Metro Inn, Walsall

Can anybody guide me please? I believe have won my case. I am on small claims track now for my reimbursement. What documents do I need to submit?

I haven't done this yet. I'll do it today...
I can email it to Claimant and get a printed copy (again) to the court.

yes that's right. I outlined all the reasons why the claimant was wrong to pursue a claim against me. Pictures. see below. And this was enough for the judge to setaside the case. So I don't know what else I am supposed to send to anybody to get my court fees reimbursed?? See what I mean??

IN THE COUNTY COURT AT WALSALL
Claim No.: xxxxx
Between
CIVIL ENFORCEMENT LIMITED (Claimant)
-and-
xxxxx (Defendant)
07 August 2018
__________

DEFENCE
__________
The Parking Charge from Civil Enforcement Limited is an invoice with which I do not agree.
As previously stated to Civil Enforcement Limited (15/11/2017), I confirm that at the time of this alleged incident, I was the vehicle’s registered keeper for the purpose of the corresponding definition under Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (“POFA 2012”).
* In no way is the Defendant declaring himself as the driver of the vehicle. *

1. The Defendant denies that the Claimant is entitled to relief in the sum claimed, or at all.
2. The Defendant received no ‘Notice to Keeper’ letter. The Claimant then raised their £100 parking charge to £200. It is submitted that this is merely a tactic to extract “double money”, and the Defendant is in any case not liable.
This is an entirely unregulated industry which is scamming the public with inflated claims for minor breaches of contracts for alleged parking offences, aided and abetted by a handful of low-rent solicitors.

Parking Eye, CPM, Smart, and another company have already been named and shamed, as has Gladstones Solicitors, and BW Legal, (these two law firms take hundreds of these cases to court each year). They lose most of them, and have been reported to the regulatory authority by an M.P. for unprofessional conduct

Hospital car parks and residential complex tickets have been especially mentioned.

The problem has become so rampant that MPs have agreed to enact a Bill to regulate these scammers. Watch the video of the Second Reading in the HofC recently.

http://parliamentlive.tv/event/index/2f0384f2-eba5-4fff-ab07-cf24b6a22918?in=12:49:41
 
Please view the signage, used at the location:

https://ibb.co/iBNmRL

I wish to make the following points:
• It is a forbidding sign.
There is no offer to park. Therefore it cannot form the basis of a contract. The offer of parking is only made to permit holders and only permit holders could therefore be bound by any contract.

• This is clear from several cases. In PCM-UK v Bull et all B4GF26K6 [2016], residents were parking on access roads. The signage forbade parking and so no contract was in place. A trespass had occurred, but that meant only the landowner could claim, not the parking company.

• In UKPC v Masterson B4GF26K6[2016] it was also found the signage was forbidding and so the matter was one of trespass. The parking company did not have standing to claim.

• In Horizon Parking v Mr J C5GF17X2 [2016] it was also found the signage was forbidding and so the matter was one of trespass. The parking company did not have standing to claim.

• Lack of Prominence.
If the driver did not see the sign then the sign is not prominent. The charge of £100 is far from prominent.

o The BPA code of Practice Section 18 states that signs must be placed at the entrance to the car park and throughout the car park in a strictly prescribed format. This covers things such as the size of the sign, the size of the text and the text content itself.

o The way it is written suggests the rules are non-negotiable, such as; "you must also have a standard form of entrance sign" and "signs showing your detailed terms and conditions must be at least 450mm x 450mm".

o The Defendant contests the validity of these signs. Not prominent and missed.




Other Notes:

1. The Claimant may rely on the case of ParkingEye v Beavis [2015] UKSC 67 as a binding precedent on the lower court. However, that only assists the Claimant if the facts of the case are the same, or broadly the same. In Beavis, it was common ground between the parties that the terms of a contract had been breached, whereas it is the Defendant’s position that no such breach occurred in this case, because there was no valid contract, and also because the legitimate interest in enforcing parking rules for retailers and shoppers in Beavis does not apply to these circumstances. Therefore, this case can be distinguished from Beavis on the facts and circumstances.

10. The Claimant, or their legal representatives, has added an additional sums to the original £100 parking charge, for which no explanation or justification has been provided. Schedule 4 of the Protection Of Freedoms Act, at 4(5), states that the maximum sum which can be recovered is that specified in the Notice to Keeper, which is £100 in this instance. It is submitted that this is an attempt at double recovery by the Claimant, which the Court should not uphold, even in the event that Judgement for Claimant is awarded.

11. For all or any of the reasons stated above, the Court is invited to dismiss the Claim in its entirety, and to award the Defendant such costs as are allowable on the small claims track, pursuant to Civil Procedure Rule 27.14.

Statement of Truth

I believe that the facts stated in this Defence are true.

;...
(Defendant)
xxxxxx

.
(Date)
14.8.2018

Thank you Keith. I didn't realise this. So, I am basically waiting to hear if the claimant puts forward a counter argument(s) (and £25 court fee) by 16:00 on 30th October to know if the case has been struck off or not?
In the meantime, should re-submit my original witness statement (as in post #56) along with the cost schedule (which I will look in to, thanks) in case they want to go to court on 27th November? Should I send copies of both to claimant and court asap?
Thank you. I am sorry to be a pain. I am very confused by all this.

I believe it was my distilled defence. Is it really my witness statement? Do I just call it WS?