parking eye ANPR PCN PAPLOC NOW claimform - 14 mins overstay - Riverside Retail Park chelmsford essex

[FTMDave]

1 hour ago, Junkie2222 said:

I'm drafting out a Ws that has to go on Monday, just wondered if this is a ' get out of jail free ' card in this one?

This evidence will be important, but it's very dangerous to rely on a single "Get out of jail free" card.  Best to chuck the kitchen sink at them.

 

It would be much better to finish your WS tomorrow, once the working week starts it'll be a lot harder for a lot of us to find the time to help.

[dx100uk]

And post links to what you have found

 

Dx

[Junkie2222]

I've reserved the whole day tomorrow for completing it. I'm know I'm cutting it fine and I'm making life difficult for the  helpful people here. It's got to be in the mail on Monday.

 

I've been reading all week and have a load of Google tabs, notes and pages from here to work from, so I'm confident.

 

I read somewhere they had a deadline to pay a fee to the court. How do you check they have please? can I phone the court directly? MCOL hasn't changed for months.

 

I have had a letter from the court in October, we were not actually living here at that point. ( fire in early October )

 

Stating that Claimant needs to pay the court a trail fee by 4pm 22nd march 2023 or it will be struck out.

I've had nothing to state this is the case and MCOL hasn't changed since Sept.

 

This is the link to the sale of the complex.

/uploads/europe/post_cover_images/64144/cover-64144.jpg

M&G Real Estate acquires Riverside Retail Park for €57.8m (GB)

EUROPE-RE.COM

---

M&G Real Estate has acquired Riverside Retail Park, Chelmsford for £53m from British Airways Pension Fund. The retail park incorporates 145,000 ft² of...

 

[FTMDave]

So - looking at the fleecers' WS.  Immediate thoughts.

 

Your CONSIDERATION & GRACE PERIODS section.  Good to see that they admit in (3) that the overstay was for 13 minutes.  Point out the sections in the government CoP, set up under the Parking (Code of Practice) Act 2019, which allows five minutes' consideration period at the start and then 10 minutes' grace period to leave the site.  Also add that although the government CoP is being legally challenged on the amount that can be charged in a parking invoice, and also debt collection charges, it is not being challenged on consideration and grace periods, or any other issue.  The IPC CoP allows a "reasonable" consideration period (surely three minutes) and a 10-minute grace period.  The BPA, which PE are a member of, bizarrely allows no consideration period if a motorist decides to park, which is absurd as time is need to read the signs, but does allow the 10-minute grace period.

 

Not essential, but you could link here to their (8) and ridicule the fact that the 20 checks don't include looking at the national government CoP.

 

Link your NO LOCUS STANDI section to their (5) and rubbish the contract.

 

Is their (14) true that you didn't reply to the LoC?

 

No essential, but as they try to ridicule your defence in (18) you could draw to the court's attention that their WS is 90% cut & paste and quotes the Beavis judgment as if it covers every single parking case ever, which is typical of lazy solicitors.

[FTMDave]

3 hours ago, Junkie2222 said:

I read somewhere they had a deadline to pay a fee to the court. How do you check they have please? can I phone the court directly? MCOL hasn't changed for months.

MCOL stops once the case gets transferred to a local court.

 

You can ring your local court directly, but realistically PE will have paid the fee if they have produced a WS.

 

I've just reread your thread from the start, and in the CONSIDERATION & GRACE PERIODS section you could add that these are supposed to be a minimum, and why it took you longer with a small child.

[FTMDave]

It's just twigged with me that Sam says she is "of Parkingeye Ltd".  She's not an external legal bod.  Plus, the LoC was sent by PE themselves.

 

Therefore I suggest you conclude with an ABUSE OF PROCESS - FICTITIOUS LEGAL REPRESENTATIVE'S FEES section.  Point out that Sam works for PE and they have engaged no legal representative so have no right to add £50 to the claim.

[Junkie2222]

It looks a mess!

I hope I've got everything i need in. I'm useless at formatting stuff so I'm waiting for my wife to tidy it up. 

Sorry its late, It's been way more reading and chasing stuff than I thought it would be.

Vs ParkingEye Ltd WS final no formatting redacted.pdf Doc 2 1-compressed.pdf

[FTMDave]

Out for a walk in the sun now.

 

I'll have a look in an hour's time.  Promise!

[Junkie2222]

Thanks! It's been a long day in front of a PC!

It doesn't look like the other people's ws. I'm hoping the content does the job.

Need to add the statement of truth part at the end and a brief conclusion.

My head is scrambled at the minute.

[FTMDave]

8 hours ago, Junkie2222 said:

It doesn't look like the other people's ws.

No it doesn't, and that is a problem.

 

You need to have your legal arguments set out clearly for a judge.

 

Your WS is full of waffle - it is irrelevant which shops you contacted for example, they are not a party to the action.

 

There is also absolutely no need to go through the whole of the fleecers' WS, which is also mainly waffle.

 

I've tried to do my best by grouping what you've written into sections below, but it needs a lot more work on it.

 

It's not sufficient to include links, you have to print out evidence and include it as exhibits.

 

When is the deadline?  As a Litigant-In-Person you're allowed some leeway.  The court won't bat an eye-lid about a delay of 24 hours.

 

 

In the xxxxx Court

 

BETWEEN                                     xxxxx (Claimant)

                      

                                                                   AND

 

                                                       xxxxx (Defendant)

                                      

Witness Statement of xxxxx

 

Introduction

 

1.       I, xxxxx, am the Defendant in this claim. I represent myself as a litigant-in-person, with no formal legal training. Everything in the following statement is true to the best of my knowledge and belief.

 

2.       In my statement, I shall refer to exhibits within the evidence section supplied in this bundle, referring to page and evidence numbers where appropriate.

 

3.       I am the registered keeper of the vehicle in question in this case which is xxxxx.

 

Sequence of events

 

On 26th of December 2021, my family and I visited the Riverside retail park, Chelmsford.  We drove in.

We got out and took our little boy, nearly 2 at the time, out of his car seat from our car (car xxxxx and reg number xxxxx) and went into McDonald's to order and use the toilet.  The toilets were out of order and the restaurant didn't smell great as a result.  We were informed they would be fixed as soon as possible and someone was on the way.  We had already ordered food, so ate and left.  We did the shopping.  Before leaving, we went back to McDonald's to use the toilet.  My little boy needed changing.  They were still closed and couldn't be used.  We headed back to the car and changed him on the back seat and this isn't an easy thing to achieve.

As we left there was the tanker lorry (presumably destined for the broken toilets) outside of the exit, obscuring the view of incoming traffic.  So we waited inside the car park for him to move.  After a few minutes, he backed up a bit but not enough to get a good view of the oncoming traffic lane we would have to travel into, to get around him.  I got out of the car and signalled the driver to go around him safely.

CONSIDERATION & GRACE PERIODS

 

The current government guidelines state a consideration period of at least 5 minutes and a grace period of at least 10 minutes, depending on circumstance, as motorists need time to read the signage and at the end of the parking period they need time to leave the car park -

The Government Code Of Practice, set up under the Parking (Code of Practice) Act, Section 16, Annex B:
Consideration and Grace periods.
Table B.1 Controlled land open to the general public for parking (Exhibit xxxxx)  You need to print this out and give it an exhibit number

 

The Act is currently being challenged on the maximum amount that parking charges can be fixed at, and regarding debt collection fees - it is not being challenge on the matter of grace and consideration periods, or on any other grounds.

 

I respected these times.  I did not overstay.

 

A grace period is also used by the British Parking Association CoP and the International Parking Community CoP both of whom allow for a minimum of 10 minutes.  The IPC allows a consideration period of a ‘reasonable time‘ (Exhibit xxxxx). You need to print this out and give it an exhibit number  I believe that 3 minutes should easily be deemed a reasonable time.  Again I respected these times.  i did not overstay.

 

The BPA does not allow a consideration period, which is absurd as motorists need time to read the signs.  Regarding the 10-minute minimum grace period, we were with a toddler, which involved taking him in and out of his car seat twice, organising a pram from the boot, changing him, etc.  We were also delayed by the tanker.  I would argue that the grace period, which is 10 minutes minimum, could reasonably be extended by 3 minutes in our case, and if so i did not overstay.

 

DE MINIMIS

 

In any case, arguing about an "overstay" of 180 seconds, which is not considered an overstay in two national Codes of Practice, but may arguably be an overstay in a third, is legally "de minimis" and a waste of the court's time.

 

ABUSE OF PROCESS - FICTITIOUS LEGAL REPRESENTATIVE'S FEES

1. Samantha Woodhouse (SW1) is an employee of ParkingEye Ltd.  She is not a legal representative.  Yet the Claimant has has included legal representative's fees in their Particulars of Claim.  It should not be required that I pay for legal costs when I’m actually paying a staff member of ParkingEye for doing the job they are paid to do.

 

It is the Defendant’s position that the Claimant in this case has knowingly submitted inflated costs and thus the entire claim should be similarly struck out in accordance with Civil Procedure Rule 3.3(4).

 

NO LOCUS STANDI

 

You are the one who has done superb research here, not me, I'm not really sure about all the contract stuff, so tidy it up so it all flows well and so the points you're making are clear.

5. The claimant is authorised to manage the car park park at Riverside Retail Park by the landowner.  This may have been correct when signed in 2011 but the site was sold in 2017.  M&G Real Estate purchased the property from British Airways Pension Fund. (Please see Exhibit xxxxx).

 

This in contract law is grounds for a void contract on the grounds of mistake to identity.  Also a voidable contract is in play where either or both parties withheld information or the information was misrepresented.  By providing an out of date contract without the consent of the current owners.

 

20. SW1 Exhibit 9. Was a CPR 31.14 request.  Supplied, out of date and stating the landowner is someone that now isn’t.

 

22. – 25. The case of ParkingEye VS Beavis is included. (Supporting Document 2. P91 / P93 of 111 SW1 WS) P91 of 111
‘.... Familiarise themselves with signage within the reasonable grace period that is provided at all sites. The grace period operates to allow motorists to park and decide whether or not they wish to be bound by the terms and conditions clearly displayed

P93 of 111 The BPA scheme code of Practice states
‘ If you do not own the land on which you are carrying out parking management, you must have the written authorisation of the landowner ( or their appointed agent ) ‘

‘ ParkingEye’s authorisation to bring legal action is expressly provided in the witness statement signed by the landowner or landowner’s duly appointed agent ‘  Both points are at issue.  The grace period has not been observed and the Landowner consent is not in place. 

 

ILLEGAL SIGNAGE

On xxxxx I sent a CPR 31.14 request to the Claimant, requesting to see evidence of planning permission for their signs at the car park

The Claimant did not reply/The Claimant replied but did not send such proof whichever is applicable. 

 

I believe the Claimant does not possess planning permission for their signs.

 

Lack of planning permission is a criminal offence under the Road Traffic Acts and no contract can be formed when criminality is involved.  If you can, look at the council portal to see if they have PP, and if you can't find it, mention your search to beef this section up.

 

INSUFFICIENT SIGNAGE

 

I visited later on and did notice there are signs in the car park, which I missed at the time.
 

The Claimant's Witness Statement includes close-up photographs of the signage.  My Exhibit xxxxx shows the sign at true height, next to a step ladder that is required to read it.  You know the score about exhibits!

 

7. The signage seems excessively high and probably doesn’t comply with the font sizes set out in the government CoP. (Supporting Link 3 – Signs and surface markings 3.1.4)  Words like "seems" and "probably" won't help you.  Print out the government CoP bit, add it as an exhibit, state you don't believe these guidelines have been followed which is why you missed the signs, and put the Claimant to strict proof of the contrary.

 

3.1.4 Signs informing drivers that a parking charge may be applicable and of the level of that charge must do so in a font of comparable size and boldness to the main body text on the sign, and where included on signs also displaying the parking tariff a font no smaller than the tariff text/numbers  Where is this from?

8. The Claimant's Witness Statement states that all data undergoes a checking process of up to 20 stages. This doesn’t appear to include checking government legislation and CoPs of various parking bodies.

 

Statement Of Truth:

I believe that the facts stated in this witness statement are true. I understand that proceedings for contempt of court may be brought against anyone who makes, or causes to be made, a false statement in a document verified by a statement of truth without an honest belief in its truth.

Edited April 2, 2023 by FTMDave
Extra info added

[lookinforinfo]

I am sorry but you have not left me enough time to respond.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited April 2, 2023 by lookinforinfo

[Junkie2222]

Thank you very much for this layout. I've clearly got carried away and waffled alot. 

It was a convulated layout and difficult to read. 

I'll go through again later with my wife and attempt to get things more polished.

The court date is the 19th so obviously time is of the essence and I haven't done myself, or anyone here many favours with that timescale.

Thank you for all your help and time on this. I'm bad with paperwork and it shows right. 

 

Thought I'd sent this an hour ago. Sorry.

 

[FTMDave]

1 hour ago, Junkie2222 said:

The court date is the 19th so obviously time is of the essence

Well if your case is typical then the court will want to receive the WS on the 5th.  That's 14 days before.  Is this right?  In that case you have some time yet.  You can always e-mail the court on the 5th.

 

Your aces are the consideration/grace period and you've cleverly added the bits about your son and the tanker.  Plus the rubbish contract.  Concentrate on polishing up those two sections.

 

The working week is nearly upon us but I for one will have time late tomorrow evening and late Tuesday evening, as long as you don't mind Night Owl correspondence.

[Junkie2222]

I'm sitting here with my wife now. She's read my version and thinks I'm a waffler!

She quite rightly points out your version is concise and you know what you're doing.

We're working on that version now, just a bit concerned about the ALOT of work part or your comment.

I'm an up at 5am man for work but I'll try to be around. I Will update asap. Just want to get the thing onto a doc as is and get the details on it.

Will do some more specific reading on those sections tomo if I get down time at work.

Thanks again

[FTMDave]

Relax and get some kip!

 

I don't think you need to do massively more reading, the "meat" of your arguments are there.  It's just a matter of polishing what you have already prepared.

 

I'll have some time this evening to look at it again and will make some specific, and not too time-consuming, suggestions.

 

I've had a read through it again, moved some stuff around, suggested some changes in red, and made some suggestions about what to do in blue.

 

There's not really a massive amount to do.

 

If you have time to deal with this tomorrow then do so, and liaise with the site, and it can probably go off on Tuesday.

[Junkie2222]

Hi, many thanks for your message. We have just completed this from your previous suggestions. Just uploaded it and saw your new message, so will spend some time tomorrow making the new adjustments.

 

Thank you for your time and help.

 

please see the redacted version amended with previous suggestions. Do you think still too long? However, it covers everything and the extra page for all the supporting docs. Do we need to submit the Claimants Supporting Docs and WS too or would the court already have that?

Many thanks

Witness Statement Amended Layout redacted.pdf

Edited April 2, 2023 by Junkie2222
removal of PDF for redaction purposes

[FTMDave]

20 minutes ago, Junkie2222 said:

Do we need to submit the Claimants Supporting Docs and WS too or would the court already have that?

There is no need to include the fleecers' bilge.  The court will already have all their tripe in their WS.

 

Tomorrow have a look at the latest version you have prepared plus the latest version we have above as they "crossed in the post", decide which bits you prefer, and post up a definitive version.  We're nearly there.  Probably only an hour's work is needed.

Edited April 2, 2023 by FTMDave
Typo

[Junkie2222]

that's as close as I can be to done. 

Going to print 3 copies and post 2 tomo. Please let me know if you see anything that needs to be changed. I know it's late so will understand if you cant get to have a look.

 

Thanks again and I'll update after the court date.

 

Witness Statement Final Draft.pdf

[lookinforinfo]

I am up to my eyeballs for a major interview at the US embassy involving masses of documents which have to be scanned and copied.

However I did come across something that might help your case as it is due to timing. It was taken fro the FAQs section of this goverment issue back in 2012

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/9155/guidance-unpaid-parking-charges.pdf

 

"POPLA may also refer cases back to the landholder where it considers the landholder has failed to take reasonable account of evidence of reasonable mitigating circumstances which has been presented by the driver or registered keeper. "

 

You have pointed out the mitigating circumstances that caused you to overstay. This gives the Judge the knowledge to allow your reasoning even if he did not know  the government issue above.

[FTMDave]

I'm knackered now and have a full day of work tomorrow.

 

I could look at the WS late tomorrow evening - if you can hang on that long.

[Junkie2222]

It's all going off today. I think that's best to comply with the 2 weeks.

I think we've made a compelling argument on a number of points. So don't want to get it rejected on a technicality.

So thanks for all of your help again.

I'm already at work after a 1.5hr drive so adding stuff now will pile more pressure on my wife, who will have to do the final printing and sending.

If the case isn't a winner, we went down swinging.

 

Don't panic about reading it unless for moral support.

 

[dx100uk]

You are what is called a litigant in person (Joe public against the legal systems).  That gives you leeway . You won't get berated no. 

 

A day or 2 late is acceptable.

 

Dx 

[FTMDave]

I have work all day but can look in this evening from around 8pm UK time.  Your call.

[honeybee13]

Fwiw, Junkie, if it were me I would wait for FTMDave.

 

As dx says, you're an LiP and 24 hours won't make a difference as you're an LiP. The more experts who look at your WS the better, I would say.

 

HB

[Junkie2222]

OK. I'll wait. I'll speak to my wife. We can get the bulk of the printing done and then send tomorrow.

 

Thanks and I'll wait to hear from you all.