One Parking Solution Stanmer Park Village

forummseuser01

Hi all, 

New to posting on the forum but have been following with interest since having been a recipient of One Parking Solution Ltd Parking Charge in Oct 22. 

My case has now progressed to the claim stage and I am intending to defend in court. I have acknowledged service of the claim and I have indicated that I am intending to lodge a defence. I have cut and paste the defence template from the forum and I am in the process of writing the particulars relevent to my specific case.

The central plank of my defence (specific to my case) is that the signage was inadequate by virtue of being unlit and poorly located. The episode occured at night in inclement weather and I genuinely did not see the signs. I have taken video footage but my concerns are two fold: 

a) that the judge will not concern themselves with viewing the video footage as they will view this as trivial or not representative (the world can look very different via video than to the naked eye - although it is my firm contention that the video is an pretty accurate reflection of the poor visibility of the signage.)

b) whether I should add context by way of mitigation to my defence. For example; there are four parking locations in Stanmer Park and the enforcement times all cease at 8pm. One can essentially park for free in these areas after this time. I had assumed I was ok to park as it was well after 8pm. I had no reason to suspect that the enforcement terms were different where I had parked and given the poor signage and inclement weather that night I had not recognised that I had entered a 'zone' whereby the terms were different. 

I would also consider challenging the view that the landowner, any business or private individual had in any way been inconvenienced by my parking as I had parked considerately causing no obstruction and the 'right side' of a residents only sign placed on a physical barrier in the road ahead of the cottages in the village.

I was feeling quite confident until recently and I have started to have doubts about how any hearing might proceed.

I would be most grateful for any advice regarding the above. 

Many thanks

Le_Kirk

Keep your defence short and punchy, do not be tempted to write war and peace.  Save the story and evidence (like video footage) for the witness statement stage later in the process.  Provided you state about signage (or lack of it) and that parking was free after 20.00, your witness statement will be used to provide the narrative and back up your defence with evidence such as photos that you will take at the same time of day as the parking event without flash"

forummseuser01

Thank you. I note from the Eastgate Wharf case, DDJ Harvey judgement in One Parking Solution versus defendant (redacted,) that Judge Harvey found the signage 'completely inadequate.' I am feeling more confident now. I am wondering if I should I include Judge Harvey's finding in my defence?

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6136572/one-parking-solution-warned-by-a-judge-that-they-may-face-an-application-for-a-civil-restraint-order

Coupon-mad

Absolutely not! DO NOT USE IT.

That case was overturned on appeal.

But inadequate signs is a strong point, regardless of the appalling fudgement in OPS v Wilshaw.

Please can you show us a redacted pic of the PCN from last October and the claim form (cover the claim number top right, MCOL password lower in right, and the D's data and the VRM in the Particulars - BUT please show the Particulars).

I want to see the PCN to know if OPS are still suggesting keeper liability.  Stanmer Park & Village are a BHCC contract.

KeithP

forummseuser01 said:

My case has now progressed to the claim stage and I am intending to defend in court. I have acknowledged service of the claim and I have indicated that I am intending to lodge a defence.

What is the Issue Date on your County Court Claim Form?

Upon what date did you file an Acknowledgment of Service?
Your MCOL Claim History will have the definitive answer to that.

95Rollers

If you use the search facility there are a lot of posts on this forum relating to Stanmer. It will definitely be worth trawling through these. I do recall the recurring theme of signage being inadequate in many of them. Many of these made the local media (The Argus) so there is plenty of information out there and people have won their similar cases. 

ParkingMad

The consultation Brighton and Hove City Council had with Stanmer Village residents says that parking controls in the village (managed by OPS) match those in the adjacent Stanmer Church car park (managed by BHCC).

https://democracy.brighton-hove.gov.uk/documents/s161648/Stanmer%20Village%20Parking%20Management%20APX.%20n%203.html?CT=2

Parking controls in the village would match the nearest car park i.e. the Church car park (9am -8pm)

 

ParkingMad

When the council took over from OPS in 2020, they had two large yellow signs warning that there was no parking in Stanmer Village.





This was the signage a few months ago, taken from Google Maps. One yellow sign which appears to have moved away from the junction. It is not as noticeable as before, even in daylight. 

95Rollers

Those signs aren't permanent structures, aren't illuminated, are obscured, unfixed, not eye level or fit for purpose. Would the signage there meet the BPA guidelines? I'd think not.

forummseuser01

Coupon-mad said:

Absolutely not! DO NOT USE IT.

That case was overturned on appeal.

But inadequate signs is a strong point, regardless of the appalling fudgement in OPS v Wilshaw.

Please can you show us a redacted pic of the PCN from last October and the claim form (cover the claim number top right, MCOL password lower in right, and the D's data and the VRM in the Particulars - BUT please show the Particulars).

I want to see the PCN to know if OPS are still suggesting keeper liability.  Stanmer Park & Village are a BHCC contract.

Thank you. I will post the redacted pic in the morning. 

Has anyone succeeded with the unlit signage defence and can anyone provide a link to an example of there defence document?

Coupon-mad

Unlit signs is likely to win every time.

We can't provide a link, because to find one we'd have to search the forum.  Defeats the object;  just giving newbies links like producing rabbits out of hats is just making us do the search.

That is a terrible way for new posters to learn how to use this board best. We encourage new posters to do searches, but you really don't need to in this case.

I've written 95% of the defence so any new poster with a simple but string defence (about inadequate signs in your case) can write paragraph 3 without needing to find one to copy.

I ask again (please, it's important):

Please can you show us a redacted pic of the PCN from last October and the claim form (cover the claim number top right, MCOL password lower in right, and the D's data and the VRM in the Particulars - BUT please show the Particulars).

I want to see the PCN to know if OPS are still suggesting keeper liability.  Stanmer Park & Village are a BHCC contract.  This is important.  Show the PCN (both sides) please.