Support with paragraph 3 of my defence - UKPC - not parked within marked bay

Grumpy_Jack

I'm hoping that someone would be able to give me a steer on the wording below for paragraph 3 of the defence template that has been helpfully provided on this message board. I've searched the forum and can't find a similar scenario (I'm sure there must be one), so apologies in advance if I've overlooked something. I have already completed the AoS and have 14 more days before providing the final defence. 


I will use the rest of the template verbatim, so have provided paragraph 3 below as advised. I have kept this as brief as possible so as not to exceed the max character count. Thanks in advance for any support with this! Please let me know if you require any further detail, I have kept this brief in an attempt not to provide unnecessary information. 

"3. The sign states "vehicles must park within the marked bay and not park causing an obstruction to others". The Claimant alleges only the former is breached and has never claimed obstruction. The sign is ambiguous if both conditions do not need to be met to result in a breach. UKPC’s own signs elsewhere state simply “must be in a marked bay”, showing they know how to draft unambiguous terms. Ambiguity must be read against the drafter (contra proferentem) and fails the clarity test in ParkingEye v Beavis [2015] UKSC 67. The adjacent car also encroached on the space, forcing the position of the vehicle."

Photo of UKPC signage from a different car park. 

Grumpy_Jack

Photos did not upload as intended. Please see below





Photo of sign in actual car park

Coupon-mad

Change this as shown:

UKPC’s own signs elsewhere - in other car parks operated by this Claimant - state simply “must be in a marked bay”, showing they know how to draft unambiguous terms.

Grumpy_Jack

Much appreciated Coupon-mad! 

For the avoidance of doubt, below is what you have suggested (original text remains as is, other than the updated text in bold). I have also noticed that I miss quoted the signage in the other car park initially so have tweaked that very slightly to align. 

Have I understood correctly? Thanks again for taking the time to respond! 

"3. The sign states "vehicles must park within the marked bay and not park causing an obstruction to others". The Claimant alleges only the former is breached and has never claimed obstruction. The sign is ambiguous if both conditions do not need to be met to result in a breach. UKPC’s own signs elsewhere - in other car parks operated by this Claimant - state simply “must be parked within a marked bay”, showing they know how to draft unambiguous terms. Ambiguity must be read against the drafter (contra proferentem) and fails the clarity test in ParkingEye v Beavis [2015] UKSC 67. The adjacent car also encroached on the space, forcing the position of the vehicle."