Napier Parking / BW Legal

powerbarge

Umkomaas said:

In this particular car park, you have to enter your reg and press a button to get the free ticket. The times stated on the notice are arrival and departure times (accompanied by ANPR photos), NOT the time when the ticket was dispensed. 

In which case, you need to read this Court judgment. It was from the Court of Appeal and the decision from it is persuasive for all lower courts, should your case get that far.
 

https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2019/854.html

I'm a bit confused about this - it appears to be about underpayment? Sorry it I've misunderstood

Umkomaas

powerbarge said:

Umkomaas said:

In this particular car park, you have to enter your reg and press a button to get the free ticket. The times stated on the notice are arrival and departure times (accompanied by ANPR photos), NOT the time when the ticket was dispensed. 

In which case, you need to read this Court judgment. It was from the Court of Appeal and the decision from it is persuasive for all lower courts, should your case get that far.
 

https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2019/854.html

I'm a bit confused about this - it appears to be about underpayment? Sorry it I've misunderstood

The period of parking does not commence until the green button is pressed, the underpayment issue is a sideshow. Use this judgment in the context of your parking event you have described. Can you tell us where you have doubts that it does apply?

Coupon-mad

Search it for 'green button' (control & f).

powerbarge

Thanks both - makes sense now

How about this? Not really sure how to incorporate these sources into this kind of document

2 It is admitted that the Defendant was the registered keeper and driver of the vehicle.

3 The Defendant's vehicle entered the car park and the Defendant subsequently dispensed a “free'' 30 minutes parking ticket from the automated machine at <CAR PARK ADDRESS>, and displayed this on the vehicle’s dashboard. After being delayed due to a long queue for a public toilet while shopping, due to the time of year (In December, one of the busiest periods for shopping areas), The Defendant returned to the vehicle and promptly exited the car park. The alleged late exit of the Defendant’s vehicle from the car park was due to circumstances beyond the Defendant’s control, and as such constitutes frustration of contract.

4 Due to a change of address, the Defendant did not receive any correspondence regarding the alleged breach of contract until legal proceedings were underway, approximately 6 months after the alleged contractual breach, and therefore was not able to raise an appeal utilising the normal channels.

5 As per the Private Parking Code of Practice, the Defendant was entitled to a minimum of 5 minutes consideration period, and an additional 10 minutes grace period, totalling a minimum of 15 minutes additional time. In calculating the alleged overstay of the parking period using vehicle entry/exit time, as recorded by ANPR cameras, the Claimant has denied the Defendant these allowances. In addition, the code defines the parking period as follows, which the Claimant has not followed: "2.24 parking period - the length of time that a vehicle has been parked, i.e. left stationary otherwise than in the course of driving, after any relevant consideration period has expired (excluding instances where the driver has stopped to enable passengers to leave or enter the vehicle). This is not the period between a vehicle being recorded as entering and departing controlled land."

6 In calculating the time duration of the alleged contract breach, the Claimant has recorded the duration of the parking event as the time between the Defendant’s vehicle entering and exiting the car park, as captured by ANPR cameras. It is denied that this is an accurate representation of the parking event, the contract between the Defendant and the Claimant only began when the Defendant dispensed a ticket by pressing a “green button”, which will be much later than the time the Defendant’s vehicle entered the car park. This is supported by National Car Parks Ltd v Revenue And Customs [2019] EWCA Civ 854 (20 May 2019) “The best analysis would seem to be that the contract was brought into being when the green button was pressed. On that basis, the pressing of the green button would represent acceptance by the customer of an offer by NCP to provide an hour's parking in return for the coins that the customer had by then paid into the machine.”

powerbarge

Sign near where I parked (could argue not easily read as very small text from distance that you'd typically park):



Sign near machine - harder to argue about visibility but text of Ts and Cs is still small:

Crop of Ts and Cs:

Coupon-mad

powerbarge said:

Thanks both - makes sense now

How about this? Not really sure how to incorporate these sources into this kind of document

2 It is admitted that the Defendant was the registered keeper and driver of the vehicle.

3 The Defendant's vehicle entered the car park and the Defendant subsequently dispensed a “free'' 30 minutes parking ticket from the automated machine at <CAR PARK ADDRESS>, and displayed this on the vehicle’s dashboard. After being delayed due to a long queue for a public toilet while shopping, due to the time of year (In December, one of the busiest periods for shopping areas), The Defendant returned to the vehicle and promptly exited the car park. The alleged late exit of the Defendant’s vehicle from the car park was due to circumstances beyond the Defendant’s control, and as such constitutes frustration of contract.

4 Due to a change of address, the Defendant did not receive any correspondence regarding the alleged breach of contract until legal proceedings were underway, approximately 6 months after the alleged contractual breach, and therefore was not able to raise an appeal utilising the normal channels.

5 As per the Private Parking Code of Practice, the Defendant was entitled to a minimum of 5 minutes consideration period, and an additional 10 minutes grace period, totalling a minimum of 15 minutes additional time. In calculating the alleged overstay of the parking period using vehicle entry/exit time, as recorded by ANPR cameras, the Claimant has denied the Defendant these allowances. In addition, the code defines the parking period as follows, which the Claimant has not followed: "2.24 parking period - the length of time that a vehicle has been parked, i.e. left stationary otherwise than in the course of driving, after any relevant consideration period has expired (excluding instances where the driver has stopped to enable passengers to leave or enter the vehicle). This is not the period between a vehicle being recorded as entering and departing controlled land."

6 In calculating the time duration of the alleged contract breach, the Claimant has recorded the duration of the parking event as the time between the Defendant’s vehicle entering and exiting the car park, as captured by ANPR cameras. It is denied that this is an accurate representation of the parking event, the contract between the Defendant and the Claimant only began when the Defendant dispensed a ticket by pressing a “green button”, which will be much later than the time the Defendant’s vehicle entered the car park. This is supported by National Car Parks Ltd v Revenue And Customs [2019] EWCA Civ 854 (20 May 2019) “The best analysis would seem to be that the contract was brought into being when the green button was pressed. On that basis, the pressing of the green button would represent acceptance by the customer of an offer by NCP to provide an hour's parking in return for the coins that the customer had by then paid into the machine.”

That's very good!

powerbarge

N180 received and returned as per advice thread - ticked no to "on papers" decision which seems to be a new addition to the forms

Coupon-mad

powerbarge said:

N180 received and returned as per advice thread - ticked no to "on papers" decision which seems to be a new addition to the forms

Which is also covered in the NEWBIES thread!

And whilst your case is quiet, we currently need people like you to do one email to change the law:

REALLY IMPORTANT THIS MONTH:

Please please (please) do this and give the Government your evidence - threatogram letters going back years - and tell them how it all feels and why you refused to just roll over and pay:
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6471857/please-reply-to-question-4-of-the-governments-call-for-evidence-re-the-level-of-parking-charges

Explained there.

PLEASE READ AND JOIN US.

It's one email. One question; will take minutes.

Make sure you attach copies of the aggressive £170 demand letters and the Claim form (redact your address and claim number/password) to provide evidence of what the parking industry and their greedy weasel 'debt -chasers' attacked you with.

Obviously state at the start of your email response to the DLUHC that you are a consumer and are answering Question 4.

The added £70 on top of an already very high penalty - plus 8% interest - has inflated the claim ridiculously and makes you less likely to deal with these horrible people.

They rely on picking off vulnerable people but the way the money has increased (to five times the original discounted PCN at £60) looks like extortion.  This business and bulk litigation abuse of small claims should be illegal. 

Add that you want your case to help the DLUHC to have sufficient evidence and case studies to ban the so-called 'debt recovery fee' that is nothing to do with debt resolution but all about funding and driving the limpet-like offshoot rogue industry called 'bulk litigation'.

Etc.  

In your own words.

Change the law... we already are...

powerbarge

Back again, unfortuantely

I now have my court summons for the 12th April 2024

Anything I should do to prepare?

A key argument in my defence references the private parking code of practise which it seems is still not in law - is this a problem?

Thanks again

KeithP

powerbarge said:

Back again, unfortuantely

I now have my court summons for the 12th April 2024

Anything I should do to prepare?

Summons??

Do you perhaps have a Notice of Allocation?

If so, is there not a paragraph something like:

Each party must deliver to every other party and to the court office copies of all documents on which he intends to rely at the hearing no later than [ . . . ] [14 days before the hearing].

Might be on the back.

Those 'documents on which you intend to rely' are your Witness Statement and evidence.