Your browser isn't supported
It looks like you're using an old web browser. To get the most out of the site and to ensure guides display correctly, we suggest upgrading your browser now. Download the latest:

Welcome to the MSE Forums

We're home to a fantastic community of MoneySavers but anyone can post. Please exercise caution & report spam, illegal, offensive or libellous posts/messages: click "report" or email forumteam@.

Search
  • FIRST POST
    • pjr1525
    • By pjr1525 12th Apr 18, 10:11 PM
    • 24Posts
    • 31Thanks
    pjr1525
    Incomplete vrn entered
    • #1
    • 12th Apr 18, 10:11 PM
    Incomplete vrn entered 12th Apr 18 at 10:11 PM
    Hi, this is my first post, I would appreciate some advice. I recently received a PCN through the post from a company called HX car park management stating that I had parked without a valid ticket. It supplied photos of my car entering and leaving the car park. I still had the ticket in my car confirming that I ,as an occupant of the car, had paid and not overstayed so I sent a photo of the ticket to their appeals department. They sent me an email the next day refusing my appeal saying that I had not completed the vrn and this was a breach of contract and I must pay 60 or100. I ,as an occupant of the car, had entered the first four digits of the vrn as some car parks that I have used previously required. This information positively identified the ticket related to the car on which it was displayed. In my opinion I am being charged this excessive amount for what amounts to no more than a typing error. Both myself and my wife are oaps and this represent a significant part of our pensions. I would appreciate any advice. Many thanks
    Last edited by pjr1525; 18-04-2018 at 10:23 AM. Reason: Clarification that I was no the driver
Page 12
    • Pjr1525
    • By Pjr1525 2nd Dec 18, 12:32 PM
    • 147 Posts
    • 143 Thanks
    Pjr1525
    Incomplete vrn entered
    Below is a rough draft of my witness statement. All photo exhibits mentioned, clearly show the before and after signs that were added. I would appreciate any help regarding wording or points that I have missed. Regards.

    In the County Court at Xxxxxxxx
    Claim No xxxxxxx
    Between
    HX car park management ( claimant )
    And
    Xxxxxxxxx ( Defendant)

    Witness Statement

    1. Am xxxxxxxxx of xxxxxxxxxxx, the defendant in this matter. I will say as follows:

    2.On xxxxxxxx I visited the car park in xxxxxxxx and parked my car.

    3.There is a large sign ( exhibit a ) between the 2 pay points clearly showing the tariffs, which I read, agreed with, and then entered sufficient vrn to identify my vehicle and purchased a ticket ( exhibit b ) which I displayed on my dashboard.

    4.I returned within the paid for time and left the car park.

    5.One week later I received a PCN from the claimant demanding 100 for breach of contract. I sent proof that I had paid, in the form of the ticket, which showed that the number, as required in point 2 of their condition of use on the point of sale, had been entered, but they rejected my proof and after several intimidating letters demanding increasing amounts of money, and have elected to pursue the matter via litigation.

    6. On entering the car park the first point on the main sign (exhibit c) states ‘Full terms and conditions at ticket machine’ thus removing the need to look elsewhere in the car park for the full terms and conditions.
    Unfortunately, when I arrived at the ticket machine, there were no such ‘Full terms and conditions’ just four brief conditions of use in small writing on the actual ticket machine. I discovered at a later date that the nearest full terms and conditions are on a small sign with very small writing some distance away above head-height on a wall.

    7.All of the conditions that were on the ticket machine were complied with in full. Point 2 requires that the vehicle registration number is entered, the number within my vehicle registration is xx which was entered in full.

    i.The claimant has realised at some point after the material date that the requirement for vehicle registration number to be entered is ambiguous ( exhibit d ) and that letters as well as numbers are required and they have added a new sign ( exhibit e ) on the same ticket machine correcting the existing condition, now stating that all characters, meaning both numbers and letters, must be entered full and exact.

    ii.Paragraphs 37 and 38 of the consumer protection act ( exhibit f ) requires that any ambiguity in a contract must favour the consumer.
    It it my position that under the doctrine of contra proferentem ( exhibit g )the claimant has no standing or cause of action to litigate in this matter.

    iii.Also breach of contract cannot be claimed when a term or condition is added retrospectively as in case law Thornton v Shoe lane (exhibit h )

    vi. At no point, on the material date, either, at the point of the transaction (especially), or elsewhere in the car park does the claimant make it clear that: if you fail to enter all characters from your vehicle registration plate you agree to pay 100.


    8.The main sign at the entrance, on the material date, ( exhibit j ) did not state the mandatory information that ANPR was in use and that it would be used for enforcement purposes. The claimant has, in effect,, acknowledged this omission by subsequently adding a prominent sign to the existing sign ( exhibit g ) which now includes the previously missing mandatory information regarding the use of ANPR.

    9. The purpose of requiring vehicle registration details to be entered into the pay and display ticket machine is so that it can be established that the patron has paid for the parking space, and no other reason.

    i.As well as my providing proof of payment in the form of the ticket, the claimant have their own records and it is their gift to cross reference the ANPR images with records from the pay and display ticket machine, which according to their own website is done by trained staff, to ascertain if there is a close match who has paid.

    ii.I have requested a list from the claimant’s solicitor, of partially redacted vehicle registration plates taken by ANPR on the material date, as proof that there was no other vehicle in that small car park with the partial vrn xxxx, and also a copy of payments taken in and kept by the ticket machine, as proof that the correct tariff was paid for vehicle xxxx, but this information has not been supplied at date of this statement. ( Exhibit k ).

    10.I invite the court to dismiss this claim in it’s entirety, and to award my costs of attendance at the hearing such as are allowable pursuant to CPR 27.14.

    Statement of truth.

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

    Signed xxxxxxxx
    Last edited by Pjr1525; 06-12-2018 at 2:06 AM.
    • Pjr1525
    • By Pjr1525 3rd Dec 18, 5:55 AM
    • 147 Posts
    • 143 Thanks
    Pjr1525
    Incomplete vrn entered
    http://imgur.com/a/ax614Ah Photos supplied with w/s
    • Pjr1525
    • By Pjr1525 6th Dec 18, 2:00 AM
    • 147 Posts
    • 143 Thanks
    Pjr1525
    Incomplete vrn entered
    I would appreciate any help with my W/S. it has to be posted off by the 10th. Thanks
    • Pjr1525
    • By Pjr1525 6th Dec 18, 1:36 PM
    • 147 Posts
    • 143 Thanks
    Pjr1525
    Incomplete vrn entered
    Below is a rough draft of my witness statement. All photo exhibits mentioned, clearly show the before and after signs that were added. I would appreciate any help regarding wording or points that I have missed. Regards.

    In the County Court at Xxxxxxxx
    Claim No xxxxxxx
    Between
    HX car park management ( claimant )
    And
    Xxxxxxxxx ( Defendant)

    Witness Statement

    1. Am xxxxxxxxx of xxxxxxxxxxx, the defendant in this matter. I will say as follows:

    2.On xxxxxxxx I visited the car park in xxxxxxxx and parked my car.

    3.There is a large sign ( exhibit a ) between the 2 pay points clearly showing the tariffs, which I read, agreed with, and then entered sufficient vrn to identify my vehicle and purchased a ticket ( exhibit b ) which I displayed on my dashboard.

    4.I returned within the paid for time and left the car park.

    5.One week later I received a PCN from the claimant demanding 100 for breach of contract. I sent proof that I had paid, in the form of the ticket, which showed that the number, as required in point 2 of their condition of use on the point of sale, had been entered, but they rejected my proof and after several intimidating letters demanding increasing amounts of money, and have elected to pursue the matter via litigation.

    6. On entering the car park the first point on the main sign (exhibit c) states ‘Full terms and conditions at ticket machine’ thus removing the need to look elsewhere in the car park for the full terms and conditions.
    Unfortunately, when I arrived at the ticket machine, there were no such ‘Full terms and conditions’ just four brief conditions of use in small writing on the actual ticket machine. I discovered at a later date that the nearest full terms and conditions are on a small sign with very small writing some distance away above head-height on a wall.

    7.All of the conditions that were on the ticket machine were complied with in full. Point 2 requires that the vehicle registration number is entered, the number within my vehicle registration is xx which was entered in full.

    i.The claimant has realised at some point after the material date that the requirement for vehicle registration number to be entered is unclear ( exhibit d ) and that letters as well as numbers are required and they have added a new sign ( exhibit e ) on the same ticket machine correcting the existing condition, now stating that all characters, meaning both numbers and letters, must be entered full and exact.

    ii.Paragraphs 37 and 38 of the consumer protection act ( exhibit f ) requires that any ambiguity in a contract must favour the consumer.
    It it my position that under the doctrine of contra proferentem ( exhibit g )the claimant has no standing or cause of action to litigate in this matter.

    iii.Also breach of contract cannot be claimed when a term or condition is added retrospectively as in case law Thornton v Shoe lane (exhibit h )

    iv.At no point, on the material date, either, at the point of the transaction (especially), or elsewhere in the car park does the claimant make it clear that: if you fail to enter all characters from your vehicle registration plate you agree to pay 100.

    v. I also contend that the requirement to enter any details from the registration plate are not sufficiently displayed around the car park, the claimant has realised this and added a new prominent sign on the actual pdt machine”


    8.The main sign at the entrance, on the material date, ( exhibit j ) did not state the mandatory information that ANPR was in use and that it would be used for enforcement purposes. The claimant has, in effect, acknowledged this omission by subsequently adding a prominent sign to the existing sign ( exhibit g ) which now includes the previously missing mandatory information regarding the use of ANPR.

    9. The purpose of requiring vehicle registration details to be entered into the pay and display ticket machine is so that it can be established that the patron has paid for the parking space, and not for the claimant to use failure as a reason to invoke breach of contract and thus generate unfair revenue for themselves.

    i.As well as my providing proof of payment in the form of the ticket, the claimant have their own records and it is their gift to cross reference the ANPR images with records from the pay and display ticket machine, which according to their own website is done by trained staff, to ascertain if there is a close match in the car park who has paid.

    ii.I have requested a list from the claimant’s solicitor, of partially redacted vehicle registration plates taken by ANPR on the material date, as proof that their was no other vehicle in that small car park with the partial vrn xxxx, and also a copy of payments taken in and kept by the ticket machine, as proof that the correct tariff was paid for vehicle xxxx, and that the claimant’s staff were well aware that the payment for xxxx related to vehicle xxxxxxx, but this information has not been supplied at date of this statement. ( Exhibit k ).

    10.I invite the court to dismiss this claim in it’s entirety, and to award my costs of attendance at the hearing such as are allowable pursuant to CPR 27.14.

    Statement of truth.

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

    Signed xxxxxxxx
    Last edited by Pjr1525; 08-12-2018 at 8:22 PM.
    • Ibcus
    • By Ibcus 7th Dec 18, 12:03 AM
    • 153 Posts
    • 82 Thanks
    Ibcus
    I can't comment on how good the WS is, I'll leave that for more knowledgeable people.


    I did spot a couple of typo's I think
    1. Am xxxxxxxxx of xxxxxxxxxxx,
    1. I am ???


    ii.Paragraphs 37 and 38 of the consumer protection act ( exhibit f ) requires that any ambiguity in a contract must favour the consumer.
    It it my position that under the doctrine of contra proferentem ( exhibit g )the claimant has no standing or cause of action to litigate in this matter.

    It is my position

    Could you not add that the ticket printed by the PD machines mentions nothing of a vehicle registration number but simply states M/C so there was no way you could be aware the ticket wasn't validated as they required albeit the signage at the time didn't require it to be?


    Or would that be better used in court in front of a judge?
    • Pjr1525
    • By Pjr1525 7th Dec 18, 2:32 AM
    • 147 Posts
    • 143 Thanks
    Pjr1525
    Incomplete vrn entered
    Hi ibcus. Not sure I can mention about M/C on ticket as it wasn't in my defence. Thanks for pointing out typos, I will sit down and proof read it all this Sunday, the W/S has to be posted off on Monday to reach court and Gladstones by deadline. Regards.
    • Pjr1525
    • By Pjr1525 8th Dec 18, 5:55 PM
    • 147 Posts
    • 143 Thanks
    Pjr1525
    Incomplete vrn entered
    Wow! Received Gladstone's W/S today, 41 pages! Makes my 3 pages look puny. A few omissions, one possible own goal. Can't reproduce all 41 pages but will try and list some points. Regards.
    • beamerguy
    • By beamerguy 8th Dec 18, 6:14 PM
    • 11,408 Posts
    • 15,483 Thanks
    beamerguy
    Wow! Received Gladstone's W/S today, 41 pages! Makes my 3 pages look puny. A few omissions, one possible own goal. Can't reproduce all 41 pages but will try and list some points. Regards.
    Originally posted by Pjr1525
    41 pages ???? Do you realise how much a REAL solicitor would charge for 41 pages ? For this cheap skate solicitor, they have already lost money.

    There you go, Gladstones still trying to prove to their scammers something ??

    Does size matter ???? don't think so, would a judge even bother reading through 41 pages knowing the rubbish Gladstones come out with .... 3 pages that comes to the point is perfect.

    Be interesting to see in points ....
    RBS - MNBA - CAPITAL ONE - LLOYDS

    DISGUSTING BEHAVIOUR
    • Pjr1525
    • By Pjr1525 8th Dec 18, 8:00 PM
    • 147 Posts
    • 143 Thanks
    Pjr1525
    Incomplete vrn entered
    Hi Beamer. A rough draft of my own W/S is post 221 with pictures 222. Gladstones/HX have sent everything to the court including correspondence between myself and HX, except my 8 page rebuttal of their LBC. Which apparently doesn't exist! ( registered post ).

    They did, however, obligingly include a letter that I sent to the DPO of HX which apart from other things cited and quoted a parallel court case in Staines CC where the DJ dismissed all other arguments because it was proven that a ticket had been purchased, as in my case. Regards.
    Last edited by Pjr1525; 08-12-2018 at 8:08 PM.
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 7th Jan 19, 3:22 PM
    • 73,322 Posts
    • 85,434 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    Wow! Received Gladstone's W/S today, 41 pages! Makes my 3 pages look puny. A few omissions, one possible own goal. Can't reproduce all 41 pages but will try and list some points. Regards.
    Originally posted by Pjr1525
    Do you have a court outcome yet, or any concerns about an impending hearing? Done your costs schedule and filed/served it in advance?
    PRIVATE 'PCN'? DON'T PAY BUT DON'T IGNORE IT UNLESS IN SCOTLAND OR NI
    TWO Clicks needed Look up, top of the page:
    Main site>>Forums>Household & Travel>Motoring>Parking Tickets Fines & Parking - read the NEWBIES THREAD
    • The Deep
    • By The Deep 7th Jan 19, 3:34 PM
    • 13,433 Posts
    • 13,780 Thanks
    The Deep
    Surely a judge would think that 41 pages is a tad OTT for a minor dispute over the price of a Chinese takeaway for four.

    It sounds unreasonable imo, acquaint yourself with unreasonable behaviour costs OP.

    https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part27

    and, if you have not already dfone so, complain to your MP.
    You never know how far you can go until you go too far.
    • Pjr1525
    • By Pjr1525 8th Jan 19, 9:54 AM
    • 147 Posts
    • 143 Thanks
    Pjr1525
    Incomplete vrn entered
    Hi both. My hearing is not till mid March, though had to lodge my witness statement by mid December.
    There are several points from their witness statement that I would like advice on, but will wait till nearer the time so still fresh in my mind.
    I have long since complained to my MP but of course he was fobbed of with the usual reasons by the ppc, including what decent sorts they are for allowing upto 2 incorrect digits. In two minds whether to submit skeleton argument before hearing. By the time of the hearing it will have been 11 months since the event, with all that goes with it, just for a typing error! And this is the ppc that boasts on their website 'Fair to the land owner and fair to the motorist '
    What Hypocrisy! Regards.
    • Ibcus
    • By Ibcus 1st Mar 19, 12:30 AM
    • 153 Posts
    • 82 Thanks
    Ibcus
    This may brighten your day


    • Pjr1525
    • By Pjr1525 10th Mar 19, 12:30 PM
    • 147 Posts
    • 143 Thanks
    Pjr1525
    Many thanks incus. My hearing is this Thursday. I'll let you know how I get on.

    Just a brief question before I write a fuller posting. On the claim form from Gladstones saying what they were pursuing me for, it gave location, time and breaching terms at that location plus amount they were claiming for, but nothing else, not how the terms were breached i.e failed to purchase/validate ticket, is this significant?
    • Le_Kirk
    • By Le_Kirk 10th Mar 19, 12:47 PM
    • 5,046 Posts
    • 4,619 Thanks
    Le_Kirk
    Assuming you have submitted your defence & Witness Statement, you can only hope you used "sparse particulars" as can be found in most of Bargepole's concisely written defences.
    • Pjr1525
    • By Pjr1525 10th Mar 19, 1:31 PM
    • 147 Posts
    • 143 Thanks
    Pjr1525
    Incomplete vrn
    Hi le Kirk my post 169, points 3 and 4.
    • Le_Kirk
    • By Le_Kirk 10th Mar 19, 3:10 PM
    • 5,046 Posts
    • 4,619 Thanks
    Le_Kirk
    Good, all covered then and the PPC are condemned by their own evidence!
    • Pjr1525
    • By Pjr1525 12th Mar 19, 4:37 PM
    • 147 Posts
    • 143 Thanks
    Pjr1525
    Incomplete vrn
    Hi, Too many points for me to ask advice on. The only real thing I'm not sure of is the Beavis argument. The claimant states that ruling us still pertinent to my case because basically a contract is a contract no matter what the circumstances are.

    How can I argue that it can be regarded as a penalty if I had paid.

    I provided conclusive proof that I had paid and they knew full well that I had paid.

    I have at least one definitely provable breach of PAP.

    I have proof of at least 2 untruths by HX in their correspondence with me and one proof of misleading my MP.

    Briefly, I paid and displayed, parked correctly and did not overstay. Entered 4 characters of a 7 character reg. they are pursuing me for breach of contract for not entering all 7 characters.
    Does anyone have a killer argument in summing up.

    Also because I have nothing to hide in my using this forum for free advice I will disclose when my hearing is; St Helens County Court this Thursday 14th March at 2 pm. If the ppc wish to use this forum in their evidence, they must admit that they were spying on me, which I'm sure is the equivalent of Phone tapping. Wish me luck.
    Last edited by Pjr1525; 12-03-2019 at 4:42 PM.
    • Redx
    • By Redx 12th Mar 19, 4:46 PM
    • 22,588 Posts
    • 28,698 Thanks
    Redx
    BEAVIS was an overstay on a free for 2 hours car park, no opportunity to top up the fee or remain on the site and he overstayed by some 50 minutes , so breached the BPA CoP on grace periods

    PE paid the landowner to "police" the site, by leasing it or something similar (HX dont)

    yours is a paid for car park (pay & display) so completely different animal and I believe the penalty rule is being engaged here (uinfairly seeing as they could have checked , seen there was an error and cancelled the pcn and court case too)

    de-minimis applies and the BPA and POPLA have issued recent guidance on this, plus the HX website states they will allow for 2 character errors, so why not 3 ?

    the driver paid for parking and was not trying to buck ther system, so was being honest and tried to abide by the site rules (but maybe the pay & display machine didnt have obvious signage about payment and what would happen if an incorrect VRM was out in)

    their machine accepted the contract and issued a ticket, so HX accepted the new contract and/or their systems should alllow for this and not accept a VRM that isnt on the car park


    good luck
    Last edited by Redx; 12-03-2019 at 4:50 PM.
    Newbies !!
    Private Parking ticket? check the 2 sticky threads by coupon-mad and crabman in the Parking Tickets, Fines & Parking Board forum for the latest advice or maybe try pepipoo or C.A.G. or legal beagles forums if you need legal advice as well because this parking forum is not about debt collectors or legal matters per se
    • Umkomaas
    • By Umkomaas 12th Mar 19, 5:12 PM
    • 23,698 Posts
    • 37,891 Thanks
    Umkomaas
    the HX website states they will allow for 2 character errors,
    What does the signage say about this 'leeway'? Nothing I suspect. Therefore the contract isn't as open as it should be. And this must surely then be a 'penalty'!

    As they say a contract is a contract - turn that back on them.
    Please note, we are not a legal, residential or credit advice forum, rather one that helps motorists fight private parking charges, primarily at the 'front-end' of the process.
    Give a man a fish, and you feed him for a day;
    show him how to catch fish, and you feed him for a lifetime.
Welcome to our new Forum!

Our aim is to save you money quickly and easily. We hope you like it!

Forum Team Contact us

Live Stats

2,567Posts Today

7,131Users online

Martin's Twitter
  • Oh if only one were brave/honest enough to say "my mental health" - in answer to the weakness question. I say this? https://t.co/RyihpzwPdY

  • Been out with the little one, just got back and turned the #c4debate on. What have i missed? Who is winning?

  • It's the weekend, it's the weekend, yay. It's that moment, when as usual, to sign off for family time. So I bid y? https://t.co/2RYRnz3fEe

  • Follow Martin