CEL CCC - Directions Questionnaire (Title changed for attention)

He’s still mobile but frail and with regard to
His mental capacity he is in residential care and advanced in his dementia so obviously my full concentration would be on him not leaving him in the car to go and read signs!

OK 2nd draft taking into account all of the above.....

In the County Court at Kingston Upon Thames
Claim no: xxx
Between Civil Enforcement Ltd (Claimant)
And
xxxxx (Defendant)

---

Witness Statement

---

1. I am xxxx of xxxxxxx the defendant in this matter. I will say as follows
2. On xxxxx I arrived at the Car Park at 324 Hook Road Chessington behind Sainsbury’s Local at xxxx accompanied by my Grandfather who was aged 87 at the time in question and who suffers from Alzheimer’s disease and vascular dementia amongst other long-term health conditions. (Please see attached appendix xxx evidence of Grandads health conditions in the form of a letter from his doctor)
3. I have visited this car park many times over the years being a life time resident of Chessington, historically there have never been any restrictions in parking in this particular car park in the times I have visited in the past.
4. Upon Arrival at the car park as I drove in, I noted a sign to my right-hand side stating ‘Free Parking 45 Mins see car park signs for terms and conditions’. (please see attached appendix xx photograph of signage at the entrance to the car park taken from inside the vehicle)
5. I then entered the car park and waited for a space close to the entrance to become free due to my Grandfathers limited mobility, with a view to keeping the journey too and from the car as short as possible.
6. Whilst Parking and assisting my Grandfather with taking off his seat belt and safely disembarking the vehicle my attention was drawn to some signs posted next to each bay which said ’45 Minutes Free Parking’ in bold font, followed by some other text below in grey font which is not legible from inside the vehicle (Please see attached appendix xx which is a photograph taken from inside my vehicle in the same bay that I parked on in the date in question.
7. We then proceeded to visit Sainsbury’s supermarket and Jenny’s caf! on the same parade to purchase a hot drink and returned to the car at xxxx I assisted Grandad once more in boarding the vehicle, putting on his seat belt and then exited the car park.
8. I thought no more of it until xxx when I received a letter from the Claimant stating that I was required to pay xxx in respect of breaching ‘terms and conditions’ by over staying at the car park by 18 minutes. The letter I received was of such poor quality and so sparse in detail that I initially dismissed it as scam.
9. After receiving subsequent letters to this effect stating that the charge had increased to xxxx I lodged an appeal directly to the claimant explaining that I had been assisting my elderly Grandfather who suffers from various health conditions including Alzheimer’s and Vascular dementia with his shopping that day. My appeal was rejected on the grounds that it had been lodged too late (Please see attached appendix xxx response My emailed appeal to the claimant and subsequent response.)
10. Under the Equality Act 2010, specifically Chapter 20.3, service providers are required to make reasonable adjustments for persons with disabilities. This includes providing extra time for a disabled person to use the service. Failure to do so not only constitutes discrimination, in accordance with The EHRC Equality Act Code of Practice for Service Providers, (specifically paragraphs 14.58, 5.4 and 5.34) but also renders any contract unenforceable under the prevailing legislation, namely paragraph 142 of the Equality Act. Because this car park is open to the public, the landowner, or managing agent, on-site outlets and the private parking company are all 'service-providers' who have a legal duty to adhere to the 'Equality Act Code of Practice on Services, Public Functions and Associations' which became law on 6th April 2011.
11. As evidenced by my rejected appeal the Claimant was made aware that I was traveling with a passenger with protected characteristics under the Equality Act that day and as so would have needed a reasonable adjustment of time. Please see attached appendix xxxx EHRC Statutory CoP with explanatory notes which evidences that the CoP is not just guidance but in fact part of the law itself and that by not allowing a reasonable adjustment of time the service provider would be committing a breach.
12. In accordance with the BPA Code of Practice 18.3 (attached as appendix xxx) Signs must be conspicuous and legible and written in intelligible language so they are easy to see, read and understand. As evidence by appendix XXX photograph taken from inside the vehicle whilst in the bay “45 Minutes free parking” is clearly legible whilst the parking charge risk itself is clearly not, and was not accepted or known on the day, On the basis of this I deny that the signage provided in this car park meets the criteria to form a legally binding contract.
13. Further to this section 18.10 of the BPA Code of Practice states “So that disabled motorists can decide whether they want to use the site, there should be at least one sign containing the terms and conditions for parking that can be viewed without needing to leave the vehicle. Ideally this sign should be close to any parking bays set aside for disabled motorists” Whilst my Grandfather is not a blue badge holder as he can no longer drive, he still requires a reasonable adjustment of time due to his limited mobility and issues resulting from his dementia. The ‘Free 45 Minutes” was not in fact parking time and does not take into account the time it took for us to find a bay close to the entrance and safely disembark and re – board the vehicle.
14. BPA 20.5a states that “When issuing a parking charge notice you may use photographs as evidence that a vehicle was parked in an unauthorised way. The photographs must refer to and confirm the incident which you claim was unauthorised” The claimant has never evidenced how long the vehicle was actually parked in the car park, simply provided two photographs of my vehicle traveling in two different directions with no reference to the surroundings to the point where I initially dismissed the original Parking Charge notice as a scam. Please see attached appendix xxxx photographs used as evidence by the claimant.
15. Whilst the claim is now £331.38 The Claimant has given no explanation as to how they have arrived at the sum of calculated The additional sum of £136 for ‘debt and damages’ This appears to be a cost with no apparent qualification and an attempt at double recovery In accordance with The Protection of Freedom Act Paragraph 4 (5) The maximum sum which may be recovered from the keeper by virtue of the right conferred by this paragraph is the amount specified in the notice to keeper.

I believe that the facts stated in this Witness Statement are true.

I've now deleted sorry not sure how that happened!