you mean their witness statement..

scan it all up to ONE multipage PDF inc the exhibits please

read upload

did they include a copy of the contract with the landowner in their bundle?

As you will have asked to see this in your CPR 31.14 request they will be on a sticky wicket if they havent produced it and that will be the first thing you raise in your witness statement.

Often the judge will beat you to it though (but not all are so enquiring).

start your WS by stating that you do not belive that PE have the authority assigned to them by the landowner to enter into contracts with the public and to make civil claims in their own name because they have failed to produce sight of this contract either in response to a CPR 31.14 request for documents nor in their evidnec bundle.

you then say that as they lack planning permission for their signage they are in breach of the 2007 Town and Country Planning Act and this is a criminal offence.

it is not possible to enter into a criminal compact so there can be no breach of contract.

You will need to read up on this as PE and others like to tell lies about having "deemed consent" by referring to the wrong park of the law.

There is a treatise on this law that can be found in a link on the parking pranksters blog from dec 2017.

the link can be found at the bottom of the article called the great planning approval sc@m.

once you have got that all sorted and the printout of the legislation and the treatise as part of your evidence bundle you can set about the other matters of signage etc.

I would number each different point so contract is 1, planning 2 and the as 3 you start off by saying " in any case" so it is clear that whatever you say doesnt rely upon the ones higher up the list.

post up your draft so we can see if there is anything obvious that needs saying.

Also post up their statements and images so we can comment on them.

If it common for parking co's to use stock photos rather than those from the actual site so that way the judge doesnt see that the sign is hidden behind a wheelie bin or an overhanging tree where yours will show what can be seen.

Also compare the actual signs to their plan as it also cnat be different with either less signs or signs not placed as the plan says.

Show them to be wrong on this and the judge will prefer your version for everything else as well.

they didnt supply the contract with landowners no.

i am just trying to get my WS together to post a draft here

So here is my draught copy of my WS

In the County Court at Liverpool

Claim Number ########

Parkingeye LTD – Claimant

Miss – Defendant

Witness Statement

1. I do not believe that Parkingeye LTD have the authority assigned to them by the landowner to enter into contracts with the public and to make civil claims in their own name because they have failed to produce sight of this contract either in response to a CPR 31:14 request for documents nor in their evidence bundle.

2. I believe Parkingeye LTD lack planning permission for their signage and they are in breach of the 2007 Town and Country Planning Act and this is a criminal offence. It is not possible to enter into a criminal compact so there can be no breach of contract.

“LPAs consider parking signs each smaller than 0.3sqm in area as having ‘deemed consent’, and signs exceeding this size as not having deemed consent but requiring ‘express consent’ under Class 2, Schedule 3 of the Town and Country (Control of Advertisements) (England) Regulations 2007 (or the Welsh equivalent, the 1992 Regs).”

3, In any case Signage inside the car park is not visible from the car as it is hidden behind bushes and you would only see that a sign is there after parking given the height and small size of it compared to the location. Other signs around the car park are not visible at all as they are all facing inward towards the building not allowing people to see them. See pictures 1,3,4 and 5 attached also the terms and conditions on the signage is so small you cannot read it.

4, The Claimant has failed to establish keeper liability so there is no cause for action against the keeper. They have also failed to identify the driver at the time and cannot assume that they are one and the same.

5. The signage in picture 2 is the sign as you enter the premises and does not mention any conditions nor does it provide any charges for breaching the offered terms.

6. There was no breach of contract so no money can be owed

7. signage is prohibitive and thus isn't a genuine offer to park so any charge would be an unlawful penalty

This statement is true to the best of my knowledge and belief.

Signed

Dated 25/02/2019

I had to submit as above anyhow 

would the judge not question why i didnt bother to mediation or have any contact with PE

no, mediation is a step that isnt always appropriate and as for a lack of contact with PE, well they are suing you so they have to follow the pre action protocols, you can choose to ignore them if you wish as the claim  is essentially for a fixed amount for a single event. If there was dispute about for example the quality of some work done that you didnt pay for then the court would expect you to have tried to reach an agreement over what the job was worth before it went to a claim.