Horizon Parking Pcn County Court Hearing date Help !!!!!

sabzi2007

Hi Guys need some help please , i got parking ticket from Horizon Parking back in feb 2025, which was ignored through out , which followed by small claim proceedings which i have followed all the advise from the forum, but now i have been sent a date by my local County Court but i realized i am not in the country and court is asking to fill a form with £126 fee which i don't really want to pay, my hearing date for county court is 20th oct 2026 , i dont really want to loose the case, can someone here can kindly help me out please, whats my best options are from here, i really appreciate your help

Coupon-mad

Which solicitor?

Was it a Tesco site? Where?

Ask the court to let you join by phone.

Make sure your Witness Statement and evidence is robust, what's the reason for overstay, any disabled passengers?

sabzi2007

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/82128641#Comment_82128641

Hi Thanks for quick reply

there solicitor name is "Gladstone's solicitors limited "

its was a 15 minutes overstay in a Greggs parkway car park in Sheffield, i was not aware off 1 hour Max stay, as we visit Home Bargains and Matalan store all the time in same retail park across road and they have 3 hours free parking so had that in mind .

yes we had 11 years old Disabled son with me at the time .

i have contacted court by email and phone but they saying i have to fill that form in for any changes.

court confirmed that claimant have already paid court fees to proceed, my question here is can they still drop the case before hearing date or it will defiantly go to hearing stage now.

i have received Sar details yesterday as requested few weeks ago but not sure if its worth prepping the witness statement and evidence as wont be able to to attend.

sabzi2007

these are couple of pictures i have taken after re visiting the retail park.

sabzi2007

IN THE COUNTY COURT AT SHEFFIELD

Claim No.: ---------

Between:

HORIZON PARKING LIMITEDClaimant

-and-

----------------Defendant

WITNESS STATEMENT OF ------------------

I, ------------------------------------------------------, am the Defendant in these proceedings.

I make this witness statement in support of my defence to the claim brought by Horizon Parking Limited ("Horizon").

The facts contained in this statement are true to the best of my knowledge and belief.

1. The parking event

1. The claim concerns vehicle registration ------------ at the Greggs car park at Sheffield Park Way on 26 February 2025.
2. I understand Horizon relies upon Automatic Number Plate Recognition ("ANPR") photographs recording an entry time of 10:55:49 and an exit time of 12:10:53.
3. The total period recorded by ANPR is therefore approximately 1 hour 15 minutes and 4 seconds.
4. I understand Horizon's case is that the permitted maximum stay was one hour and that I therefore exceeded the permitted period by approximately 15 minutes and 4 seconds.
5. I do not dispute that the vehicle was present for the period recorded by the ANPR system. However, I dispute that the Claimant has established that the circumstances give rise to the parking charge claimed, or that the charge is enforceable.

2. Circumstances involving my disabled child

1. At the time of this visit I was travelling with my 11-year-old disabled child.
2. The presence and needs of my child are highly relevant to the circumstances of the visit.
3. A disabled child can require additional time when getting in and out of a vehicle, moving between the vehicle and the premises, and being safely accompanied and settled.
4. I was not deliberately attempting to obtain an additional period of free parking or deliberately attempting to disregard the parking conditions.
5. The additional approximately 15 minutes was a short and genuine overrun arising in the circumstances of the visit.
6. I respectfully ask the Court to consider the circumstances as a whole rather than treating the ANPR timestamps as automatically establishing that a contractual parking charge became payable.

3. The alleged 15-minute overstay was very short

1. The alleged breach is not a case where the vehicle remained in the car park for hours beyond the permitted period.
2. The alleged excess was only 15 minutes and 4 seconds.
3. The British Parking Association's current information explains that private parking enforcement should provide motorists with appropriate consideration and grace periods. Its Single Code of Practice introduced a mandatory 10-minute grace period and requirements for clear signage.
4. The parking event occurred on 26 February 2025, after the Single Code of Practice version 1.1 came into effect on 17 February 2025.
5. I therefore ask the Claimant to demonstrate precisely how it calculated the charge, including what consideration period and grace period it applied, and how it complied with the applicable Code in force on the date of the event.
6. ANPR records the time at which a vehicle passes cameras. It does not, by itself, establish the precise period during which the driver was actually parked in a parking bay or the precise circumstances in which the vehicle entered and left the parking area.
7. The BPA itself explains that ANPR calculates the duration from the recorded entry and exit photographs and recognises the need for appropriate grace periods in private car parks.

4. Signage and contractual terms

1. The Claimant is required to establish that the terms upon which it relies were sufficiently clear and prominent so that a motorist could reasonably understand them before entering into the alleged contract.
2. In particular, the Claimant should provide clear evidence of the signs that were actually present at this location on 26 February 2025, including:

a. photographs of the entrance signage;

b. photographs of all relevant signs within the car park;

c. the exact wording of the one-hour maximum-stay term;

d. the size and positioning of that wording;

e. the location of the signs in relation to the entrance;

f. evidence demonstrating that the signs were sufficiently visible to a driver entering the site; and

g. evidence that the signage relied upon by the Claimant was in place on the date of the alleged event.

1. The Claimant should not simply rely upon photographs taken substantially later if those photographs do not establish the condition and positioning of the signage on the date in question.
2. If the Claimant contends that a motorist entering this car park was bound by a one-hour maximum stay, it should prove that the term was prominently and unambiguously communicated before any alleged contract was formed.

5. Other parking arrangements at the retail park

1. I also wish to explain the surrounding circumstances.
2. Other stores within the wider retail park provide customers with substantially longer periods of free parking, including parking arrangements allowing up to three hours.
3. I have visited the wider retail park on other occasions and was familiar with the longer parking arrangements associated with other stores.
4. I accept that different areas of a retail park can have different parking terms. However, this makes it particularly important that the one-hour restriction applicable to this particular car park was clearly and prominently communicated to motorists.
5. I respectfully submit that the existence of different parking restrictions within the same wider retail environment is relevant to whether the Claimant's alleged one-hour term was sufficiently clear and prominent in the particular circumstances.

6. Horizon's authority to bring the claim

1. I put the Claimant to strict proof of its legal authority to operate and enforce parking charges at this particular site.
2. The Claimant should provide the contemporaneous contract or agreement with the landowner or occupier which was in force on 26 February 2025.
3. That evidence should identify:

a. the landowner;

b. the contracting parties;

c. the precise land covered by the agreement;

d. the period for which the agreement was in force;

e. the maximum-stay restrictions the Claimant was authorised to enforce;

f. Horizon's authority to install and operate ANPR equipment;

g. Horizon's authority to issue parking charges in its own name; and

h. Horizon's authority to commence court proceedings and recover parking charges.

1. The Claimant should not be permitted simply to assert that it manages the car park without proving the contractual authority upon which its claim depends.

7. ANPR evidence

1. I require the Claimant to provide the complete ANPR evidence upon which it relies, rather than merely a cropped image or a computer-generated statement of entry and exit times.
2. The Claimant should disclose the original entry and exit images, including the vehicle images and timestamps.
3. The Claimant should also explain how its ANPR system was calibrated and synchronised and whether there were any system errors, delays or processing issues affecting the recorded times.
4. The BPA itself recognises that ANPR systems record entry and exit times and that appropriate consideration must be given to circumstances surrounding those recordings.

8. Mitigating circumstances

1. I respectfully ask the Court to take into account that this was a short alleged overstay and that I was travelling with my 11-year-old disabled child.
2. I was not using the car park abusively or deliberately seeking to avoid the parking restrictions.
3. The circumstances were entirely different from a motorist deliberately remaining in a car park for a substantially extended period.
4. The Government's work on private parking has recognised the importance of consideration and grace periods and has specifically referred to circumstances in which drivers may take longer because of children and other practical circumstances.
5. I therefore respectfully submit that this is precisely the type of situation in which the Claimant should have considered the circumstances fairly and proportionately rather than pursuing a substantial parking charge for a very short overrun.

9. Conclusion

1. I respectfully invite the Court to dismiss the claim.
2. The Claimant has not, in my view, established that:

a. the alleged contractual term was sufficiently clear and prominent;

b. the Claimant has correctly applied the applicable grace/consideration provisions;

c. the ANPR entry and exit times establish the precise period of contractual parking;

d. the Claimant's calculation properly accounts for the applicable grace period;

e. the parking charge is justified in the circumstances;

f. the Claimant has sufficient contractual authority to bring the claim; or

g. the Claimant has properly considered the mitigating circumstances, including the presence of my disabled 11-year-old child.

1. I respectfully ask the Court to consider the evidence as a whole and to dismiss the claim.

STATEMENT OF TRUTH

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

Signed: ___________________________

------------------------

Date: ___________________________

sabzi2007

i will really appreciate if someone can check my witness statement please as advise .

Regards

Gr1pr

You appear to have possibly adapted a very old Witness Statement ! Pre 2021

How do I know ? Because that very short Statement of Truth is over 5 years out of date, it was retired long ago in favour of one almost 3 times as long

Please try again with a more up to date WS like the recent example by mse member JackR1 for example

sabzi2007

thankyou its AI generated , i will try to find jackR1 .

Regards

James_Poisson

It's probably me but one sign says max 1hr the other says Max 3hrs?

sabzi2007

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/82129474#Comment_82129474

yes thats the thing only small parking area IN front of Greggs, subway and card factory is restricted to 1 hour max stay and rest of the outlets in retail park have max 3 hours stay.

Car1980

EQUALITY ACT 2010!

You need to quote this. THIS is why Horizon are legally obliged to allow you and your son extra time because disability is a protected characteristic under the Act.