Excel parking fine - Help needed to review my CCJ set aside application documents

noubee

Hello all, I have just had an email come through from ELMS legal where they have submitted a witness statement challenging my supplementary witness statement. Court date is 24/10/2023, so I really need urgent help as I haven't got much time left.

The summary of their witness statement is as follows:
1 - the PCN and original claim was sent to the vehicle's registered address at the time therefore they had no reason to believe that I no longer lived at that address.
2 - the 2 pay and display tickets I purchased inicate that I was entitled to park at the site for a maximum of 3 hours, however, ANPR footage shows that my vehicle spent a total of 3h30mins on the site.

N.B: They did not make any comment about Vehicle Control Services Ltd vs Excel Parking Services Ltd and they have now included a new draft order (not sure if this is worth anything but they made a mistake in the date referred to in their draft order).

Other thoughts
I am particularly confused by the last sentence in paragraph 11 of their statement as I've recently received a road tax reminder letter from DVLA at that address.
They attached a photo of the ANPR camera capture of my car entering and leaving the car park. I wonder if it is sufficient for them to show that  the total amount of time spent at the car park was longer than the total number of tickets purchased? Or if they need to show that I overstayed my ticket by exactly X minutes?
I don't have the original tickets so I don't know exactly at what time each ticket was purchased

The full statement can be found at this Google Drive link

Coupon-mad

Vehicle Control Services Ltd vs Excel Parking Services Ltd

No such case. SRS wouldn't sue himself!  What case do you mean?

noubee

@Coupon-mad pardon the confusion in the use of the word 'vs' i did not mean court case, I meant that in my supplementary witness statement, I pointed out that the signage in the car park referred to entering a contract with Vehicle Control Services Ltd yet I was being sued by Excel Parking Services Ltd. So I meant to say that in their witness statement, Excel parking made no comment about that discrepancy

Coupon-mad

Oh sorry - make sure you press this at the hearing as it is a silver bullet.

Le_Kirk

N.B: They did not make any comment about Vehicle Control Services Ltd vs Excel Parking Services Ltd and they have now included a new draft order (not sure if this is worth anything but they made a mistake in the date referred to in their draft order).

Be very careful of draft orders written by the PPC/solicitor as they may, if you sign them, do away with all your rights, particularly when it comes to the matter of costs.  There have been a few on the forum recently, a search might find the relevant threads.

UncleThomasCobley

That does not state that it is a supplementary WS. It appears to be just a WS and is submitted less than 14 day before the hearing and should not be allowed.

noubee

Hello @UncleThomasCobley yes you are correct, save for the consent order which they sent on 28/10/2023, this is the first witness statement they have ever submitted, or at least, that I have ever been made aware of. Is this something that I need to bring up now in the email? Or should I simply bring that up during the hearing on the 24th of Oct? I had submitted my initial WS with my set aside application on 07/07/2023 and then a supplementary WS on 06/10/2023.

Coupon-mad

You can mention it but I wouldn't. If this is a CCJ set aside hearing, there is no Order with any 14 day deadline.

What you do need to say quickly and clearly at the hearing is that you DO NOT ACCEPT their Draft order, and if they headed it up 'Consent' Order you should object and say you feel that is an attempt to mislead the  court because there has been no consent and will not be, because if the huge £275 application fee.

You absolutely require your costs back by Order of the court because the C used an old, unchecked address.

Do NOT let the Judge say that using the DVLA address is all any private parking firm has to do.  It's not.

Take him/her straight to the Code of Practice and point out that an address check 'soft trace' is mandatory and they breached the Code.

The reason this pre-litigation check is mandatory, is because the DVLA does NOT give out keeper addresses as confirmed or even vaguely reliable court papers 'service addresses'.  Indeed the DVLA admits these keeper addresses are unreliable in up to a quarter of cases, and are technically 'out of date' the minute the data is handed over because people move house. Parking firms can't ask the DVLA twice so the minute that an address is changed with the DVLA, parking firms do not know and must take other steps pre-litigation. DVLA keeper data is ONLY supplied for the sole (very limited) purpose of "asking a keeper who was driving". That is all, and it's a snapshot in time of a car not a person's address. It's simply not a reliable last known address for service.

noubee

Hi @Coupon-mad please would you mind giving me some pointers on which code of practice you are referring to? The one I found on this gov uk site mentions that it has been withdrawn, so I am a bit unsure as to whether it is the correct one.

noubee

Coupon-mad said:

The reason this pre-litigation check is mandatory, is because the DVLA does NOT give out keeper addresses as confirmed or even vaguely reliable court papers 'service addresses'.  Indeed the DVLA admits these keeper addresses are unreliable in up to a quarter of cases, and are technically 'out of date' the minute the data is handed over because people move house. Parking firms can't ask the DVLA twice so the minute that an address is changed with the DVLA, parking firms do not know and must take other steps pre-litigation. DVLA keeper data is ONLY supplied for the sole (very limited) purpose of "asking a keeper who was driving". That is all, and it's a snapshot in time of a car not a person's address. It's simply not a reliable last known address for service.

Also, I would appreciate some pointers to any official documentation I can use to support the statement regarding the unreliable DVLA keeper addresses. My online search keeps coming up with a bunch of forums and news sites but nothing official.