Parking Eye ANPR PCN claimform - University Hospital of Wales, Cardiff - Staff 4, Heath Park, Cardiff, CF14 4XW

[FTMDave]

I agree with HB that, sadly, you've left this very late.

 

A WS is a complex document and generally needs many re-tweaks.

 

The regulars here have a lot of people to help as well as their normal jobs.  I don't mind putting some serious work into the WS, but you'll have to wait till the weekend.

 

However, in the spirit of doing what can be done rather than moaning about what can't be done, drop your argument (3) as that was booted into touch by higher courts years ago.

 

 

[db_mb]

This is what I have so far. I am still working on it. 

 

Any help is greatly appreciated!

 

Thanks

Witness Statement (1).pdf

[lookinforinfo]

Here is some help for your WS

 

I did say a few posts back that their Notice to Keeper was compliant. I was wrong. The NTK should give you 28 days notice from when the PCN was GIVEN [ie two clear days after the day of issue ] NOT 28 days from the date of issue.

 

It is irrelevant that their follow up Notice was after that time, the relevant notice is the Notice to Keeper-  the one that is received  within 14 days from the date of the alleged breach. That means that when they say they are pursuing you as the keeper , they are wrong because their non compliant PCN prevents them from pursuing the keeper.

 

now I am using the numbers that they use in their WS.

 

5] theirs is a witness statement but it is scarcely relevant. What is missing is the actual contract to prove that under PoFA Schedule 5 {1][a] the creditor  has the right to enforce against the driver of the vehicle the requirement to pay the unpaid parking charges; That requires the actual contract to be present complete with signatures by directors from both companies duly witnessed as per The Companies Act 2006.

 

No way does a WS from a manager who may or may not have signed it even begin to satisfy the necessary requirements of proof. Strict proof of an exiting contract is required.

 

11]  Samantha Woodhouse is attempting to misdirect the Court here by only stating that the keeper would become liable for the debt after 28 days, when PoFA states that is is 28 days from the day after the PCN is given, not 28 days after issue as stated at the top of their PCN. That 3 days difference renders the PCN non compliant and therefore the keeper is not liable for the alleged debt.

 

13] the keeper is not responsible for the breach how could PE make such a mistake

 

18] the Defendant would stress that parking companies use robo claims in their Witness Statements and do not even      seem  know when their PCNs are non compliant

 

22] furthermore in their robo claims they quote ad nauseam from Parking Eye v Beavis  which had nothing to do with parking permits and so is totally irrelevant in this situation.

 

On page 6 of 45

 

States that

"Any claim that the Defendant was not the driver of the vehicle is no longer a valid defence".

She then carries on to misquote PoFA Schedule 4 since s9[e] asks only that the creditor INVITES the keeper to provide details of the driver, not Provide the name of the driver.

 

Indeed it is trite Law that  one cannot assume that the keeper and the driver are one and the same.

 

However it is not untypical of certain parking companies including parking Eye as indicated above  to misdirect the Courts for their own gain.

Parking Prankster: ParkingEye witness "tantamount to perjury"

PARKING-PRANKSTER.BLOGSPOT.COM

---

ParkingEye v Mr X. Crewe. 8/9/2017. DJ Rogers Mr Price appeared as a Lay Representative for a case at Crewe County Court. The claim involv...

 

 

That is all I can do for now but you should I think suggest how surprised you are that PE do not consider that if they can prove where you were parked was indeed on a staff car park without a permit the driver  was therefore there in an unauthorised position and at worst guilty of trespass to which  the paralegal neglected to mention in their copious notes from PE v Beavis

Edited February 23, 2022 by dx100uk
spacing

[db_mb]

Thank you so much for this champ!!

 

As per the shared case, I would also like to send PE and email and request their attendance, however, I am unable to find their email address.

 

Would anyone have an email address for PE?

 

Thanks

[dx100uk]

not your job

thats the courts

 

dx

 

[lookinforinfo]

I don't believe a word that PE says. so despite the fact that they appear to say that they have planning permission for the site, and it was in your CPR, they didn't actually produce it so put them to strict proof that they have it. And remind the Court that in the new CoP  that complying with Council planning permission for signs is back on the agenda.