Jump to content


Cpm/BW windscreen pcns - BW PAP LOC Now Claimform - (residential car park) The citrus Building, Maderia road, Bournemouth ***Claim Dismissed with Costs** now another PAPLOC for another same place ticket


harni
 Share

Recommended Posts

I’ve just had their witness statement sent to me via email.

Not read it fully but they are lying within their witness statement saying that the updated signs (installed from Feb 19) were in place at the time of the tickets being issued.

 

Thankfully the image of the sign is date stamped 6/12/2019.

 

Surely the fact that this is a blatant lie (which I have evidence of that they even provided to me!!) is a note for this to be kicked out?

Link to post
Share on other sites

email where did they get that from?!!

 

scan everything up but we don't need each exhibits cover page.

 

ONE multipage pdf ONLY please

 

care read upload guide

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know in all honesty.

I know that when it was appealed, i had to do so via email as their online portal wasnt working so i can only assume it was carried up from then.

I will get the entire thing uploaded shortly as its a big document but in the mean time, who can see their sneaky games in the attached two images?

 

signage_error.pdf

 

Note pic two was taken by me on July 21st 2018 and i have more recent photos to evidence this signage up until the beginning of 2019

Link to post
Share on other sites

Right, ive attached their WS with any sensitive information removed

 

A few points

1. They are arguing the signage stated that double parking was not allowed however this is not the case. I have now provided evidence to counter this in my WS

2. Paragraph 19 they are saying i only appealed to one ticket. Not true, all 3 were appealed with evidence. I know this has no bearing really on the charge being enforcable however in my eyes, evidences they cant even go through their own paperwork!

3. paragraph 21. They suggest the vehicle was registered to the defendant. Not true, this is a lease vehicle. Again, no bearing but does highlight their incompetence

4. Paragraph 23. The defendant failed to respond to post issue correspondence. Again, not true

5. Paragraph 32. The defendant has failed to support his position. In every communication to them i have highlighted their T&Cs do not mention double parking which has been ignored by them

Claimant_WS_Redacted-min.pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites

Also just noticed this in the email they sent along with the WS

 

Notice is hereby given pursuant to CPR 27.9 (a) & (b) that our client will not be in attendance at the hearing and wish for the Court to decide the claim in their absence. Please note that our client will be represented by an advocate. 

 

Anything I need to take into account here other than losing the satisfaction to see them personally lose?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't engage with the advocate for any cosy chat they might ask to have with you prior to the case, might be worthwhile checking if they have right of audience as well, others might give better info on that.

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

 

The bailiff: A 12th Century solution re-branded as Enforcement Agents for the 21st Century to seize and sell debtors goods as before Oh so Dickensian!

Link to post
Share on other sites

just so I can get a better understanding, what is the abilities of their advocate in court?

Are they able to argue any points made in the claimants WS or argue against mine?

Or is it purely that they are they as a representative with effectively no say in the matter?

Link to post
Share on other sites

if the person that wrote the WS in not at the court in person.for want of a differing phrase...to all intent and purpose..the WS cannot be relied upon as you can't cross examine them.

 

pretty much std in most bw pcn claimform threads here now..

 

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

it means a locum (local solicitor to the court)

 

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

And that can work in your favour.

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

 

The bailiff: A 12th Century solution re-branded as Enforcement Agents for the 21st Century to seize and sell debtors goods as before Oh so Dickensian!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Very much!!

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just looking in. Had a quick skim of their WS... interesting. I'll try to comment more either tonight or tomorrow.

 

Your WS will ideally need a bit of a re-write though, to give more flow, hit on harder main points of defence, and also remove some stuff that's not relevant.

 

Have you looked into the lack of signage at the entrance? Take a look at the IPC Code of Practice regarding signage, specifically at the entrance of the site being managed. This is just in addition to the points that have already been raised here and In your WS.

Edited by shamrocker
Link to post
Share on other sites

With regards to the signage, now I have seen their WS and they have dropped themselves in it with this, I can now rewrite this bit to cover the fact it’s incorrect, the fact there is multiple different signs across the site and that in my opinion, it’s not adequate (location, lighting etc)

ad tomorrow’s the last day I have to prepare this, I will be doing so in the morning getting it all ready for hand delivery to the court on the 2nd. I know most will probably be hung over from the New Years celebrations but I’d really appreciate any other comments before it’s signed, sealed and delivered. 
 

Finally, CPMs offices are 30 seconds from the court so do you think hand delivering to CPM will be acceptable as well?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes acceptable

 

Thats why we said await theirs all those posts ago.......

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks DX, was nervous about pushing it right to the last minute but I’m quite confident now all will be fine

 

jumping the gun a bit Here but how does it work in claiming from them my time in the event of me being successful?

i know I can claim 5hrs at £19P/H (?) but am I correct there is other things I can claim for?

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, shamrocker said:

You've blanked out the contravention details - what does it say there? This is important, so we need to know.


It’s a table with the 3 ticket numbers on, the time and date of contravention and the reg number. I blanked it out for the reg and the ticket numbers. You’re not missing anything that isn’t already listed elsewhere. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

do you work?

 

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, dx100uk said:

do you work?

 

dx


yes, about 14 hours a day running my own business so doing this genuinely has been a burden on my own earnings and that of my business 

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

38 minutes ago, harni said:


It’s a table with the 3 ticket numbers on, the time and date of contravention and the reg number. I blanked it out for the reg and the ticket numbers. You’re not missing anything that isn’t already listed elsewhere. 

 

Ah ok - fair enough.

 

You need to use your appeal transcript against them when making the argument about there being no term which forbids double parking, as they pretty much imply that none exists on the signage, but instead refer to communications supposedly given out by the management company (which counts for nothing). All the while, deny that they have any locus standi in the matter, as the land on which your vehicle was parked, and where you have parking rights, is not within the area for which the parking company is responsible.

 

Note also that their WS refers to their accredited body - this is a good opening to arguing the point about lack of signage at the entrance. Their lack of compliance invalidates any contract they claim to be offering - albeit, they have no rights on the land upon with you parked anyway. Keep dropping in the point about your parking space not being on the land they are allowed to manage.

 

When you make a point, always try to qualify it with something, where appropriate. Don't just say, for example... "there should be signage at the entrance" or "the signs are not big enough" etc - qualify your assertions.

 

You also shouldn't be delivering the WS to the parking company - everything goes to their legal representatives.

Edited by shamrocker
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Poss might be able to claim £90 for lost days work

 

 

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Taking into accounts your comments above (Which are really appreciated), i have pretty much rewritten my WS which is attached. Again any last minute comments are really appreciated. This is being hand delivered to the court tomorrow at 9am and posted off to BW.

Witness statement version 2 REDACTED.pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, harni said:

Taking into accounts your comments above (Which are really appreciated), i have pretty much rewritten my WS which is attached. Again any last minute comments are really appreciated. This is being hand delivered to the court tomorrow at 9am and posted off to BW.

Witness statement version 2 REDACTED.pdf 56.72 kB · 2 downloads

 

I'm reading it now. Feedback coming shortly..... albeit, I'm sure you don't want to be making more changes.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You've focused way too heavily on signage in my view, and you've only thrown in the point about the boundary map at the death

- this being, arguably, your strongest point of defence.

 

I'd be looking to get this point in straight away [having first set the scene and outlined the cause of action]

 - "The Claimant's assertion that a contract was created between them and the Defendant is denied.

A contract cannot have been created between the Claimant and Defendant because The Vehicle was not parked on land managed by the claimant" - clearly indicated and supported by images.

 

Then, say something like, "not withstanding this crucial point, which is fatal to the Claimant's case, had the Defendant actually been bound by the terms of parking for the land managed by the Claimant, a breach for "double parking" cannot have occurred because no such term existed on the signage [referred to and relied upon by the Claimant as "the contract"] on the dates the charges were issued". You can add on that the management agent explicitly approved your request to park two vehicles in your allocated space - albeit, it was a verbal agreement.

 

You should really also have the point about the signage change earlier in your WS. Make it stand out!

Give it its own heading and cut to the chase....

 

"The Claimant avers that their signage contains a term which explicitly forbids "double parking" and has disclosed a photo of their sign, dated 06/12/2019.

 

This does not evidence their pleading that the same sign was on display on the dates the charges were issued to the Defendant - only images taken on the date(s) of the alleged contraventions should be provided in support of this point.

 

The Defendant's position remains, that the signage on display on the dates of the alleged contraventions, and relied upon by the Claimant as the contract, did not contain any such term, but  this was in fact added in at a later date and is now being misleadingly used by the Claimant.

 

The Court is referred to appendix ABC, which is a photo of the signage, taken by the Claimant on xx/xx/201x, and clearly supports the Defendant's position.

 

The Court is also referred to the Defendant's appeal transcript, where the Claimant implies that their signage did indeed lack a term relating to "double parking", and seems to be of the belief that the lack of such term on the signage can still form a contract.

 

The Court is reminded that The Vehicle was not actually parked on land managed by the Defendant".

 

You have to almost tell it as a story, but making each and every point have impact and weight. Straight to the point...the judge will appreciate that.

 

You also haven't mentioned my suggestion about the IPC's CoP requiring the operator to display signage at the site entrance

- which the claimant hasn't in this case.

 

I'd be using this.

It's part of what supposedly makes their signage form a valid and enforceable contract.

They use their IPC membership and compliance as a form of credibility - so, if they don't comply, use it against them.

It's an open goal - take advantage of it. Include the relevant part of the CoP in your appendix.

 

I'd also be putting up some sort of challenge to the £60 collection fees.

 

Anyway, I know it's getting late in the day, but if you aren't careful you could easily end up owing these crooks £700.

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • dx100uk changed the title to Cpm/BW windscreen pcns - BW PAP LOC Now Claimform - (residential car park) The citrus Building, Maderia road, Bournemouth
  • dx100uk changed the title to Cpm/BW windscreen pcns - BW PAP LOC Now Claimform - (residential car park) The citrus Building, Maderia road, Bournemouth ***Claim Dismissed with Costs** now another PAPLOC for another same place ticket

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...