Court Case Coming Soon - Helping Elderly Man & Need Some Advice Please

Jambo27 · 29 July at 5:30PM

Hello, I have just started helping an elderly gentlemen with a court claim from National Parking Management (NPM), He's a bit scatty, can't ready very well & lost most of the documents including the court documents.

If anyone can give any ideas or guidence , it would be appreciated as I'm not sure what to do.

He is the Keeper of the car.

Is know that the hearing is dated for the 15th August because he has 1 letter (N157 Notice of Allocation to the Small Claims Track (hearing).

He has also has just recived the document pack from Gladstones for their claim, which includes a claim paticulars from the paralegal who prepared the case, photos of the car & the orginal NTK.

I don't know exactly the wording of the defeice he (or a friend) filed, and have phoned the court while I was with him and asked for a copy of the paperwork to be sent. They insisted I had to email, which I have from his email adddress, but we haven't heard back yet.

He assures me that it was parked by the company who was fixing his car as they had it for 2 days, and says a friend called NPM and told them the address, but I haven't spoken to the friend to confirm.

Unfortunetely it looks like he didn't formally in writing tell NPM of the driver details, neither did he file the drivers details in the defense.

* In Gladstones the paperwork there is a rough map of the site, with pinpointed areas they claim there are signs. Also ther are 2 small areas marked as "do not ticket".

* A few photos of the car by NPM's patrol guy, with physical NTD attached to windscreen.

* A photo of a sign, which is NOT in the same photos of the car.

* They claim the keepers defence is that he could not get the key to work & that he did not get the paperwork.
* A copy of the Parking Agreement from 2017, which states in the terms that it only lasts for 12 months.

* The Agreement says NPM will replace any damaged signs.

The photos are all taken at night time and the only loght in the photos seems to be from the camera flash.

Also there's no indication as to where exactly the car was parked, bearing in mind there are the 2x areas on the map which say do not ticket.

I have been to the site and noticed the following:

* It's a very rough car repair yard, with people renting units.

* There are no entrance signes to the the yard.

* Most of the signs they claim on the map are not there, or are low down, or are worn so not noticable or properly readable.

Coupon-mad · 29 July at 6:47PM

You need to help him do a WS this week, telling his story and attaching his evidence. His deadline on page 2 of that hearing order is probably this Friday at the latest (14 days before).

Suggested exhibits are in the NEWBIES thread.

Jambo27 · 30 July at 3:24PM

Thank you for the info. The directions with the N157 say that all documents need to be submitted by the 7th August. So we have a week, but won't leave untill the last minute.

Coupon-mad · 30 July at 3:28PM

Jambo27 said:

Thank you for the info. The directions with the N157 say that all documents need to be submitted by the 7th August. So we have a week,

I'm not convinced. That'll be the electronic bundle deadline? Show us page 2 of the Order.

Jambo27 · 30 July at 3:36PM

I have inserted 2x screen shots below.

Excert from Page 1:

Image: https://us-noi.v-cdn.net/6031891/uploads/editor/el/pqeuypk8q9kd.png

Page 2:

Image: https://us-noi.v-cdn.net/6031891/uploads/editor/ab/33sazhpnbzy1.png

Coupon-mad · 30 July at 3:39PM

Oooh I take it back. Also, what clear and simple instructions. Nicely set out in layman's terms which is rare for courts.

Jambo27 · 4 August at 6:24PM

Hia.

I have pased the Witness Statement below which is in the name of the defendent.

I have coppied the style on Gladstones WS in relation to the headers of each section.

The defendent's details, court details & other addresses have been changed to ficticious.

I would appreciate any feedback.

Witness Statement No: 1

In The xxxxxxx County Court

Case Number: xxxxxx

National Parking Management Ltd

Claimant

Parties

Mr X

Defendant

Witness Statement of Mr X

1. I Mr X of Test Street, Test Town, TT1 1TT am the Claimant in this claim. The facts in this statement come from my personal knowledge.

2. This document is made in preparation for the hearing on the 15th August 2025 in the County Court in xxxxxx, and is in adherence with the dates for sending documents as per directions on page 2 of the N157 Notice: “By 7 August 2025 each party must send copies of all of the documents that are relevant to their case”.

3. I have received assistance in creating this document due to having learning disabilities in reading and writing.

4. I was keeper of Vehicle xxxxxxx on the 01st January 2024 the, which is the date the claimant alleges is the Contravention Date.

5. In my defence filed with form N9B it states: “i was unable to move the car from the

car park as my Keys were not working”.

This is not a declaration of being the driver at the time of parking, it stated I was attempting to remove the vehicle.

It is the signage that forms the basis of the contract between the driver and the Claimant so it’s the driver who parked the vehicle, who would have accepted the terms on the signage, and who is responsible for displaying any permit.

THE CLAIMANT’S JURISDICTION TO CLAIM FROM THE KEEPER

6. The signage forms the basis of the contract between the driver and the Claimant.

7. The legal jurisdiction for the Claimant to pursue unpaid parking charges from the Keeper is regulated under the Protections of Freedoms Act 2012, Schedule 4 (referred to as PoFA).

DRIVERS NAME & ADDRESS GIVEN

8. PoFA, Schedule 4, Paragraph 5(1)(b) stipulates that a condition for the Claimant to take action against the Keeper, is they must be unable to take action against the driver because they do not know the driver’s name and serviceable address.

“is unable to take steps to enforce that requirement against the driver because the creditor does not know both the name of the driver and a current address for service for the driver”

9. On the day of the Contravention Date, xxxxx was with Company xxxxx, 1 Company Road, CC1 1CC being repaired and the vehicle was parked by them.

10. A friend helped me and wrote a letter to the Claimant on 20th February 2024 (EXHIBIT TAC-1) which told them that the driver was: ‘Company xxxxx, 1 Company Road, CC1 1CC. I personally posted the letter.

11. I kept receiving letters claiming I needed to pay so my friend telephoned the Claimant while was with them, and explained who the driver was. The agent on the phone said the letter isn’t on the system so I will need to pay.

ADEQUATE NOTICE NOT GIVEN / SIGNAGE INSUFFICIENT

12. PoFA, Schedule 4, Paragraph (2) stipulates a Parking Charge is dependent on the driver being given Adequate Notice.

13. PoFA, Schedule 4, Paragraph (3)(b)(ii) stipulates Adequate Notice is dependent on notice which is adequate to bring the charge to the notice of driver on the relevant land.

14. At the time of contravention, the site did not have, and still does not have any entrance signs (EXHIBIT TAC-2).

15. Other terms & conditions signs which were, and still are situated on the site are mostly extensively worn, not fully legible, and located in places which are hidden or not noticeable (EXHIBIT TAC-3).

16. In Gladstones’ Document the photographs in EXHIBIT GS-4 do not show any signs or notices near the vehicle. There is a photograph of a sign which is not fully legible, but no indication where it’s located. This could have easily been photographed within easy sight of the vehicle if Adequate Notice had been given.

17. Even if this claim is directed at the driver, the signage is insufficient to adequately notify the driver that the area is restricted.

PARKING LOCATION WITHIN THE SITE IS NOT STATED

18. There is no indication as to exactly where the vehicle was parked within the Site of xxxxxx, BB1 1BB.

19. In Gladstone’s Document, EXHIBIT GS-3 the provided map displays 2 areas which are circled in red and are marked “Do not issue area circled RED” .

20. As there are declared areas which are marked “Do not issue” there is reason to consider that the vehicle was parked within these non-enforceable areas.

21. The Claimant has a person or persons who patrol the area and issue Notices, which is who took the photos in Gladstones exhibits and who issued the notice on the vehicle windscreen.

22. It would have been possible for them to have given a rough location based on the map so it can be verified for evidence.

DIFFERENT SITE ADDRESS

23. Gladstone’s claim that the Claimants standing and rights to manage and enforce parking regulations at the Site derives from the ‘Parking Scheme Agreement’ shown at EXHIBIT GS-1. This is referenced in Gladstones’ Document at Paragraph 10.

24. The Parking Scheme Agreement explicitly identifies the relevant Site as: ‘The Yard, (No Roadname),BB1 1BB’.

25. The Claim in Gladstones’ Witness Statement at Paragraph 10 is for a different Site listed as: ‘The Yard, (No Roadname), BB17 7BB’.

26. BB17 7BB does not correspond with the location covered by the Parking Scheme Agreement, raising serious doubts about the Claimant’s standing to enforce at the actual place of the alleged contravention and if there are 2x The Yard locations.

MISSING, INADEQUATE & POOR-QUALITY SIGNAGE

SUPPLIED BY THE CLAIMANT IN THE CLAIM

27. In Gladstones Document, EXHIBITS GS-2 & GS-4, there are 2 photos of signs which allegedly are on the site where the alleged conservation occurred.

28. There is no information on the signs as to which site they are from. They could be generic signs from another site.

29. In these photos, the signs are only partially readable so there is no way of checking if they adhere to contract law and other legislation such as the Consumer Rights Act.

30. It would have been easy to take a high-quality photograph where all of the terms could be read and then used in evidence. This is also important because it’s for the claimant to prove their case & if the driver or keeper does not live in the area of parking and cannot attend the site again to look at the signs.

31. Anybody or company with a legitimate interest in claiming a contract for the basis of their claim should be transparent with supplying the fully readable contract when requested, if they have nothing to hide.

THE DEFENDANT’S INVESTIGATIONS

32. The signs which were, and still are situated on the site are mostly extensively worn, not fully legible, and located in places which are hidden or not noticeable (EXHIBIT TAC-3).

33. In Gladstones’ Document the photographs in EXHIBIT GS-4 do not show any signs or notices near the vehicle. There is a photograph of a sign which is not fully legible, but no indication where it’s located. This could have easily been photographed within easy sight of the vehicle if Adequate Notice had been given.

34. On the Date of Contravention, the Claimant was a member of the Accredited Trade Association (ATA) called the International Parking Community (IPC) and therefore agreed to comply with their “Code of Practice”.

35. On the Contravention Date, Code of Practice V9 was in place and was issued on 1st January 2024.

36. In V9, Schedule 1 it says if entrance signs were installed pre 2024, then V8 applies.

37. Considering that there was and still is no entrance signs at all, I will quote V8 & V9.

V8 & V9: Entrance Signs:

“Entrance Signs should:

a) make it clear that the Motorist is entering onto private land;

b) refer the Motorist to the signs within the Car Park which display the full terms and

conditions.”

V9 Entrance signs:

“The sign should be placed so that it is readable by drivers without their needing to look away from the road ahead. Any text on the sign not intended to be read from a moving vehicle can be of a smaller size. “

V8 & V9 Signs Displaying Terms and Conditions:

“The Operator must adequately display any signs intended to form the basis of contract between the Creditor and the Motorist.

Such signs must (in addition to the requirements above):

a. be in sufficient number so that they are clearly visible to Motorists on the Controlled Land;

b. inform the Motorist of all the Terms and Conditions applicable to the use of Vehicles on the Controlled Land;

c. identify yourself as ‘the Creditor’;

d. identify the amount of any charge and explain when it becomes payable;

e. advise Motorists that if a charge remains unpaid for a period of 28 days after issue then an application will be made for the Keeper’s details from DVLA, or, that they may be requested immediately such that a notice may be served on the keeper by post;”

PARKING SCHEME AGREEMENT VALIDITY

38. Gladstone’s claim that the Claimants standing and rights to manage and enforce parking regulations at the Site derives from the ‘Parking Scheme Agreement’ shown at

EXHIBIT GS-1. This is referenced in Gladstones’ Witness Statement at Paragraph 10.

39. The ‘Parking Scheme Agreement’ states it commenced on 13/04/2017, with paragraph 16 stating that it’s only valid for 12 months.

40. In Gladstones Witness Statement, Paragraph 6 it’s stated that in the case of One Parking Solution Ltd v Wilshaw [2021] it was found that it’s not necessary for the Claimant to prove the Landowner’s authority to constitute a valid cause of action.

41. Taking in account One Parking Solutions Ltd v Wilshaw [2021], the claimant has provided what they claim to be the agreement, which would be expected to be valid for the relevant dates of this claim.

‘I believe that the facts stated in this witness statement are true.

Signed:

Mr X

Date: xx/xx/XXXX

Jambo27 · 4 August at 6:27PM

Glasdsones have not stated whether they are claiming the defendent is the keeper or driver. Just just make references to the driver in relation to what they driver should have done and that the driver would have seen signage.

They also make no ference to PoFA, but it's on the original NTK which they have included in the PDF.