Jump to content

 

BankFodder BankFodder

parkingbill2018

Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Content Count

    150
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

2 Neutral

About parkingbill2018

  • Rank
    Basic Account Holder

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. My Father and I noted that not once in the waiting or court room did either of the two representatives of the Claimant make eye contact with us, and as stated before they couldn't leave the room quick enough after the DJ delivered his verdict! I know there are still motorists who have refused to pay PCN's issued in this same road. I wonder if NPM will still issue claims, but without the extra £60, to see if they can win without abuse of process? If they do, with the right defense and WS they will still have their claims struck out/dismissed so they should now just give up and move on. The change of operator and double yellow lines was the final nail in the coffin for any future claims associated with this road!
  2. Welcome back to the thread ericsbrother. We were so glad we had this DJ, although would have also been happy to have the one in the next room as he had personally struck out several NPM/other Private Parking Company claims and was aware of the changes in this road with regards to a change of operator and adding of double yellow lines. Whilst waiting an hour we saw several DJs walking in and out and there was one very young female, probably like the one you refer to. However my defence and WS was so detailed it should have guided even a junior DJ who didn't know much about private parking law. Having a bad DJ was my biggest worry on the day, because I knew the defence was good enough to get NPM's claim struck out or dismissed. The Chronicle and Echo have been contacted but it seems they are not interested in doing a follow up to the Misleading Signs report they ran in September 2014. They have not even acknowledged emails sent and tweet asking why. Maybe they use NPM for parking management and don't want to upset them! Unfortunately the Northamptonshire Telegraph doesnt cover Northampton. I think it is shocking and disgraceful that NPM are continuing to pursue claims when they have had so many struck out. The court should be hard on them for continuing to waste court time. Why are they not striking these claims out before they get to trial? In my claim the court even allowed them to disobey the court order for the deadline to submit their WS and evidence. Yes the DJ liked Dawood, but like you, my Father before the hearing told me not to focus too much on this. The DJ did link this nicel to my defence that the signs were not adequate to alert motorists that they were entering a private road, which from the tarmac surface (same as Wellingborough road) and markings at the entrance looked like a normal council/highways adopted road. The DJ's biggest focus was on abuse of the process and the many cases we referenced and what he knew from the DJ in the next room.
  3. Glad to hear Eric is still around. The advice my Father had from the FB group seemed to favour a detailed defence with a lot of it repeated and reinforced in the WS. In the end it didn't matter because like many operators they tactfully submitted their WS and evidence at the last minute, much later than the original order date. They may have been even later if I hadn't alerted the court. Therefore they had the upper hand knowing what was in both my defense and WS when submitting their documents. Despite this, they still failed to use that advantage and correct mistakes previously made like the wrong address, which was even wrong on the never seen before landowner agreement. It seems that all their claims for unpaid PCN's in the road had this address error and certainly the landowner agreement was wrong when originally created/signed and no one spotted this. My Father did so because he is a Quality Consultant so has a keen eye for auditing documents. Also the landowner agreement didn't give NPM authorisation to issue proceedings for breach of contract or trespass on behalf of the landowner, but the DJ decided to just focus on 3 things as he only had an hour, not a full day!!! You are right that these rogue parking companies get a high return/profit on issuing 1000's of PCN because many motorists just pay out of ignorance and/or fear. This road was a big earner for NPM, just on Easter Sunday alone according to the Tesco Express manager. If they had just cancelled my PCN when I first disputed it then they might have continued to get a nice income from unsuspecting Tesco shoppers. The IAS, proved that appealing to them is a waste of time because they don't know the law and are corrupt. The IPC, even with their connections to Gladstones Solicitors don't know the law either and failed by approving the signage in this road. Their desk top audits are also useless because they use site plans and photographs that are years out of date. Well they were for this site. When I pointed this out to the IAS Adjudicator he still rejected my appeal! Hopefully Sir Greg's new Private Parking C of P Act and independant Ombudsman will sort that out this badly regulated industry, but I fear it wont be sufficient enough to get rid of all the rot! In conclusion I have leaned the following from this experience. 1) Don't name or admit to being the driver. Being a Keeper gives you better legal rights! 2) Dispute the PCN with the Operator, but until there is a proper independant ombudsman don't waste your time appealing to POPLA and definitely not the IAS! 3) if your dispute with the operator fails ignore all correspondance from Debt Collectors, Solicitors and further corresponance from the Operator, EXCEPT A LETTER BEFORE CLAIM. 3) If you get an LBC respond ASAP, including pointing out any non-compliance. Enclose the Annex 1 requesting all necessary information. 4) Research as much as possible and double check any sources. There is a lot of bad advice out there on the internet, on forums/groups (not here of course). 5) If you believe the PCN was issued unfairly fight to the end and have your day in court. It will be a long and hard journey, with lots of stress, worry, sleepless nights etc. but to get justice is so satifying and worth it! Visitors to my thread please learn from my experience and use any relevant cases and points from my defence and Witness Statements. Good luck!
  4. Thanks. Lots of battles along the way, but in the end the war for justice was won and the Tesco Express store and it's Customers have benefited too, not that they have shown any gratitude. The store manager renegade on his promise to my Father that he would support us in his own capacity if this went to court. Luckily we didn't need his help in the end. I think head office gagged him. Also, my Father has emailed updates to the person at Tesco Head Office who put through the complaint about NPM to their Landlord/Landowner. Two of his emails have been delivered, but have not even received an acknowledgement! Not the respect/courtesy you would expect from a corporate company like Tesco, especially to someone who has helped their business/Customers.
  5. Despite doing my own Defense and WS without consulting on here, and this being a war and peace, I am pleased to announce my Father and I won in court today. The hearing started just over an hour late. NPM were represented by the MD/Owner of the company and a female member of staff who didn't say or do anything during the trial. I think this case was so important for his company to win, the MD didn't want to risk delegating this to a member of his team, which he has done in the past. They have also had several other cases dismissed/struck out for unpaid PCN's issued in this road. What a waste of court time! We had a good and fair District Judge who knew about private parking law and also the Claimant's and the case histories I had referenced in my defence and WS. He even knew about NPM losing their contract in this road and that it now has double yellow lines all the way round. The case was struck out for 3 reasons: 1) Abuse of process. Claiming more than £100/Parking Eye v Beavis total of £85. The MD said the extra £60 was an error and they no longer add that, but in their response to our defence they had stated they were entitled to add it reference the IPC Code of Conduct! They have had other claims struck out for this but still pursued with their claim against me. 2) Dawood V Camden road. The road looked like a normal highways/council managed road and their signage was not clear enough to make motorists aware that the road is unadopted/private with parking restrictions. 3) The location of the alleged offence was wrong (road name and post code) on the their Claim, LBC, Defence, WS etc., and the Landowner agreement which I finally got to see a week ago had the wrong post code. The above 3 things were enough for a strike out, but I could have won for other reasons as well, but the DJ stated we only had an hour so he was focusing on just those points. The MD and his colleague couldn't get out of the room quick enough and didn't stay to hear my schedule of costs. Not everything on this was agreed, even though there had been an abuse of process. We were awarded loss of earnings, travel to court & parking costs, but whilst this is a fraction of yhe true cost, and no compensation for the stress, worry and upset over the last 2 years, I was just relieved that the hell my family and I have been put through is finally over! I am glad my Father accompanied me in the court room as I was nervous and lacked confidence, but he was allowed to prompt me. I hope I never have to go through this experience again, but happy we got the right result. Also the campaign to get this road marked properly was a success and NPM lost their contract in the process, not that we have had any thanks from Tesco head office or the store management! Thanks to this forum for your earlier advice. My Father in the end did a lot of research on his own and he got very good support from a friend who is a member of a Private Parking Tickets facebook group. So after nearly 2 years and hundreds of posts this thread can finally be closed. Hopefully others will benefit from some of the content. Goodbye all.
  6. A lot of the war and peace in my defence and WS, and even mistakes I have pointed out have not been countered or corrected even in the WS written by the head of the company!!! I did report the capacity issue at least twice, which only started after you upgraded your website. Anyway thats all history now. We are where we are.
  7. There is loads of pages, 0.5 cm thick, some already posted on here. Will take age to remove personal details and scan to pdf. BTW WS and defense could not be uploaded for consultation due to the capacity issue.
  8. Documents as requested. Hopefully all personal details covered up. My defence.pdf My Supplimentary WS.pdf My WS Statement.pdf NPM WS.pdf
  9. Obviously I am wiser now and have lean't a lot and would do things differently and not waste time doing certain things like appealing to the IAS, but what is done is done.
  10. Thanks very much. With the case being heard tomorrow is it too late now? Also i'm sure you will criticize my WS and Defense!
  11. You have not seen any recent documents because since your upgraded your website trying to do so has failed because I am up to my limit. Give an example of what had not sunk in and if you read the 250 post you will see that someone advised me to ask for proof that the operator had planning permision for their signs! Yes the duration was less than 10 minutes but that is not enough to win this case nor has not been a good enough defence to win other cases!
  12. I mentioned that NPM lost their contract in this road and since the new company took over double yellow lines have been painted on the road. Doesn't this strengthen my case. NPM refused to mark the road or make their signs clearer. They stated the Landowner did not wish to mark the road, but they have done now! The road is still unadopted. Interestingly the new parking company have not put any of their signs on the derelict building that NPM had place 4 on. They said the reason was that it is a listed building and their signage without these is still IPC compliant. I did ask the Claimant to give evidence that they had planning permission for their signs. They have not provided this. I wonder if the NPM signs on this building were illegal. Do you need planning permission to put signs on a listed building?
  13. If it has wouldn't I have received a letter stating it has been? They haven't replied to my email either, so either no news is good news or the claim will be heard as planned on Monday. To give 2 working days I had to post the Schedule of Costs today, so I sent it to the court and copy to the claimant.
×
×
  • Create New...