That's All Folks!

the defendant doesn't have the best hearing and had asked the judge to repeat something at which point the judge offered to sit at the desk next to us for ease of communication, perhaps this or just perhaps the very informal nature that meant the judge never bothered to stop me from talking when i kept saying stuff. who knows?

Yeah that was my point that I should be allowed to cross examine the witness to question the validity of their testimony. As in their testimony they claimed their claim was elligble becuase of their reliance on PoFa 2012. Which we believed was invalid claim. And that as they were not there the case should either be dimissed or at least rescheduled. (although the judge said , on another point, that he'd probably not reschedule anything as it's a small amount and would be a waste of the courts time. I don't see how they could win in that case as surely it's more onerous on me. What would be a valid reason for not allowing cross examination? No claimant and no solicitor present. They had notified us that the claimant would not be present, but didn't specify that there would/wouldn't be a representative. I didn't even pick up on us not being a commercial vehicle, as it "not so clearly" says commercial vehicles on the sign. I guess the definition of commercial is it's use and not it's actual appearance. Plenty of delivery drivers such as yodel in regular cars these days. I think the judge was just being nice. The judge declared at the start he doesn't read any documents before the trial as oftren people don't show up so it's a waste of time. (or so he claims anyway) I'm incredibly pleased I don't have to pay the £160 or whatever they were asking for nor the £40. But rest assured I shall be walking or paying the ticket/reduced fine as it's a waste of my time and too stressful. But everytime I park now at least i'll get to think of how i'm still £160 up on them. "Some times I despair with Judges how they come to their decisions." I was quite pushy in the trial to be honest, I don't think he was used to someone so insolent. I kept asking him about the points he dismissed as I just couldn't comprehend the conclusions he was making from the evidence and premises placed in front of him. My conclusion from all this was to be rich so you can afford stuff, and stay away from lawyers and the courts as much as humanely possible as they're living on another planet from the rest of us. Thanks again everyone it's a great relief really and you do a great service here for lots of people.

Hey, Thanks for everyone's help. We won the case. Phew! Boy was it a close call though. 1) Judge wouldn't let me argue the point about PoFA 2012 because he said the point of the defendant not being the keeper was not raised in the defence. (I realised later that in the defence it said "no contract exists" and that perhaps I could have argued that there was no contract because defendant was not the keeper) I didn't really understand why the judge wouldn't allow it considering it was in the defences witness statement. 2) Signs not clear. Not accepted so watch out for that in future cases. He said the signs seemed acceptable. I was surprised about this as it was clear from the actual photographic evidence that the signs particularly any of the terms in the small paragraph were not even close to readable. If you can I'd say take a full size copy and stand to court and show it to the judge from 2ms away to stand a chance or something perhaps that would work. I don't know what world he's living in if he thinks a reasonable person should be expected to get out of their car and stand within 1m of a sign and read a paragraph of text in newspaper size print to see if they are good to park there. 3) Luckily and I don't know how this got accepted as it wasn't raised in the defence specifically either. He ended the case on the grounds that sufficient evidence had not been given by the claimant to demonstrate the there was no loading because taking place as there was only a time stamp in 2 sequential photos of about a minute. He seemed like he was going to allow that but I mentioned about a 10min grace period which I think helped a tiny bit. His reasoning was that you don't have to be carrying boxes in and out of the car the whole time to be loading. You could be walking 10mins to the place to get the box for instance. (I think that bodes well for other loading type cases maybe) Those were the only points raised really. I asked if costs were possible for printing and postage. He said costs were only permissible if the claimant had acted unreasonably and that for printing and postage these are typical costs that you should expect in a trial. (which is a bit unfair if you're supposedly the winning party and the trial is brought through no fault of your own and suddenly you're lumbered with costs for defending yourself.) The other point he made which I thought was interesting was that he felt that the parking companies use a copy and paste approach to their claims and just through everything in there and go ona fishing expidition to see what they can catch. The way he expressed this gave a strong impression that he felt this was reasonable approach and acceptable. The last thing I was unsure about was the claimants witness statement. In small claims court do you get to question the witness? I tried to argue that if I didn't mention the PoFa thing in my defence that I could raise it when questioning the witness (who was not there but i was hoping that then I could get it thrown out that way, I really have no clue about law as a lay person) My thought was that I could attempt to discredit the witness and question the factual validity of the statements made in the witness statement and bring up the PoFA point that way. But he said as it wasn't in the defence I couldn't do that anyway. Is it the case that you can only ask witnesses questions in regard to things you have previously stated in your defence? Anyway a lucky escape in the end. To be fair to the judge he did seem to be looking for any holes in their argument. I think the biggest victory was that there was no delay in the morning cases and so we were in and out within 1hr which was good going. Anyway thanks again for all the help much appreciated.

I don't know if lay reps can get costs that's why I asked. I'm guessing by your answer they can't. The defendant is attending.

" This publication was withdrawn on 7 June 2022 Private Parking Code of Practice is temporarily withdrawn pending review of the levels of private parking charges and additional fees." [Withdrawn] Private Parking Code of Practice - GOV.UK WWW.GOV.UK The Code of Practice sets out the requirements that private parking operators must follow when enforcing parking restrictions in England... Was the no to the it doesn't matter about the withdrawl. Or no to the lay helper costs?

Can the defendant claim expenses on behalf of the lay helper who is "me" (sorry if that wasn't clear that i'm not the defendant) as the defendant is retired. I however have wasted loads of time on this. Also i'm self employed which might make a difference on that. does it matter that the private parking code of conduct is currently withdrawm since June 7th pending a review of the level of the fees?

has FMTDave gone anywhere nice? Can't believe he didn't invite us along.

Ok defence witness statement has been sent to court and claimant. Thank you so much for everyone's help. You are all very generous with your time and it's greatly appreciated. It is remarkably stressful and sadly it seems like paying the extorters £40 is a better use of one's time than the 20hrs of reading and stress to argue it. They really are the modern day playground bullies. I honestly couldn't have managed to get this far without your kindness and generousity. Is there anything I need to do or know before the court case? Back to real work now I guess. Enjoy the weekend.

Ok yeah let me see if I can condense it quickly

I've amended referenceing the exhibit number GS4 instead of just saying "the evidecne" CWS Section 15 The site plan does not demonstrate that the sign is clearly displayed. The other evidence Exhibit GS4 provided by the claimant does not show what sign is actually placed in that location as it is not readable in the photo evidence provided. The sign is not by any reasonable standard displayed clearly. - It’s too small. - The writing is too small. - It’s not directly lit. - It’s placed on the reverse of the lamppost, to the rear of the parking bay in the direction of travel. - It’s unreasonable to think a commercial vehicle would ever see the sign particularly as they have no rear window and are high and would totally obstruct the view of the terms if using the bay. And i've added this section along with the image as a new Exhibit Exhibit PF2 shows a photo taken less than 2m distance from the sign at the entrance of the private land. It’s plain to see that even while standing still and looking directly at the sign none of the terms of the contract are even remotely readable .

I was just going to send it now really. Should I wait untill midday then to have someone look it over?

Here is my attempt at a witness statement I think it's ok Defendandnt Witness Statement redacted .pdf

Hey thanks, yeah i've been reading up through some of them now. The claimant is not attending, does that mean their solicitors are not also? "The signees names on contract as well as the name of the land owner have been redacted. " I wondered about that actually, I didn't think to raise it as I thought obscuring their names for privacy is reasonable but I guess not if they are relying on that contract with that party and are not declaring the owner who has the rights. Ok thanks you're a legend.

Ok thanks. When I make points like "PCN is not compatible with PoFA2012 so you are not liable as keeper for the alleged debt-only the driver is liable" Do I have to reference the relevant part of the case law or code/statutes? "Also wording missing and it must be included to validate the PCN." --What wording is missing and where can I find the relevant law or regs on that please?