DCB Legal Court Hearing 28th August

InconspicuousSheep21

Thank you for your comments, Castle said:

InconspicuousSheep21 said:

Hi all, me again!

Is it worth contesting the PCNs with Head Office of where I worked asking them to request the Landowner cancelling the original PCNs? Is it worth a shot despite the contract between UKPC and the Landowner stating the following:

The Client:

• confirm that you are its appointed agent in relation to the Premises and have sufficient authority to, and give permission for The Contractor to levy the Parking Charges on the Premises;

Since JLL haven't been the "appointed agent" since 2021 that is no longer true.

I would be unable to use this in court now since the date to submit any new witness statements has passed. How do you suggest I go about making the judge aware of this?

Coupon-mad

By raising it in court at the hearing when it is your turn to speak.

Anything goes in small claims.  It is up to the Judge to guide you but you are certainly not 'unable' to raise points about the other party's exhibits.

InconspicuousSheep21

So can I just mention to the Judge - since the deadline for Witness Statement submissions passed I was made aware by the “managing” agent (JLL) that they have not managed the Land since 2021. As a result, the Contractor (Claimant) was not granted permission by JLL to “levy the Parking Charges” on the Land during the time of my employment?

I’m confused

Coupon-mad

Yes.

But you know that's not your main defence point. Just an observation on their evidence pack when you get to speak.

InconspicuousSheep21

I’ve received an email today from the claimant. Its contents are a “Supplementary Witness Statement”. They say as follows:

———————

I, XXXX XXXXX, of Eastcastle House, 27/28 Eastcastle Street, London, W1W 8DH, state as follows: -

1. I am an employee, employed by Uk Parking Control Limited (“my Company”). I am duly authorised to make this Statement on my Company’s behalf.

2. I make this Statement in support of the Claimant’s Claim and response to the Defendant’s Defence.

3. The facts and matters set out in this statement are within my own knowledge unless I state otherwise. I believe them to be true. Where I refer to information supplied by others, the source is identified. Facts and matters derived from other sources are true to the best of my knowledge and belief.

4. Upon further investigation, we acknowledge there to have been an administrative error within the First Witness Statement of Joel Little, whereby relevant signage which supports the Claimants Claim in relation to Parking Charge Notice (PCN) 9393322184201 was not included. My Company apologises for this error and kindly invites the Court to consider the additional evidence within this Supplementary Statement.

5. For the avoidance of doubt, evidence exhibited to the First Witness Statement of Joel Little at "EXHIBIT 2" is relevant for the contraventions 'Parked for longer than the maximum period permitted' only.

6. PCN 9393322184201 was incurred on 03/07/2022 as the Defendant’s vehicle was accurately captured by Automatic Number Plate Recognition (ANPR) cameras entering the Land at 05.51am and exiting at 10.09am.

7. I refer your attention to the terms and conditions displayed on the Land which are exhibited at

‘EXHIBIT 6’.

The terms clearly state:

‘No parking between 23.00 and 06.00’

8. The Defendant alleges that they were an employee on the Land at the time of the contravention. It ought to be noted that the terms were applicable at all times and the Defendant was not exempt from the terms. Regardless of if the Defendant was an employee on the Land, they still ought to have complied with the Terms. If the Defendant did not understand or could not comply with the Terms, they should have sought alternative parking to avoid the risk of incurring a PCN.

9. To avoid doubt, third parties, such as the Defendant’s employer, do not have authority to cancel PCNs, nor are they able to authorise parking in breach of the Terms displayed on the Land.

10. As previously address, the Defendant denies they agreed to pay with 28 days however, the Defendant entered and agreed to the terms by parking on the Land. Had the Defendant not be able to abide by the terms, alternative parking should have been sort.

11. It is reasonable to suggest that as the Defendant is an employee they ought to have known the terms of the Land, and therefore were aware that they ought to have complied with the same.

Conclusion

10. It is my respectful submission that the Defendant’s Defence is entirely without merit and as such it is requested that the Defence is struck out, and Judgment awarded to the Claimant.

 

11. I may not be able to attend the forthcoming Hearing. Should this be so, an advocate will attend on my behalf. I ask that the Court accepts this as written notice pursuant to CPR 27.9(1).

———————

Given that the deadline for submissions has passed, will the Judge still take this into consideration? Points 8, 9, 10 and 11 were not raised in their first witness statement. It seems they’re trying to convince the Judge that as employee I was not allowed to park on the Land whatsoever. I’m fully aware that there is an exemption process, yet they fail to mention it but I don’t know how I’d go about proving/mentioning this to the Judge at the hearing. From my understanding, they’re making every attempt to manipulate the Judge into believing I was wrongfully parked. 

Since they’ve submitted another Witness Statement would anyone suggest I submit anything further to strengthen my Defence, if so, what?

I would appreciate some advice/guidance, thank you as always!

!!!really stressed as the hearing is very soon!!!

Coupon-mad

Nope, don't submit anything. Judges do not like multiple, late submissions.

Calm...breathe!

UKPC has months to submit relevant evidence.  

This extra WS should be dismissed because it arrived far too late to comply with the hearing order and was in fact sent out of the blue by email, on the Friday before the Bank Holiday weekend, giving the Defendant just ONE clear working day to look at this new evidence before the hearing on Wednesday!

When you arrive at your hearing:

- always get there half an hour early to get through security & loo break, water, etc.

- take a printed file of everything from both parties (and/or your laptop fully charged, plus charger).

- do NOT agree to speak to their rep in a side room.  Say "hello but no I won't have a chat with you & I will not settle. What we both say will be before the Judge"

- greet the Judge "Good morning Judge" 

- once sat down, clear your throat and say "Sorry Judge, there is a preliminary matter in that I think the very late extra Witness Statement should be dismissed at the outset because 

THEN SAY WHAT I PUT IN BOLD ABOVE.

Up to the Judge but be polite but confident and try to get that WS kicked out.

By the way, the Judge will make allowances for your nerves and inexperience. Nothing has to be perfect as long as you are there on time.

InconspicuousSheep21

Okay, thank you! I'll be sure to address the preliminary matter at the commencement of the hearing. 

I wanted advice if possible surrounding raising some points with the Claimant to obtain clarity surrounding the "exemptions" mentioned between the Landowner and managing agent. So, the Claimant regulates parking for the Landowner. As such, they should be aware of the Contract terms between their client (UKPC) and the Landowner whom they are acting for. A clause in the Contract states -

"The client agree to update and maintain an exemption list of vehicle registrations and bring this to the attention of UKPC in a timely manner prior to the Parking Charge being issued. The Restrictions will apply to all motor vehicles including those on the exemption list"

In relation to the above, would it be appropriate to request clarity regarding circumstances under which someone might be exempt from PCNs being issued?

Since the Claimant deals with claims as such regularly, I'd expect them to know the answer to the above and as I'm already aware those exemptions apply to employees on the Land/employees of the Landowners tenants on the Land (tenant being Iceland). Which if they answer truthfully would strengthen my Defence.

Another point of discussion I'd like some clarity on is the Claimant mentioning in their second WS -

"To avoid doubt, third parties, such as the Defendant’s employer, do not have authority to cancel PCNs, nor are they able to authorise parking in breach of the Terms displayed on the Land."

It's reasonable to assume that third parties such as my employer might not have authority to cancel PCNs, so I'd like to ascertain the procedure behind cancelling PCNs. I've been made aware there was a system in place for registering vehicles on the exemption list possibly by notifying the Landowner. If the reason behind my PCNs being issued was a failure of/miscommunication between my employer and the Landowner it's entirely unfair that I am being made to deal with the consequences of paying these PCNs. Furthermore, I reasonably believe I would have been on an exemption list allowing me to park in breach of the Terms displayed on the Land throughout my employment due to parking on the Land for the entirety of my employment and not receiving an excessive amount of PCNs.

I apologise for not being very clear but I'm not sure how else to word the above. 

LDast

So, the Claimant regulates parking for the Landowner. As such, they should be aware of the Contract terms between their client (UKPC) and the Landowner whom they are acting for. A clause in the Contract states - 

You appear to be confused. The Claimant is UKPC.

InconspicuousSheep21

Apologies, I stated Client since I was trying to infer DCBL being UKPC's legal representative. So what I was trying to get at was DCBL (Representative for UKPC) should be aware of the Contractual Terms between their Client (UKPC) and the Landowner. I hope that makes things a tad bit clearer

Not_A_Hope

The original particulars of claim are vague covering a total of 7 PCNs. They then submit a late witness statement claiming the overstay for one of the PCNs (being on the site for 4 hours and 18 minutes ) is actually because you entered the site before 6am (which is probably when your shift started). 

I am not clear which of the their T&Cs they allege you broke in the other six PCNs. Are they all for ‘Parked for longer than the maximum period permitted’. Do you have a copy of the signage / T&Cs?

To avoid doubt, third parties, such as the Defendant’s employer, do not have authority to cancel PCNs, nor are they able to authorise parking in breach of the Terms displayed on the Land."

It is reasonable to suggest that as the Defendant is an employee they ought to have known the terms of the Land, and therefore were aware that they ought to have complied with the same.

You are arguing that as an employee you were verbally given authority to park, any ‘terms’ would not be expected to apply to employees  and it would be reasonable to expect to park for the full duration of your shift. Management of any white list was out of your control.