not sure why you are making this point. 

Does the Claimant’s evidence include a clear time and date stamped photo of the sign with a shorter period taken on or after the relevant date?  

Thank you for the feedback. They've provided a picture of a the sign stating 2 hours maximum stay only in their exhibits. It's dated 26 Nov 2021 and time stamped. Therefore is it best to remove the sentence? I thought that whilst not relevant to the terms that were in place at the time, combined with all the other things it may make one ask what difference an overstay makes when under the current terms the driver wouldn't have received the PCN's. 

But when was the parking event?

fryster

Coupon-mad said:

fryster said:

troublemaker22 said:

In paragraph 10, you write that the entrance sign “now” states 3 hours. Unless you’re absolutely certain that the Claimant’s evidence proves that it stated a shorter period at the relevant time, why not omit the word “now” and say that the Claimant has produced no convincing evidence that it said anything else at the time?  If they have produced convincing evidence of a shorter period on signage at the time, I’m not sure why you are making this point. 

Does the Claimant’s evidence include a clear time and date stamped photo of the sign with a shorter period taken on or after the relevant date?  

Thank you for the feedback. They've provided a picture of a the sign stating 2 hours maximum stay only in their exhibits. It's dated 26 Nov 2021 and time stamped. Therefore is it best to remove the sentence? I thought that whilst not relevant to the terms that were in place at the time, combined with all the other things it may make one ask what difference an overstay makes when under the current terms the driver wouldn't have received the PCN's. 

But when was the parking event?

23rd and 24th December 2021

Coupon-mad

You could still say that:

A photo of a sign purporting (but not proven) to be conveniently timestamped a month before the parking event suggests they must have been there to replace the signs (because parking firms don't randomly go out and photograph their signs - there has to be a reason).  Further, as this was Christmas Eve 2021, it is likely the free stay time was in fact extended to allow for post-Covid shoppers & queues, as measures relating to social distancing were still very much in place in 2021.  Most professional parking firms relaxed some or all rules at that time and it is usual to be asked by retail parks to do so at Christmas. The Claimant is put to strict proof of the retailers/landowners' specific Christmas shopping instructions for free stay time pertaining to the material dates.  Especially given the signs in fact state 3 hours free stay (evidence will be provided at witness statement stage).

fryster

Coupon-mad said:

You could still say that:

A photo of a sign purporting (but not proven) to be conveniently timestamped a month before the parking event suggests they must have been there to replace the signs (because parking firms don't randomly go out and photograph their signs - there has to be a reason).  Further, as this was Christmas Eve 2021, it is likely the free stay time was in fact extended to allow for post-Covid shoppers & queues, as measures relating to social distancing were still very much in place in 2021.  Most professional parking firms relaxed some or all rules at that time and it is usual to be asked by retail parks to do so at Christmas. The Claimant is put to strict proof of the retailers/landowners' specific Christmas shopping instructions for free stay time pertaining to the material dates.  Especially given the signs in fact state 3 hours free stay (evidence will be provided at witness statement stage).

In their witness statement they've included a contract signed on 22 October 2021 in relation to landowner consent. I suspect that they will argue that the signs were installed in November 2021 and that's why they have taken pictures. Although the contract is signed on 22 October I can see no mention in the documents of the when it comes into force - is it assumed that it commences from this date? Many thanks!

Coupon-mad

In which case you obviously cite the Code of Practice clause about new sites.