CCJ - update, now set aside and currently creating defence for elderly family member

sunmoon789

Johnersh said:

Can I just wryly observe that in order to take that photo, the parking operative had to have impermissibly parked in the roadway, obstructing any residential traffic (which cannot have been the intention of the landlord). Under the terms of their signage that makes them liable for a PCN there being no exemptions for drop off, delivery etc.

The parking operative may have even utilised a phone/camera whilst in charge of a motor vehicle on land abutting a public highway (a criminal offence - if the ignition was on). I doubt it's got legs, but an Ex Turpi pleading might be fun. 

In theory it is possible that the driver is still in the vehicle. We don't have a statement from the parking operative to confirm either way.

The fact that the parking operative hasn't stopped more than momentarily to snatch that photo might suggest that there has been no period of observation (? Is that a requirement).

Of course, since that looks like a car rather than a van, one might query whether this is a self ticket site?

The time stamp is about a minute apart from then taking a picture of the sign which is at the end of the road. 

Does the driver have ground to stand on for the defence? The last thing I want is for them to end up with another CCJ, I’m going to include all of these points in their defence. 

Coupon-mad

But they can't get another CCJ. That's not what happens, even if people lose. If they did, they'd just pay!

The time stamp is about a minute apart 

Exactly what @Johnersh said then!  The Defendant has a solid case.

Johnersh

Did the driver indulge in "showroom parking" rather than park in the bay? Well, obviously.

The points I flagged are mere argument - a judge may like them ... Or they may not.

If there is a basis for doing so, asking if the PPC can legitimately override the rights of the resident in their property title may be stronger, but I don't have that info.

Furthermore, any defence should include a challenge to the enhancement and the interest calculation (it's near certain to have been incorrectly stated on the claim form). So even if you lose, that shaves £70 odd off the claimed amount. For that reason and at this point, one might argue that you may as well see it through.

Johnersh

Good thing para 7.2. of the code of practice is unambiguous (check the applicable version at the time of the event)

sunmoon789

Thank you for this I really appreciate it. 

sunmoon789

Hello all just to provide an update - it was a bit of back and forth over a few months with different forms etc. Nominated myself to speak on their behalf etc. a few days ago the family member got a letter in the post stating the claim was dismissed without hearing as the PCN does not specify the period of parking. PCN is not valid. Thank you thank you all so so much for the help I am over the moon for my family member. I am so grateful !! 

Coupon-mad

sunmoon789 said:

Hello all just to provide an update - it was a bit of back and forth over a few months with different forms etc. Nominated myself to speak on their behalf etc.

 a few days ago the family member got a letter in the post stating the claim was dismissed without hearing as the PCN does not specify the period of parking. PCN is not valid.

Thank you thank you all so so much for the help I am over the moon for my family member. I am so grateful !! 

Woohoo! Now that's a result and unusual.

ANOTHER ONE BITES THE DUST!

We can use that judgment to help
others, if you don't mind showing a picture of it with the dates, court location, claim number, judge's name and District Enforcement showing (in other words, only redact the Defendant's name).

Please show it!

sunmoon789

Coupon-mad said:

sunmoon789 said:

Hello all just to provide an update - it was a bit of back and forth over a few months with different forms etc. Nominated myself to speak on their behalf etc.

 a few days ago the family member got a letter in the post stating the claim was dismissed without hearing as the PCN does not specify the period of parking. PCN is not valid.

Thank you thank you all so so much for the help I am over the moon for my family member. I am so grateful !! 

Woohoo! Now that's a result and unusual.

ANOTHER ONE BITES THE DUST!

We can use that judgment to help
others, if you don't mind showing a picture of it with the dates, court location, claim number, judge's name and District Enforcement showing (in other words, only redact the Defendant's name).

Please show it!

Hope this is okay  

Coupon-mad

That's great! Hope they don't appeal it.

We have got a case of Brennan kicking around somewhere with the same judgment made on appeal, so this extra judgment is useful for cases where the period of parking isn't on the NTK. Thanks again,