Parking Eye - Claim form - Rishworth Centre Retail Park, Dewsbury

[ericsbrother]

just file it with your other paperwork,

they are hoping you will agree to pay them something-anything to get their money back they have shelled ut on court fees and lawyers that they now see going down the toilet.

 

 

By gabbling on about their true losses you are falling into a trap, cast it from your mind as that is not how the applicable law works, you agree they are owed a penny and they will get the lot because of the Beavis decision.

 

Mediation is for when you sue your builder for doing a rubbish job and he reckons that you owe him for some of the work done and materials costs. In that case there is room for discussion and the final result will be bound by the court.

 

 

In this case you agree that you owe a penny for overstaying and that is a breach so they automaticllay get the £100 plus some costs.

You then cannot argue about the fairness of the £100, you have agreed you were in the wrong.

[Alipeeps]

That's exactly what I thought.

 

 

There's nothing to mediate, the only purpose of them doing this is to try and get me to agree to pay something - ANYTHING!

- whereas my position is that I don't owe them squat.

 

Thanks ericsbrother.

[Alipeeps]

it seems that Parking Eye are set on pursuing this.

 

 

I've since received in the post my own Notice of Proposed Allocation to the Small Claims Track form from the court which I need to return to them and also, from Parking Eye, a mahoosive pile of papers in response to my defence - their pile of bumf includes a full print-out of the Parking Eye v Beavis ruling and various diagrams and examples of the signage at the car park in question.

 

I've scanned the pages in which they set out their response to my defence and would appreciate and advice on where I go from here - what it likely to happen next and how I defend against their claims in court (as I assume this is now going to proceed to a court date).

 

TIA.

PE Response.pdf

[ericsbrother]

interesting.

They like the Beavis decision but prefer the BPA CoP when actual law doesnt suit their claim.

 

You hvae a plan of their signage so you need to get down there and photograph the sign at the entrance as they mention this in para 2 and also see if all of the other signs are where they say they are and legible.

 

 

Bear in mind where you actually parked may not have a sign near it so you will need to put that on a copy of the plan and the sign at the entrance will be the one that offers you a contract (or not).

 

 

As this sign refers to other signs to create a contract

the argument about it being an invitation to treat should also include other examples where parking co's have had claims dismissed on this point.

 

 

There are a few and start with the lists of cases mentioned on the parking pranksters blog and also the important cases list on his web site.

[Alipeeps]

I;m guessing the process now is that a date is set for a court hearing and I have to research and prepare my argument as to why the sign at the entrance constitutes invitation to treat not a contract etc. Will look up the relevant cases etc.

 

I've already photographed and measured etc all the signs in the car park - details are in a document attached further up the thread.

 

It's also relevant, I think, that the sign nearest to where I parked is the one that is a full 30cm higher than it should be on the planning permission - when I stood directly under it, when first taking photos/measurements etc, I *still* couldn't read all the small print at the bottom, it was that high up!

[Alipeeps]

Quick Q if anyone can help please..

. for the Small Claims Track Questionnaire that I have to fill out and file with the court (and serve copies on all other parties) do I HAVE to complete my mobile number and email address etc under the Contact Details section?

 

Given that I have to send a copy of this to Parking Eye, I really don't want them having my mobile number or email address.

[ericsbrother]

no,

better if you dont as then PE have to send everything through the post on time.

 

 

Some of the rubbish solicitors (you know who you are Will and John) would then email things to you the night before a hearing and claim that they were sent in time and it is your fault you didnt get them.

 

Dont forget the planning consent for their signs.

Have you asked the council?

 

 

It is not deemed consent, that has a list of 16 differetn sorts of sign but theirs arent on this list, regardless of the size of the sign. it is the content and placing that requires the consent.

[dx100uk]

you can omit it from the copy you send to the other side

leave it on the court copy.

 

 

dx