Jump to content


Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Murpheus

  1. Yeah sent it off although did some minor editing when referring to the Beavis and Butthead case. Just going to wait for Court case. Evidence I supplied was of an empty car park, even then you must admit that sign is very hard to see. Forgot to mention in my defence, car park was very busy on the day and I'm sure vehicles were parked in front making it even harder to see. Pardon late response, will keep you updated.


  2. Here goes, witness statement I will post to Court and and the claimant before 14th June.


    On 10 July 2019 I had an appointment with the dentist. I had not been in the area for around 2 years and was totally unaware of the new parking restrictions being a free public car park previously. The road adjacent at the time, was very congested as traffic lights were in operation.


    Turning right into the car park, I had to wait for pedestrians walking their dogs etc and a gap in the traffic, there were wagons and various heavy plant parked on the path and grass, a sinkhole had appeared further down the street which explained the disruptions.


    The car park was quite full but my favourite spot was free so reverse parked as usual. I walked straight over the green between the trees to the surgery over the road and did the exact journey in reverse when visit was completed. When I drove out of the car park, which was just as hazardous driving in, did half notice a small blank sign near entrance but presumed it was related to construction as other road signs were close to it.


    When the PCN arrived about a week later, I couldn't believe it as I never saw any obvious signs. I decided to revisit the scene mainly to scold myself for not being observant. It soon became apparent given the circumstances, anyone else would have done the same as myself and very likely missed the warnings. I decided to take photos. [around 18th July 2019] 


    *The small sign at the entrance was on the day of appointment, obscured by a Construction wagon parked on the prementioned path. 


    *When I turned right again into the car park, another sign was obscured by a large LWB van.     [See example photo 1] 


    * The only sign opposite where I parked was tuned 90 degrees, obscured by branches / leaves and directly in line with the angle of a tree making it very difficult to notice.                       [ see photos 2 and 3] 


    * Although [bar example photo 1] these photos were taken around 18 July 2019, the traffic lights are clearly gone but a workman's sign had been left.

    [see photo 4] 


    I am very surprised and stressed that this incident has dragged on for so long. If I was not incapacitated through sickness and still working, would counter sue.


    The claimant has had my photographic evidence since August 2019 but along with an adjudicator, twisted it around by claiming I must have been fully aware of the rules as I took photos of the signs. 


    It implies that I took these photos either before or on the day of my dental appointment, not over a week after the events.


    Why on Earth would I do that, it would have been a lot quicker and less hassle just to register my details providing I knew the rules.  


    The fact I had permission to park where I did and was considerate towards the elderly and disabled [could have parked right at the door of the surgery] I don't expect any sympathy these days.         

    The Beavis case I have been reminded of so often, highlights this 


     If it can happen, it will.

    That is what happened to me on 10th July 2019.

    I drove into a car park and back out again without seeing any warning signs. 

    mt car park.pdf street.pdf


  3. Only evidence I can rely on are my photos.


    That sign I did not see is still angled the wrong way and you might as well look at a razor blade. A LWB van can easily hide other signs as in my case.


    I did not get a chance to mention the road works going on in the POPLA hearing as I couldn't add any more photos to their website but this will be mentioned in my Court defence as it contributed hugely to me not seeing the sign at the front entrance.


    I will type out my witness statement exactly how it happened, anyone would have done the same as me and not seen the signs on that particular day.


    Thanks again for all your contributions.


  4. Case now allocated to small claims track and written statements to be sent to the Court and other parties by 4 pm 14th June.


    Okay....... then I get an offer [Today] to settle out of Court and just pay the original fine of £85 up until Sunday 29th May. Some may think I am pig headed and I know this offer will favour the claimant in Court but I truly did nothing wrong given the circumstances so have decided to go to Court.


  5. I have written a letter which will be included with the admission from relative to driving the car.

    It will be posted first class registered tomorrow. Searched other sites and found out you can make an informal appeal to be included with your admission. Not all Police forces do this but there is nothing to lose, thumping a keyboard for 5 minutes and pressing print hasn't been at all stressful.


  6. 2 dimensional photos can be deceiving but believe me when I got done the distance travelled 15 metres per second [38 mph] could be plainly seen. looking at my relatives photos the car has barely moved which makes me want to question it. 


    Is there a new speed gun on the block that can nick you in a second?


    Why were my photos,

    15.03.07, 145.9 metres...

    15.03.08 , 130.3 metres...

    15.03.09, 115 metres 

    15.03.09, 110 metres.


    In both cases the camera graphics, timers, and other scaling are identical but at least I know for definite I was speeding given all that extra information.


    Will update tomorrow, thank     

  7. Relative is going to phone tomorrow to see if there are any more photos.

    Like I said earlier my evidence for speeding clearly indicated 34 metres in 2 seconds,  ie 7,8, and 9 seconds are on the same type of camera evidence.

    Anyway here is the photos, notice how it looks like 38 just past the 60 mph sign, c'mon we all speed up a bit once we approach that sign !

    1 second evidence..pdf

  8. I know what it's like to be done for speeding but the camera evidence I was given all made sense to me at the time.


    I had travelled 34-35 metres in 2 seconds and I am aware 38 mph is very close to 17 metres per second so fair cop. 


    A relative has given me access to very similar police website  photos but this time I'm scratching my head.


    1st photo the car is 147.4 metres away with 24 seconds on the clock [frame 47 I think bottom left] allegedly doing 37 mph. 

    2nd photo 152 5 metres still 24 seconds on the clock frame 53 allegedly doing 38 mph.

    3rd photo still 152.5 metres and still 24 seconds on the clock frame 54 allegedly doing 38 mph.

    Last photo is number plate but no time stamp like there was in my case.


    Both mine and relative were clocked by a mobile speed van that crudely hides just as you enter or in my relatives case leave 30 mph zone.


    Apart from the speed indications of 37 and 38 mph, there is nothing to prove an offence took place,


    what I note is 147.4 metres and 152.5 metres which indicate 5.1 metres per second, nothing more.


    Unless the police have more photos can my relative be punished with this evidence?


    Can I upload a PDF with all the info bar number plate of course.   


  9. Pleased you asked lookinforinfo , could have sworn i uploaded it in earlier posts.


    I have stumbled across original PCN which is in the POPLA defence of Civil Enforcement.


    My short defence statement is also in that PDF and have to admit I was ignorant by not including more information like road works, traffic lights and wagons parked in front of the main blue sign. Thought my appointment and permission to park there would be enough... obviously not!



  10. Just when you begin to think the matter has been dropped, good old CE have waited until the very last moment to inform the Court, they want my arse!


    As mentioned in previous posts, successful against these [when they turned a £30 parking fine for my daughter into a £600 + bill]  thanks to the advice from here.


    This time unfortunately they aint going to let it drop.


    I have been looking at other posts and see JackD13 is in the same boat but a couple of weeks ahead of me....... link below.



    From what I can gather, looks like going down the "Mediation Services" route is being advised to avoid if it regards parking ? 


    If they are anything like POPLA can understand why. 


    Haven't heard anything from CE despite pre typed letters asking for various info. 




  11. Sorry for the loss of your father hightail. Been a while since I was on here, lots of figures flying about. So we all agree 17,000 have lost their lives to the rona that had no underlying health conditions. That is one huge leap from the whole of 2020 when the virus was rampant. 388 died that year, wonder what was introduced in 21 for the graphs to go off the scale?                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/13584329/377-covid-deaths-under-60-underlying-health-conditions/      

  12. Ok will do. Never changed my user name although it may have been all lower case at the time, murpheus. Have to dig through old emails from a different email address I guess.


    hahaha, feel like a prat. below is an extract from a welcome email dated 10/02/2010


    Dear murpheus,
    Thanks for registering at The Consumer Forums!  We are glad you have chosen to join our forum.  We hope that you will be able to benefit from the information, advice and support which we attempt to provide here.
    Although The Consumer Action Group is here to help you Reclaim the Right in respect of all consumer issues, you are probably here because you are a victim of unlawful penalty charging by your bank.
    We can help you get your money back.
    I was using a different email address at the time and looks like my old username was murpheus not Murpheus.
  13. Thanks again FTMDave and dx100uk.

    Think I'm getting the jist of it now.


    Once I get this sortedi  will delve into my daughters case and find out why they backed off back then. Not sure if it was the  CPR 31:14 or the photos I had of the machine out of order that saved the day or both. The case was on here but can't find it anymore,  did try to update the good news on here when it was fresh but had difficulties logging in and ultimately lost touch. That success story will be uploaded on here regardless of what happens with me.


    On that note, will do as advised and put reg number into what I pasted before and submit that as defence for now.

    I will read through it thoroughly maybe tomorrow and submit no later than Friday before I forget.

  14. Thanks Honeybee13 for that link. I may have been advised to click on it earlier but my head is up my arse at the moment. It looks like you can submit a small defence now and you can add to it later, I had no idea you could do that. When MCOL give you 122 lines in that defence paragraph it is easy to presume they want the whole information now. Never mind have copied and pasted part of that link and may use it after I have carefully read and understood it. This too is difficult to understand as it looks like what a Solicitor would say trying to defend me.


    The Defendant contends that the particulars of claim are vague and generic in nature which fails to comply with CPR 16.4.  The Defendant accordingly sets out its case below and relies on CPR r 16.5 (3) in relation to any particular allegation to which a specific response has not been made.


    1.  The Defendant is the recorded keeper of [motor vehicle].


    2.  It is denied that the Defendant entered into a contract with the Claimant.


    3.  As held by the Upper Tax Tribunal in Vehicle Control Services Limited v HMRC [2012] UKUT 129 (TCC), any contract requires offer and acceptance.  The Claimant was simply contracted by the landowner to provide car-park management services and is not capable of entering into a contract with the Defendant on its own account, as the car park is owned by and the terms of entry set by the landowner.  Accordingly, it is denied that the Claimant has authority to bring this claim. 


    4.  In any case it is denied that the Defendant broke the terms of a contract with the Claimant.


    5.  The Claimant is attempting double recovery by adding an additional sum not included in the original offer. 


    6.  The Particulars of Claim is denied in its entirety.  It is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief at all.


  15. I'm sorry but this whole situation has me confused.

    I find it difficult to follow court procedures and some of the advice on here.

    Some of the links refer back to credit loans, what I do understand is I have to submit a defence within a week .


    Been through a lot recently and this has come at a bad time.

    MCOL website gives you 122 lines in a paragraph for your defence.

    Surely if I don't submit that now it wont be allowed later.


  16. Murphy's Law. If it can happen, it will.

    And that is exactly what happened the day I parked at the surgery. I never saw one sign !


    Below is the defence statement I will submit to MCOL within the next few days.

    I had a Dentist appointment on the 10/07/2019. The last time I was there was around 2 years earlier.


    The street at the time had traffic lights with wagons and heavy plant parked on the path. A large sinkhole had appeared earlier along the street that had caused the roadworks.


    Coming up the bank at Durham road I turned left onto Queens road, traffic lights then when I got a chance to pull in, right into the car park.


    I turned right again and reverse parked into a vacant bay. Walked straight across through the trees across the green and through the open door to the dentists. Sat in the waiting room and nothing had changed since the last visit, same pictures on the walls, certainly no new signs.


    When treatment was finished did everything in reverse to get back to car. Driving out of the car park the only thing I noticed different was a blank sign to my left that i presumed was part of the other road signs close by.


    Soon after I got a PCN and was astounded that I did not see any warning signs. I returned to the car park and realised why i didn't see anything. 

    *The main sign at the front was obscured by a wagon waiting to tip.

    *the sign opposite me was turned 90 degrees looking like a razor blade, that's why i did not see it, the pole being in line with the tree from my angle didn't help either..

    * there is a sign on the surgery door glass but this was wide open a week earlier.

    * the main sign was blank at the back and on the wrong side

    *Previous correspondence implied 2 inconsistencies.

    1, I was aware of the new parking restrictions.

    2, Photos  took a week after the event were used against me claiming they were took on the day of the appointment.

    I can provide photographic evidence


    Well that's the raw version for now that I will send off to MCOL soon. Biggest joke is inconsistency 2.


    Why the hell would I take loads of photos the day of the appointment? If I knew then what I know now, it would have been quicker and easier just to put your reg in the machine.

    I have sent an email to MCOL asking them to untick box regarding Jurisdiction as it is not there now. CPR 31 14 sent last week to CE, no reply yet.

  17. Thanks "Yet" again dx100uk. Will post within a couple of days and start preparing my defence.


    Being a couple of years, will have to go through old hard drives for more photos.

    In a nutshell, my photographic evidence [1 week after anpr shot] was twisted by CE and POPLA by being used against me.


    CE seem to imply I must have seen the signs as I took a photo of them, while POPLA stated the rules are clearly displayed on the signs. 


    No mention was ever made that I did not see the signs for temporary traffic lights, construction activities, traffic congestion and 2 crucial signs in question not being clearly displayed.  

  18. The letter I refer to is the CPR 31 14. I'm sure that is what I sent when my Daughter had problems with them. I have copied and pasted it again but what do I do with this paragraph where it says....... [each of the following / the] ? Do I leave it as it is or should there be something I have to type in between the brackets? 

    My gut feeling says leave it as it is but there are other brackets throughout the whole document where you have to type in logical details like their name address etc. Below is the said paragraph.


    Please treat this letter as my request made under CPR 31.14 for the disclosure and the production of a verified and legible copy of [each of the following / the] document(s) mentioned in your Particulars of Claim:


    I will be posting it off to CE by registered letter.

  19. Thanks dx100uk for doing the typing for me. I honestly don't think I'm special [not now anyway] just typing out their lies made me feel angry, That and clerical typing has never been my Forte, worked outside all my life.


    FTMDave thanks for the observation of the additional costs. About 5 years ago, I was in the same boat with my daughter, her parking charge had rocketed up to £650 +. That is history now as the pre typed letter last time from dx100uk sent them packing, that and a photo of the machine out of order.


    Tomorrow I will copy and paste the similar letter and post it to CE recorded delivery.

    I am not expecting them to back off this time as I suspect they will be more determined seeing their £650 vanish like a fart in the wind.

    At least I have bought more time to prepare my defence, should I need it.

  • Create New...