Defence for overstaying car park at BP Connect Gatwick - point 3

dusia

no, however the driver had a stomach flu for the next few days after this episode 

Coupon-mad

OK that was worth asking but isn't an avenue to expand on then. I was wondering if there was an Equality Act aspect here but there isn't.

However, the claim will be discontinued by DCB Legal by the New Year anyway. There will not be a hearing and you'll pay nothing.

Coupon-mad

Your para 3 can be this AND IF THE DEFENCE DOESN'T FIT INTO THE MCOL DEFENCE BOX, SIMPLY REMOVE THE LAST PARAGRAPH 10 (which is optional):

3. There is no cause of action against the Defendant. There were mitigating circumstances causing the driver to pull into the garage (sudden sickness) and the signage was poorly placed and not seen. This situation in a private land parking context is on all fours with the authority in Vine v London Borough of Waltham Forest [2000] EWCA Civ 106. The Claimant has failed to prove the existence of any notice that could be considered sufficiently visible so as to offer any person a fair opportunity to learn of the terms by which they would be bound, considering all the circumstances. As such, the terms in this case match the unfair terms of Example 10 in Schedule 2 of the Consumer Rights Act 2015 (‘CRA 2015’), and, pursuant to Section 62 of that Act and/or the increased consumer contract protections in the Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers (DMCC) Act 2024, such unfair terms are not binding.

3.1. Further and in the alternative, the Claimant knows or should know that Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 ('PoFA') can never apply to land lying within the boundaries of an Airport (Gatwick) because it is not 'relevant land'. Airports, Ports and railways etc. are subject to byelaws and as such, are specifically excluded from the POFA keeper liability law. The Claimant is unable to hold the keeper liable under the ‘keeper liability’ requirements set out in the POFA, yet the POC includes a clear falsehood, signed under a statement of truth by the Claimant's legal representative.