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
    • Staceyplindfield
    • By Staceyplindfield 16th Aug 17, 8:09 PM
    • 56Posts
    • 18Thanks
    Staceyplindfield
    Defence mitigating circumstances
    • #1
    • 16th Aug 17, 8:09 PM
    Defence mitigating circumstances 16th Aug 17 at 8:09 PM
    I parked in a lay by (which is located on hospital grounds - but has residential homes hence why I parked there) I took my daughter to accident and emergency and a few weeks later I received a pcn in which they had a picture of my vehicle, I disregarded the letter and glad stones started writing to me, after the 3rd letter before claim arrived and so I responded asking to waiver charge explaining mitigating circumstances as was taking daughter to a and e, I have now received the claim form and provided them a aknowledgement, I have only 14 days left for a defence, am panicking, I have read almost every thread and website regarding private parking but just wondered if anyone has won on mitigating circumstances., obviously I didn't see the signs or I wouldn't have parked there, just feeling a little nervous.
Page 6
    • nosferatu1001
    • By nosferatu1001 8th Jan 18, 11:09 AM
    • 2,765 Posts
    • 3,442 Thanks
    nosferatu1001
    "iii) The contract submitted is dated 2014."

    This doesnt appear to add - are you drawing any conclusions on this date, for example it is dated 2014 for a period of X, the alleged parking event occurred on Y or alternatively Z which is after the contract expires

    No, IPC CODE OF PRACTICE - BPA rectangle is meaningless, thats NOT the membership that matters. ROUND membership is what matters, and thats IPC

    You should not need to include law, but I would add in the CRA sections for reference. It is neater that way. Why are you attaching evidence to the skeleton - was this not attached to your witness statement already>

    Remember you submit to court AND to the claimant
    • Staceyplindfield
    • By Staceyplindfield 8th Jan 18, 12:38 PM
    • 56 Posts
    • 18 Thanks
    Staceyplindfield
    https://ibb.co/fa2Cwb
    Contract, rubbish they only sent me this! Assumed it was from 2014.

    Ok I had attached bpa cop to witness statement not ipc cop, therefore do I now attach that to skeleton, or just take with me for reference?
    • claxtome
    • By claxtome 8th Jan 18, 6:08 PM
    • 577 Posts
    • 680 Thanks
    claxtome
    Not sure what to advise as either way should be ok as is the CoP that Claimant is fully aware of.

    If you want to send it I would prepare a covering letter which mentions why you are submitting this evidence late to the court.

    You also need to email to Claimant's solicitor too so they are aware of it.
    • Staceyplindfield
    • By Staceyplindfield 8th Jan 18, 7:40 PM
    • 56 Posts
    • 18 Thanks
    Staceyplindfield
    The guidelines are so similar so fingers crossed! Do you think I'm all ready to go on the skeleton as hoping to send tomorrow - amended all coupon mads stuff.
    • claxtome
    • By claxtome 8th Jan 18, 9:08 PM
    • 577 Posts
    • 680 Thanks
    claxtome
    Do you think I'm all ready to go on the skeleton as hoping to send tomorrow - amended all coupon mads stuff.
    I think so.

    How you getting on with your costs schedule?
    • Staceyplindfield
    • By Staceyplindfield 8th Jan 18, 9:13 PM
    • 56 Posts
    • 18 Thanks
    Staceyplindfield
    Trying to find one to copy!! I have just been through your posts again but couldn't find it - but well done on your case!
    • claxtome
    • By claxtome 8th Jan 18, 9:29 PM
    • 577 Posts
    • 680 Thanks
    claxtome
    Not sure if things have changed but my costs for the day were calculated as follows:
    1) Half day off work to attend hearing @£XX per hour x YY hours
    £XX

    2) Mileage driven to attend court and return
    XX miles @ £0.45 per mile
    £XX

    3) Car parking on day of hearing
    £XX

    If claiming unreasonable behaviour there are so many other costs you can claim but is difficult to prove.
    • nosferatu1001
    • By nosferatu1001 8th Jan 18, 9:37 PM
    • 2,765 Posts
    • 3,442 Thanks
    nosferatu1001
    1) is capped at £95
    • Staceyplindfield
    • By Staceyplindfield 8th Jan 18, 9:53 PM
    • 56 Posts
    • 18 Thanks
    Staceyplindfield
    Found it on the newbies, just going to tally it up!
    • Staceyplindfield
    • By Staceyplindfield 12th Jan 18, 11:38 AM
    • 56 Posts
    • 18 Thanks
    Staceyplindfield
    The 'barrister' has just introduced herself and said she is here to represent the company and will be unable to be cross examined?
    • Lamilad
    • By Lamilad 12th Jan 18, 12:10 PM
    • 1,353 Posts
    • 2,712 Thanks
    Lamilad
    The 'barrister' has just introduced herself and said she is here to represent the company and will be unable to be cross examined?
    That's correct, and you use it in your favour telling the judge that this puts you at a serious disadvantage as this is a highly contentious matter with lots of issues in dispute which you would like to cross examine their witness about.

    Explain that the fact the witness is not their should mean the court attaches far less weight to the case presented by the advocate - this what judge's usually say anyway
    • Lamilad
    • By Lamilad 12th Jan 18, 2:26 PM
    • 1,353 Posts
    • 2,712 Thanks
    Lamilad
    Eagerly awaiting the outcome of this....
    • Staceyplindfield
    • By Staceyplindfield 12th Jan 18, 6:08 PM
    • 56 Posts
    • 18 Thanks
    Staceyplindfield
    Ok here's a summary,.....
    Having never used this forum before and not technical at all, I found the newbies forum quite daunting, however through guidance from the forum managed to win the case, so many thanks to everyone for your help, it was much appreciated and would if been a different outcome with out your guidance, a heart felt thankyou.

    So court scheduled for 12, had legs like jelly and just scraped my car on a wall trying to park (within a car park!) so not the best start, I arrived in court 20 minutes early, the court usher asked if it was 'parking fine', I replied yes, he said you have the best judge, so was hoping he was right!
    Shortly afterwards the barrister arrived and the usher informed her I was the defendant, she introduced herself and advised that she was not from the company and would not be able to be cross examined etc....the usher called us in...
    The Judge started straight away by saying she has received my skeleton argument and fired me the question why did I not feel the contract was valid, I replied it was incomplete as only one page and that it was dated 2014, she said it clearly states that they have permission to enforcement on the land and felt the contract was fine, she then scribbled a note and said another point was particulars of claim show incorrect date, the claimant has expressed this was entered in error which I accept, I then advised it was not only on the particulars but also on exhibit number, in which judge said exhibit, what exhibit, I replied in my defence bundle, she said she had not received this and angrily slammed her glasses on the desk, I informed her one copy had been sent registered and one hand delivered, she asked us to step outside and then could resume when documents found.

    Sat waiting, hadn't been going in my favour so far so confidence was low, 15 minutes later we were called in and she went straight into signage and asked the claimant about the vcs v HM quote, unfortunately my mind went blank and my only response to this was 'this is different due to vat claim'.

    The judge swiftly moved on and asked me about the Beavis sign, I defended this quite well, but the claimant diagreed the signs in my case were visable and as said I had previously been to the hospital on four occasions in the letter I wrote to Gladstones that I was avoiding car park charges, I interrupted that the hospital was a different hospital and judge advised claimant to continue and I could respond afterwards....oops. Judge asked me why did I not park in car park, advised the route takes you onto a one way system short cut to the hospital in which I saw the space and parked, distressed daughter etc,... Judge then asked why did I not see signs, again distressed daughter, we then went through the signage plans and had to explain layout (signs on post/brick wall) offered my video evidence in which she said no need, vine was then quoted by claimant and she wanted full transcript of which I had to hand (brownie point for me) she read through this all and then said to claimant, the paragraph quote in your witness statement is a response to the vine case and not from judge in that case, I then added my points to the case (vine was in distress, did not see signs etc). Ipc was mentioned and we both contributed, claimant also mentioned audit, in which I mentioned tax disc so out of date sign, also stated claimants photo out of date and not in location of parking, judge pointed out that "no ball games sign next to parking sign, believing it looked residential area)

    The judge asked if we had anything to add, we both said no, the judge recorded ...
    The defendants bundle was prepared and very well presented and was clear etc, then went through contract (in agreement with claimant) , signs, and again read the vine transcript, and concluded that she believed the defendant didn't see the signs and that the photos of her daughters ear proved she would have been in distress and the entrance sign was placed high on post and positioning of signs were not adequate, and believes defendant couldn't of seen sign, secondly it looks like residential therefore ruling in favour of defendant!

    Was awarded parking costs for that day and loss of earnings, she believed they had played reasonably and not a robo claimer as they have lots of cases and signs are usually well written within car parks.

    The judge also said to the barrister she advises her to inform that the vine quote is incorrect on what they are sending out.

    When leaving the barrister said, I bet your happy with that, I replied I am indeed, she then asked me if I was a law student and is this what I do, I replied no but thankyou, she continued to say what a great bundle was prepared, we wished each other a good weekend and departed the court.

    Was not expecting the hearing to go quite as it did....I didn't expect it to last over an hour, also assumed claimant speak, defendant respond, questions then judgement, however was interrogation more than me 'telling my story' in order.


    Happy for the win.....thankyou everyone.
    • IamEmanresu
    • By IamEmanresu 12th Jan 18, 6:21 PM
    • 2,418 Posts
    • 4,310 Thanks
    IamEmanresu
    Good win but it shouldn't have got to court. Interested in the comment

    The judge also said to the barrister she advises her to inform that the vine quote is incorrect on what they are sending out.
    As was said earlier.

    What you have to understand with this lot is that they misquote, mislead and when you get their pack there will be lies in it too.
    Idiots please note: If you intend NOT to read the information on the Notice of Allocation and hand a simple win to the knuckle dragging ex-clampers, then don't waste people's time with questions on a claim you'll not defend.
    • Staceyplindfield
    • By Staceyplindfield 12th Jan 18, 6:26 PM
    • 56 Posts
    • 18 Thanks
    Staceyplindfield
    Yes couldn't believe advice was being given to the barrister on that point! Although if it's a standard witness statement that gets sent out can be used to defend other cases that 'it was the repondant saying that quote and not the judge'.
    • Lamilad
    • By Lamilad 12th Jan 18, 8:25 PM
    • 1,353 Posts
    • 2,712 Thanks
    Lamilad
    Great stuff, very well done.
    • Umkomaas
    • By Umkomaas 12th Jan 18, 10:09 PM
    • 18,024 Posts
    • 28,551 Thanks
    Umkomaas
    Great win.

    Despite the judge warning on the future inclusion of Vine, it will, no doubt, be wantonly ignored by both UKCPM and Gladstones.
    We cannot provide you with a silver bullet to get you out of this. You have to be in for the long run, and need to involve yourself in research and work for you to get rid of this. It is not simple. We will help, but can't do it for you.

    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.
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 12th Jan 18, 10:19 PM
    • 58,549 Posts
    • 72,051 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    Very well done! Fantastic job and you clearly overcame your nerves!

    Another great win chalked up v UK Car Park Management and Gladstones, cost them a fair whack too!
    PRIVATE PCN? DON'T PAY BUT DO NOT IGNORE IT TWO Clicks needed for advice:
    Top of the page: Home>>Forums>Household & Travel>Motoring>Parking Tickets, Fines & Parking - read the 'NEWBIES' FAQS thread!
    Advice to ignore is WRONG, unless in Scotland/NI.

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

85Posts Today

1,470Users online

Martin's Twitter