What to submit for hearing?

GuineaPog

Hi,

I've had a hearing date set and have to 'deliver to the other party and to the Court office copies of all documents on which that party intends to rely…,' what am I meant to be submitting?

I've scoured through the sticky's and posts but am just getting lost, might be slightly panicked by it all.

Is it the witness statement I've already submitted and any evidence support. In this case we thought parking was paid and have proof of conversation around this so this? What about where I have cited ParkingEye Ltd v Beavis, does this need evidencing somehow?

Thanks in advance!

Car1980

When is the hearing?

When do they have to pay their hearing fee by?

When do you have to exchange witness statements?

Your witness statement is account of what happened, your legal arguments and exhibits such as photographs. It's written in the first person. Put Beavis aside - it's just a case that shows parking charges are sometimes enforceable in specific circumstances.

Very few hearings go ahead because the vast majority of claims are discontinued by the parking company a couple of weeks before.

GuineaPog

Thank you for replying.

Never quite sure what I should say on forum so didn't want to put too much, but to answer your questions

The hearing is set for September

They had to pay the fee by last week, which I rang the MCOL number and found it had been paid.

Exchange needs to be done for Thursday.

Defence statements were exchanged in May 2025. Questionnaire's in June, they had to resubmit in November which they did, mine didn't change.

Coupon-mad

"what am I meant to be submitting?"

Certainly not your defence again. The court has that already. This stage needs a Witness Statement and evidence, as shown in post 2 of NEWBIES PLEASE READ THESE FAQS FIRST.

There's a whole list of recommended exhibits there. That's what that thread is for. You only need to read the WS & evidence bit.

This is probably academic - as you will have seen from other threads ahead of you - because ParkingEye are likely to discontinue now, and your hearing almost certainly won't happen.

But comply with the Order, just in case, especially if as you say, they've paid the hearing fee.

Is this a claim from ParkingEye themselves (not DCB Legal for them)?

DON'T use PEye v Beavis if you don't understand how to distinguish a case from it.

Can your case be distinguished? What car park site and what went wrong? Overstay, or what?

What did your defence say?

GuineaPog

Thank you, I will go back and read again and then form a new witness statement. I did try as described on Newbies

'To read examples, search the forum (filter for 'newest') for the keywords: Witness Statement',however, I got a lost in a lot of results!

As for some particulars without making it too obvious.

This is from PiS (backwards) dates back 4 years ago now

Initial Notice to Keeper came through, based on non payment. We responded saying not paying because

• Driver was not registered keeper and RK would not be passing on their details, as that is not a requirement
• Driver believed they had paid parking and had sent a message to registered keeper to say as such. Screenshot was provided (and message still on phone).
  • This wasn't in response but worth noting. Both Driver and RK remembered issues with paying, hence the text to confirm it was paid to driver, as RK had an appointment to get to so driver stayed to sort payment.
• Disproportionate price.

After a first payment overdue letter, they responded to the appeal essentially no sufficient groups, and no appeal options given even though their first letter stated they will give you details on how to appeal the appeal it to IAS. More reminders, some more money added to PCN, some money taken off PCN, until the money courts claim form paperwork started coming through. Went through the MCOL acknowledge process, been through mediation, they had to resubmit statement of particulars as first did not comply and now we're at court hearing.

Coupon-mad

"they had to resubmit statement of particulars as first did not comply"

Show us that so we can guide you how to respond. Are they saying no payment was made or that a typo in the VRM occurred?

Did they attach a payment log for that day?

GuineaPog

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/82114722#Comment_82114722

This is taken from the new PoC issued

it goes on about over grace period, times captured, pursuit as registered keeper, lists the letters sent (but omits the appeal response), breach of contract etc. happy to share more, just unsure of rules as to what is shareable so please advise.

Haven't been given any evidence yet, so no payment log has been received for that day.

Coupon-mad

OK, so your WS should put them to strict proof of the payment log that day, with any unmatched payments and/or partial VRMs shown in full because the driver is certain they paid and the attached exhibit (your initials1) shows the conversation about the driver paying to park on the day).

Does the driver use another car?

Could they have paid for their vehicle in error? If yes, you could put that alternative VRM into a paragraph and say that you firmly believe the payment log will show the payment, either matched to a partial VRM or to the other car xxxx xxx, this there was no loss. If SIP had made it clear in the first notice that there was an unmatched payment that day, you could have resolved the dispute easily, but instead they fired out a barrage of threatening letters with changing amounts and at all times said "no payment was made", which put you on the back foot and is not true, to the best of your knowledge.

You can also make a point that SIP use various full company names and you doubt the sign, the PCN and the landowner authority are all in the name of (or showing the same company number) as the Claimant in this case. There is no evidence that the same legal entity which offered the contract (as identified on the sign), had landowner authority in their name or issued the NTK in that name, and the Claimant is put to strict proof.

Did SIP add £60 or £70 on top of the £100?

Show us the original POC.

GuineaPog

This is the original POC

So I would request that they submit proof of payment log for that in the Witness statement?

• Does the driver use another car?
  • Yes, named on own care so it is a definitely a possibility. We can't remember what type of machine it was (i.e. input registration) and the car park no longer exists (nor has for years now) so couldn't check the machine. There is another car park close by operated by the same group, which had new put up on top of the machine stating 'Never use QR code/barcode to make payments in this location. PiS never uses QR code/barcode for payment method's' (have a photo from this year) so there's also a chance this bogus QR code was there on the other machine, but is speculation based another of there machines.

Coupon-mad

So they've added the false 'debt/damage costs' of £60, which are in fact double recovery of minor costs already in the PCN.

What does the sign look like? I assume they attached a copy to the amended POC?

GuineaPog

Nope no image of the sign with the POC, there was just the amended POC, no other documents.

This is the remainder of the 2nd POC, continuing from above, though above numbering was amended to remove points 1 and 2, below is the continuation with true numbering as per POC, including the jump from 14 to 21.

On the letters, note my response was sent between NTK and 2nd reminder, their response arrived between 2nd reminder and Final Reminder.