Help with Witness Statement and should I go to court?

dainteej

Hi all thankful for this forum as it has helped me with many charges from parking firms over the years . 

I currently have a situation where ive now been allocated a hearing date for a PCN from PremierPark for parking in a disabled bay . I was moving at the time when notices were coming to my house so I didnt recieve any letters I did recieve the solicitors letters which was demanding 175 pounds, I did park in the bay as my child was ill and having 3 kids in the car i needed access to the grounf floor at Lakeside that particular carpark all the bays seemed to be access bays and as I needed access I parked there for the moments I could  attend to the baby and get her sorted at the toilets as the lfts were not working as well so navigating steps sick child and two other littles I had to park on the groundfloor it was after lal shops were closed so parking lot was empty . I had appealed to the land owner on that basis but they came back to say as it had gone to the solicitors they couldnt help me any further . I then started working on the claim which now has turned to a hearing . I dont know whats the chances I have at any success in this but any help with the witness statements and compiling my pounts would be of help . I did put in my defence based on the mitigating circumstances I was unable to observe any signs and as the parking lot is free I focused on attending to my child while parking safely where the child and toilets  could be accessed . 

they have submitted to me their WS which shows signs (noy in the carpark I was in though) but other signs all over  Lakeside as well as the landowner  agreement with them. I did offer to mediate but they asked for £280? i dont even understand howe that is a mideation offer from a £100 charge ? Any help with orrganixing my WS will be much appreciated 

Gr1pr

It would be very foolish to not attend court if it actually gets to a hearing 

Study recent posts and the newbies sticky thread by coupon mad, basing your WS in the same manner as the recent ones she recommends, as seen in recent cases like this one 

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6529577/charge-notice-for-stopping-at-red-light-bristol-airport#latest

dainteej

when i ask should i go to court my question was should i just pay it or should i go to the hearing ...i do plan to go but i feel my chances of winning are slim as my defense is mitigating  circumstances ...and they are alleging that signinge is clear....thanks for the link i  am ormulating my own WS on some of the `ws's ive seen here and i plan to revisit the parking lot to indicate how on the day i could have missed the sign in a situation of distress 

dainteej

i just feel really nervous about it all its causing me alot of stress i never actually got this far i usually get them dealt with at appeal or with landowners 

Gr1pr

Usually claims are inflated with spurious charges,  so nobody should be paying more than £212 for a single pcn 

If a court hearing is paid for and goes ahead,  turn up and defend,  plus object to added charges

They always argue that signage is clear, but its rarely true

Coupon-mad

dainteej said:

i just feel really nervous about it all its causing me alot of stress i never actually got this far i usually get them dealt with at appeal or with landowners 

What's your deadline for your WS?

Show us the exact defence you put in.

dainteej

The hearing is 2nd June the deadline is 14 days before this . I havent received a letter yet just a witness statement form Gladstones which let me know that hearing date was allocated I contacted the court to advise them Ihad not received the letters . I was told the hearing date is 2nd June and the deadline for WS should be 14 days before this date 

see defense submitted below 

Defense :

 It is admitted that the Defendant was the registered keeper of the vehicle in question

3. The defendant vaguely remembers the car being driven to the Lakeside Shopping Centre winter programme  and the shops being closed due to the a young child in the vehicle being violently ill and throwing up the defendant parked in a nearby bay to the nearest accessible toilet where the child could access toilets and changing stations . There was also a wait to receive assistance, The defendant believed the  was parked  in a parking bay that was believed to be a parent and child parking bay. The car park itself  in question is free to use and there is no parking fee to be paid for its usage.

The defendant received a PCN for parking in an accessible bay. The accessible bay sign on the floor was not clearly visible due to being dark as well as the situation on hand .

The PCN was also not received by the defendant and the defendant only received solicitors letters with no photographic evidence or details of the alleged breach. There was also  no chance to appeal or  to even pay the fine if the appeal was rejected.

 The Claimant will concede that no financial loss has arisen and that in order to impose an inflated parking charge, as well as proving a term was breached, there must be:

(i). a strong 'legitimate interest' extending beyond mere compensation for loss, and

(Ii). 'Adequate notice' of the 'penalty clause' charge which, in the case of a car park, requires prominent signs and lines.

11. The Defendant denies (i) or (ii) have been met. The charge imposed, in all the circumstances, is a penalty, not saved by ParkingEye Ltd v Beavis [2015] UKSC67 ('the Beavis case'), which is fully distinguished.

Exaggerated Claim and 'market failure' currently being addressed by UK Government

12. The alleged 'core debt' from any parking charge cannot exceed £100 (the industry cap).  It is denied that any 'Debt Fees' or damages were actually paid or incurred by this Claimant, who is put to strict proof of:

(i). the alleged breach, which is not pleaded in the POC and requires further and better particulars, and

(ii). a breakdown of how they arrived at the enhanced sum in the POC, including how interest was calculated, which looks to be improperly applied on the entire inflated sum, as if that was all overdue on the day of the alleged event.

13. The Defendant avers that this claim is unfair and inflated and it is denied that any sum is due, whether in debt or damages. This Claimant routinely pursues an unconscionable fixed sum added per PCN, despite knowing that the will of Parliament is to ban it.

 

 

Conclusion

34. There is now evidence to support the view - long held by many District Judges - that these are knowingly exaggerated claims that are causing consumer harm.  The July 2023 DLUHC IA analysis shows that the usual letter-chain costs eight times less than the sum claimed for it. The Defendant believes that it is in the public interest that claims like this should be struck out. 

Statement of Truth

I believe that the facts stated in this defence are true. I understand that proceedings for contempt of court may be brought against anyone who makes, or causes to be made, a false statement in a document verified by a statement of truth without an honest belief in its truth.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Coupon-mad

Defence has no S. Did you use the whole template defence or just those bits?

dainteej

Coupon-mad said:

Defence has no S. Did you use the whole template defence or just those bits?

what is s.? i used the template but altered it to the bits that were for my case whats missing?

Gr1pr

FYI 

She means the spelling, uk English states that it is spelt  DEFENCE,  , there is no s in that word, check it,  it's spelt with a C

DEFENCE 

Le_Kirk

dainteej said:

Coupon-mad said:

Defence has no S. Did you use the whole template defence or just those bits?

what is s.? i used the template but altered it to the bits that were for my case whats missing?

Paragraphs 14 to 33 are missing, unless you just took them out for this thread but left them in when you sent it to CNBC.