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@.

    • harnas
    • By harnas 31st Jul 18, 4:08 PM
    • 58Posts
    • 52Thanks
    told not to worry about payment and enjoy the day by the staff
    • #1
    • 31st Jul 18, 4:08 PM
    told not to worry about payment and enjoy the day by the staff 31st Jul 18 at 4:08 PM
    Greetings to all!
    So, as many here, I made a mistake of trying to be compliant to the "rules" and appealed via IAS and got the appeal dismissed -just then found this forum. I thought my case is simple enough and will be looked at with some reason so, as it was true, I admitted to everything, including being the driver and not displaying the ticket.
    The reason I didn't pay and display was that i was told not to do it by the staff - security person, whom i asked for a change (as had only notes and card). He told me not to worry and enjoy the day with my daughter, and I was fool to trust him, but thought it was a private parking and person that represents this parking is just being nice and for sure can decide on such things. I was in rush and thankful for the help, but I asked him twice if he is sure. When i got back, the ticket was on the car.
    I appealed, gave all details and asked for securing the cctv footage that would support my statement - I was going back and forward on the parking lot to find ways to pay, in rush with my child, until talking to the security in his car - at that time I didn't know he is the staff, thought it was a private person, asked for change but he didnt have any, he chased me few minutes after that, seeing me still struggling to pay, all would be seen on the footage, if I had it). In the appeal response I was told that the cctv doesn't belong to the company that secures the car park and that the staff is not able to make decisions on who pays and who doesn't, and that is up to the landlord (although signs state that it is managed and operated by that company). I asked for the details of the cctv company which was refused, and for landlord involvement which was left unanswered.

    My question is should i just pay the fine or wait for court? I feel strong this was unfair treatment refusing me the evidence supporting my case, or even reviewing it.
    Should i contact the company informing them that i will not pay, if that's the case? (they indicated i have 14 days to do so)

    thanks a lot!
Page 7
    • Le_Kirk
    • By Le_Kirk 16th Nov 19, 10:26 AM
    • 7,496 Posts
    • 8,063 Thanks
    Well done on the win and hard luck on typing out your court report only for the forum to lose it! If I am going to or am typing out a long post, I frequently go Ctrl-A and Ctrl-C which copies your text onto the clip-board, then, if you do have to log-in again, a Ctrl-V gets you back where you were.
    • harnas
    • By harnas 22nd Nov 19, 10:26 AM
    • 58 Posts
    • 52 Thanks
    Hello all,
    As promised here is bit more details about the court case. Sorry for bit of delay. busy busy.

    I came to court earlier and sat down in the waiting area. I did not know that i had to register for the case at the reception? (some kind of kiosk or but luckily did just before the time, whilst asking about some details of the hearing rooms) so REMEMBER to check in before the departure - not sure what the consequences are though.
    When I was registering, the lady pointed at BWLegal advocate stating that he also is present. On that note he approached me and it went like that:
    - Hello
    - Hi, how are you?
    - Ok thanks, I was wondering if we could have a brief chat before the hearing?
    - No, I dont think so, but thanks,

    And i went to take a seat in some distance thinking that i would get into the conversation if not for this forum! THANKS!
    The advocate then went to some witness room, and looked like he was preparing for a case but not sure if this was for mine or not. He also looked quite nervous or... I don't know... like someone that didn't want to be there more than me...

    As mentioned before, the judge was well prepared and the hearing was a form of a conversation, whilst seating, which i did not expect (I thought it would be a stand up, speech kind of a thing). It was quite relaxed tbh.

    The judge presented the case in few words stating that in his understanding, I spoke to someone that told me not to pay and then I was issued the PCN. He asked if this is my main line of the defence. I confirmed and added that I do have a statement prepared, if it's necessary.

    The judge said, it is not as necessary it these type of hearings but I can do it, if i want.

    I only explained that apart from being mislead by the representative I was also mistreated by the whole system of the appealing process. It seemed automated and not human, which was expressed in my emails, as I admitted to not displaying the ticket as my first sentence of the email but they kept coming back with "the ticket was not displayed therefore..."-kind of statements without addressing my requests for securing the evidence of CCTVs and hiding behind data protection when I asked to involve the landlord. I mentioned that I learned that ARMTRAC, the IAS and BW LEGAL belong to the IPC trading body, so I did not have fair independent appeal process after all. I also mentioned that with the information I provided, about PA, his car, time etc, log, ticket info, they could have easily identify the person, but even this was not done.

    Judge confirmed again that the main line of the defence is that you were told by the PA that you don't have to pay, and that that you asked for the evidence and was not given one.

    I confirmed and he turned to the advocate.

    He asked, is there anything in the claim that gives an evidence to prove that what I stated, is not true.

    The advocate tried to point out, again, that I did not have the ticket and there is no proof of the conversation with the PA so they deny it has happened.

    The judge asked if they have a proof that the conversation did not happen. He said, that the claim says it doubts it happened and he has to stay within those lines.

    Judge said that given this, in his opinion, the conversation has happened and the payment was waived by the PA so the claim is dismissed.

    Then it turned to damage control on their side. The judge asked if I had any costs. I presented my Cost schedule (judge didn't have that or couldn't find it his pack for some reason but I was prepared for this with my copies! THANKS!).

    Judge looked at it and asked if the advocate received it, he confirmed. Judge analysed it - i asked for 430 based on hours out of work expenses and 30h of prep at national minimum hourly rate (as not being qualified) I explained that it is moderate to what I did to prepare for it and the stress caused. He asked advocate of what he thinks about it. The advocate quoted 95 max for out of work (which was higher than what I claimed anyway) and that he is ok up to this amount. The judge said that although the responses within the appeal process were not reasonable, the case was. He used some word to describe it but i forgot what it was...I stated that it was all unnecessary and could be resolved earlier, just as a note. The judge stated that based on this he can allow for out of hours and some expenses compensation but without the prep work which brought it up to almost 100.
    I am ok with that and would't argue - I took it as an experience I gained anyway, got the case dismissed and satisfaction is there so the amount of compensation is a bonus

    And that's it. Thanks a lot for all the help!

    Note: When we were called for the hearing, the advocate asked who was the judge on the case, which made me think that he is a regular... and later I realised that this must be true, based on his behaviour before and during the case, quietness, politeness, maybe nervousness and not being argumentative at all... and due to the profession, they must have some history with some judges, other cases that are more important, some that went well and some that went wrong etc. they have much more to loose saying too much than you or they lost it already.... So what i want to say is simply don't be too stressed about being inexperienced, you don't have the baggage that you have to carry and it may work in your favour!
    • beamerguy
    • By beamerguy 22nd Nov 19, 10:57 AM
    • 12,949 Posts
    • 18,270 Thanks
    A good read harnas and well done

    BWLegal were spanked again ...... they are fast becoming a white elephant in the parking scam

    Who will spank them next

    • The Deep
    • By The Deep 22nd Nov 19, 11:19 AM
    • 15,976 Posts
    • 16,766 Thanks
    The Deep
    Solicitors and barristers who take on these cases are either not very good, or inexperienced. They are unlikely to have seen the case more the a day ago, it is usually badly prepared, and they may not be too familiar with the appropriate law.

    ]I was taken to court once in an RTA. We were both represented by wet behind the ears barristers, mine was incompetent and theirs was worse, I won.
    You never know how far you can go until you go too far.
    • beamerguy
    • By beamerguy 22nd Nov 19, 11:30 AM
    • 12,949 Posts
    • 18,270 Thanks
    Solicitors and barristers who take on these cases are either not very good, or inexperienced. They are unlikely to have seen the case more the a day ago, it is usually badly prepared, and they may not be too familiar with the appropriate law.

    ]I was taken to court once in an RTA. We were both represented by wet behind the ears barristers, mine was incompetent and theirs was worse, I won.
    Originally posted by The Deep
    A perfect example on everything we see on here. Sad really

    • Umkomaas
    • By Umkomaas 22nd Nov 19, 11:47 AM
    • 26,043 Posts
    • 42,359 Thanks
    Nice report and great result. Thank you for providing us with the details.
    Please note, we are not a legal advice forum. I personally don't get involved in critiquing court case Defences/Witness Statements, so unable to help on that front. Please don't ask.
    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

74Posts Today

2,905Users online

Martin's Twitter