UKCPM/Gladestones Vanishing windscreen PCN Claimform - Parked in loading only bay - The Edition - 130 Colindale Avenue, colindale, London nw9 5HE ***Claim Dismissed***

[Picante]

Letter received

 

Notice of Allocation to the Small Claims Track (hearing)

 

"Face to face hearing will take place 13th June 2022 at County Court Clerkenwell. "

[dx100uk]

Then ws time and very quickly like today . 

 

Another day wasted then ..

[Picante]

Does WS have to be submitted to the Claimant before the trial?

 

I am intending to attend the trial.

 

I will get on it today.

 

There is nothing on the Notice of allocation letter saying a WS has to be submitted before?

Edited June 8, 2022 by Picante

[dx100uk]

now read page 2 of the N157.

 

dx

 

[Picante]

ah god damn it. that page was all mixed in with other crap.

 

FML

 

It says point 14)

 

Because this order has been made without a hearing, the parties have the right to apply to have the order set aside, varied or stayed. A party making such an application must send or deliver the application to the court to arrive within seven days of service of thies Order.

 

What does that mean "made without a hearing"?

 

 

edit: ah ok it says below in bold "you Must attend court at the given time" so there is a hearing. I thought there might not be one.

Edited June 8, 2022 by Picante

[dx100uk]

Get brain in gear..its really not that difficult if you simply read what the COURT tells you to do stuff what the flwecers say/do.

 

You need to get you ws done and in by emaul and attend the hearing.

 

if you do you are almost 100% guaranteed to win as they are not attending.

 

Dx

[Picante]

Yeah got it brain in gear.

 

will get it done today.

 

edit: There is no email address for the court on the form just postal address and phonenumber.

 

I found this online, would the enquiries email be appropriate?

 

/assets/images/govuk-opengraph-image.png

Clerkenwell and Shoreditch County Court and Family Court - Find a Court or Tribunal - GOV.UK

WWW.FIND-COURT-TRIBUNAL.SERVICE.GOV.UK

---

Clerkenwell and Shoreditch County Court and Family Court - Find contact details, opening times, how to get to here, types of cases managed...

 

 

I found a couple other possible emails on courtdatabase not sure of the validity of the source

 

There are :-

 

Family court : [email protected]

 

Filing and records: [email protected]

 

hearings seems generic enough and relevant to me no?

 

Send an email to enquiries and hearings and post a copy also?

 

Clerkenwell and Shoreditch County Court and Family Court

COURTSDATABASE.CO.UK

---

Clerkenwell and Shoreditch County Court and Family Court

 

Edited June 8, 2022 by Picante

[dx100uk]

we know all these things and they are contained in our sticky threads we send out to people IF they come here 1st and seek help rather than coming here late after going it alone.

 

why not get the ws done, get it checked here. Then tomorrow you can ring their clerk's office and ask for an email address to send your late ws too .

 

Dx

 

 

[Picante]

These are the photos I wanted to submit as evidence.

 

I think they show the poor lighting conditions the signs are under.
they show the small of sign and of lettering.

 

The one on the wall you can clearly see the size of the lettering on the Fly tipping and Refuse store sign but the only thing readable at 2meters distance away  (Which is less than the distance of the bay to the sign is the P for parking. The amount and any contractual details are not visible.

 

I'm not sure img1 is good to use though. I was hoping it would show that from a car the sign is not readable at a reasonable distance given that a car would be moving when trying to read the signs.

 

These are the current points I have for my defence witness statements.

 

Claimant is Suing the wrong person who hasn’t followed POFA provisions to transfer liability to the keeper.

 

Claimant has stated in appeal rejection letter and witness statement that the “defendant would have had the opportunity to read and understand them when entering the car park”

 

Defendant did not have opportunity to read signs as:-

1) the defendant was not the driver of the vehicle.

2) The signs are not sufficiently clear and readable see photo evidence

3) Signs do not confirm to code of practice and previous case rulings, government guidance (insert references)

 

Therefore there was no contract between the defendant and the claimant.

 

Claimant stated that “Motorist. Always has the option to leave”

The defendant has spoken to the driver who has stated that “on being informed by the warden (whom was wearing a body camera) that they could not park there immediately removed the vehicle from the premises and had not been aware they could not park in that location before then”

 

IPC Code of practice states "make it clear that the Motorist is entering onto private land;"

 

From evidence supplied this is not clearly marked and there for the claimant is in breach of the IPC code of practice which it is bound to, and therefore has no right to make a request to the DVLA as being a member and abiding by the code of practice is one of the stipulations set out by the government that gives abiding members the right to request for information from the DVLA.

 

No ticket was issued to the driver of the vehicle despite the driver of the vehicle being known to the claimant at the time of the incident despite the fact a warden was on site at the time, whom spoke directly with the driver, also shown by the various photos of the vehicle submitted as evidence taken by the ticket officer.

 

Predatory practices (forbidden in the industry CoP,  you believe the patrol officer did not place a NTD in the windscreen deliberately so they could pursue the keeper whom is easier to track litigate against the patrol officer could easily have mitigated the loss but asking the driver to leave but did not do so . Despite the vehicle only being on site for a very short period. With additional bays in the same location not preventing any other vehicles from using the site.

 

evidence.pdf

[lookinforinfo]

Their PCN is not compatible with PoFA2012 so you are not liable as keeper for the alleged debt-only the driver is liable. 

Not compatible because no period of parking is mentioned -all it mentions is the incident time which is not a parking period. Also wording missing and it must be included to validate the PCN.

The signage does not say that the car was in the commercial area, just that if you were in the commercial area you had to be loading/unloading.

Will try and get back later.

 

Edited June 9, 2022 by lookinforinfo

[Picante]

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?
 

[lookinforinfo]

 

Yes especially as it helps the Judge  for one thing. 

had you ben reading up on some of the successes there has been on CAG you would have seen them in more than one case plus you wold have got some added knowledge which may have helped you in court when you come across solicitors who are trying to bamboozle you in court.

 

The wording that has to be correct is in Schedule 4 section  9  [2][f] warn the keeper that if, after the period of 28 days beginning with the day after that on which the notice is given—

(i)the amount of the unpaid parking charges specified under paragraph (d) has not been paid in full, and

(ii)the creditor does not know both the name of the driver and a current address for service for the driver,

the creditor will (if all the applicable conditions under this Schedule are met) have the right to recover from the keeper so much of that amount as remains unpaid;

 

In your PCN the words in brackets are missing. This in itself makes the PCN non compliant.  But the applicable conditions were not met earlier on in the PCN where there was no mention of the parking period just an incident time which fails compliance with PoFA2012.  The question is how long did the incident time last? Ten seconds? Five minutes?  Was it parking or just stopping for a short time? so the PCN is not compliant for a second reason. CPM should be put to strict proof the length of the parking period. If they cannot do that then the case should be cancelled as if the time could be  less than 10 minutes  because there is a grace period of 10 minutes at least.

 

The failure of the PCN to comply means that you as keeper cannot be liable for the alleged debt. If CPM cannot prove how long the car was parked in the loading area, the driver cannot be held liable either.

 

The sign behind your car contain the parking regulations not an indication that it is the Commercial zone.  Very confusing if CPM think that is  saying ithe sign is in  meant to say it is in the commercial area. In the event of confusion, it is the driver's right to take the most advantageous meaning as the correct one . 

 

The signees names on  contract as well as the name of the land owner have been redacted.  As we cannot confirm anyone  on the contract, it is not worth the paper it is printed on. There is no proof that the land owner is named on the contract nor that even if it was the landowner, that the signatory was an authorised signatory for the company or a made up name by CPM for example. Also  there are no witnesses to the contract. All in all there is no way that one can confirm that it is a valid contract.

 

The signage does not appear to be illuminated thus difficult to find, let alone be able to read. The font size for the £100 charge is smaller than the T&CS and does not seem to be part of the T&Cs as it is separated by a line of much smaller font sizes.

 

The contract is governed by the Law of England, not the IPC code of Practice.  So for one thing the extra £60 charges are classed as being a  rip off by the government and under PoFA 2012 Schedule 4 s7 [2][c][1]  a sum which is mentioned in the Notice [ie Notice to Keeper]. 

So their attempt at overcharging is an abuse of process and is a disgrace that CPM and their solicitors are still demanding these extra charges when it is patently obvious that not only is it against PoFA it is also counter to the Private Parking Code of Practice February 2022 Section 9 " sand thus against the Law.

9. Escalation of costs

The parking operator must not levy additional costs over and above the level of a parking charge or parking tariff as originally issued.

 

[Picante]

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.

[lookinforinfo]

Exactly. They  could easily cobble up an agreement signed by the tea boy and the charlady, redact their signatures and present it as a bona fide contract.

If they do come up with the name of the land owner and the signatory, ask for time to check that they are the land owner and the signee is allowed to sign. It really should be a director of the company. You can find their company name on the Companies House website then scroll down the page and you will see along from Overview there is "People" which will when clicked on give you all their current directors.

I think the Judge will have seen enough before that and kicked their case out. But it is there as backup.

 

Good luck.

[Picante]

Here is my attempt at a witness statement

 

I think it's ok

 

Defendandnt Witness Statement redacted .pdf

[honeybee13]

Hopefully people will be able to read that early enough for you to submit it, Picante. I believe it needs to be by 4pm on Fridays, especially if your judge is to have any chance to read it before the hearing on Monday.

 

ETA: The 4pm thing could be MCOL, I can't remember. How are you planning to submit the WS?

 

HB

[Picante]

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

[Picante]

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

 

 

.

[honeybee13]

I don't know if you're going to have any more replies, picante. FTMDave is on holiday so I doubt he'll be able to drop in.

 

Have you sent the stuff off now?

 

HB

[lookinforinfo]

Your WS is not as concise as it could be.

The main criticism I  have is that you did not put the most important point first-that the PCN is not compliant. Therefore you cannot be held responsible for the debt. You were not the driver so there is no case.

the Judge should end it there without the necessity to read further. That is assuming  CPM even go to Court.

 

If you can, then I would suggest that change but time may be against you to make the change. 

[Picante]

Ok yeah let me see if I can condense it quickly

 

[honeybee13]

Thank you for the comments, LFI, it's good of you to take the time to answer.

 

HB

[Picante]

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.

 

 

[Picante]

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

[lookinforinfo]

I think he has gone to the Flannan Isle to help DX with the sheep shearing.

What Dave doesn't know is that Dx has no dogs at the moment so Dave will have to bark and round up the sheep.

So he will be fit when he gets back if slightly hoarse.