CEL ANPR PCN PAPLOC now claimform - Morrisons, Butterfly Walk Car Park Denmark Hill Camberwell, London SE5 8RW***Claim Dismissed***

[dx100uk]

done if you look at the previous one you can see thru your blacking

[dx100uk]

open

 

 

[StoryBoard]

Evening. 

I took the advice from FTMDave's post #127 and queried the initial response then followed up.

I have now received a Notice of Allocation to the Small Claims Track (Hearing) scheduled for 4th April 2024 at the local County Court.

The letter advised that on 30th Jan 24, District Judge Thistle considered the statements of the case and directions questionnaires filed and allocated the claim to the small claims track.

I will post up the letter in next day or two.

The standard process seems to have been corrected by this action?

I expect I will need to prepare documents for the hearing. Thanks.

[dx100uk]

WS exchange 14 days before hearing date 

[FTMDave]

Looks like you're back on track.

Just to be sure please upload this letter.

[StoryBoard]

Letter uploaded. Hopefully redacted properly.

 

2024-01-30 NOA - Hearing in person 2024-04-04.pdf

[FTMDave]

So you're back on track.  Well done.

Your Witness Statement has to be in by 21 March.

You might as well get started with a first draft.

[dx100uk]

i know this may sound rather basic, but you must attend court on 04-04-2024

just that we've had someone today, whom we had, to put it kindly,  nursemaid from day one all through a thread/claim that ran for almost 2 years and some +150 post - didn't realise they had to GOTO COURT IN PERSON..

dx

[StoryBoard]

Yes I would. 

Is there a standard format that I could use for a witness statement? Thanks.

[honeybee13]

The parking forum here has loads of witness statements. Have a look at our Parking Successes form for anyone who's been to court and see what they wrote.

HB

[FTMDave]

I'm at work now and don't have time to read through the whole thread.  However, from the most superficial of glances it seems that the signs show a completely different company run the car park so you can start drafting part of a Witness Statement that covers this aspect and refer to the photos of the signage that you have as proof.

The last part of your WS will concentrate on the Unicorn Food Tax that they always make up which is essentially the same in every case soi you can use what is below..

More when I knock off work.

 

DOUBLE RECOVERY

33.  The Claimant has artificially inflated their claim for a £100 invoice to £170.  This is simply a poor attempt to circumvent the legal costs cap at small claims.

29.  Since 2019, many County Courts have considered claims in excess of £100 to be an abuse of process leading to them being struck out ab initio.

An example, in the Caernarfon Court in VCS v Davies, case No. FTQZ4W28 on 4th September 2019, District Judge Jones-Evans stated “Upon it being recorded that District Judge Jones- Evans has over a very significant period of time warned advocates (...) in many cases of this nature before this court that their claim for £60 is unenforceable in law and is an abuse of process and is nothing more than a poor attempt to go behind the decision of the Supreme Court V Beavis which inter alia decided that a figure of £160 as a global sum claimed in this case would be a penalty and not a genuine pre-estimate of loss and therefore unenforceable in law and if the practise continued, he would treat all cases as a claim for £160 and therefore a penalty and unenforceable in law it is hereby declared (...) the claim is struck out and declared to be wholly without merit and an abuse of process.”

34.  In Claim Nos. F0DP806M and F0DP201T, District Judge Taylor echoed earlier General Judgment or Orders of District Judge Grand, stating ''It is ordered that the claim is struck out as an abuse of process. The claim contains a substantial charge additional to the parking charge which it is alleged the Defendant contracted to pay. This additional charge is not recoverable under the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012, Schedule 4 nor with reference to the judgment in Parking Eye v Beavis. It is an abuse of process from the Claimant to issue a knowingly inflated claim for an additional sum which it is not entitled to recover. This order has been made by the court of its own initiative without a hearing pursuant to CPR Rule 3.3(4) of the Civil Procedure Rules 1998...''

35.  The addition of costs not previously specified on signage are also in breach of the Consumer Rights Act 2015, Schedule 2, specifically paras 6, 10 and 14.

36.  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).

[dx100uk]

just type

stop hitting quote everytime!!

dx

 

[FTMDave]

So your Witness Statement needs to be -

SEQUENCE OF EVENTS - a brief description of how you got the ticket.

INSUFFICIENT SIGNAGE - all the signs point to different companies running the car park, not CEL.

NO LOCUS STANDI - you also believe CEL don't have a contract with the landlord to enter claims in their own name, they never produced one after your CPR request and the signage refers to completely different companies.

PCN - it's pants and doesn't even say what you were supposed to have done wrong.

ILLEGAL SIGNAGE - they did not produce proof of planning permission after your CPR request, lack of PP is a criminal offence.

DOUBLE RECOVERY - Unicorn Food Tax section listed above.

[lookinforinfo]

You may have to go to Court later this year and you still haven't posted your original PCN. This is a very important document as if the rogues get it wrong it makes their case much harder fro them to win.

Could you please post the front and the back of the first PCN they sent you and please ensure that we can see all the wording and that it is legible -not out of focus and preferably a decent font size.

[StoryBoard]

Response to post #142.

I'll check back on the thread as I thought I had. uploaded.

I assume this should be uploaded with my name and references still omitted?

I have received a letter from the Claimant titled 'Without Prejudice save as to costs' dated 7th Feb 2024 with offer to settle which still covers their payment for court costs. The offer remains open for 14 days. Attached.

As the Court's Notice of Allocation letter encourages settling the case by negotiation, do I formally need to reply back to the Claimant stating no? 

Claimant without prejudice letter 07 Feb 2024.pdf

[dx100uk]

std letter everyone gets.

[brassnecked]

means they are not sure if they will win so will cut their losses and grab what they can.

 

[lookinforinfo]

I know there is 145 posts to trawl through looking for your original PCN as I did it. But three days and still not posted it

Surely quicker to post it now as if the PCN does not comply with PoFA you can combine it in your WS now  without having to rewrite it.

[FTMDave]

The PCN is on the first page LFI, I think post 5.

[brassnecked]

Yes its definitely on the first page

[StoryBoard]

I have started to draft the contents of a witness statement. {Sorry, but I couldn't find any examples on the forum for a WS template when searching. Maybe I don't know how best to do this correctly?}

Q's:

1. I have started to reference chronologically all relevant correspondence as an appendices to the WS? Assume this is fine. But know to bring any original hard copies to the court.

2. Started to pull in posts #139 and 141 into this content.

2. Assume if I upload draft of WS to this forum, I still keep the claim number and my name, address (and anything linked to myself) etc off the document. Only to add these to the final submission to the Court and Defendant.

4. Original PCN is in post #5. Hopefully no further action needed from me on this.

 

I have focus that that last day for WS submission is 21st March 2024. Thanks.

 

[FTMDave]

There is no WS template simply because the cases vary so widely.

There are plenty of examples of WSs.

If you look at the last page and the last-but-one page of our PPC Successes thread  https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/347084-ppc-successes-no-questions-please/page/17/#comments  virtually every thread wuith "claimform" in the title will have a WS in,. generally towards the end of the threads.

When you have a first draft ready, then yes, please upload it for comments, but of course redact any identifying details.

 

[StoryBoard]

Evening

I've pulled a draft together. Clearly more to do and some items that I've included may not be relevant or detract from the statements intent. 

Appreciate feedback on content and any items to add, omit or rewrite. Thanks.

All suitably redacted currently..

Witness statement 19_02_24.docx.pdf

[dx100uk]

you need to start that with 

i am the registered keeper of vehicle xxxxxx

your end statement also needs updating the one you have used is out of date.

the rest quickly looks a good start.

dx

 

[lookinforinfo]

I am sorry,  you did include your original PCN but you redacted so much of the necessary in formation-times and dates. A few minutes over time can be argued away but over 38 minutes is not easy to explain . Is there a reason why you were so much longer than the time you expected?

Thank you for the photos of the car park showing ABC management faciliities running the car park then. Of course they went into liquidation in 2016 so were not members of the BPA or the ISC at  that time so were not capable of having a relationship with the DVLA nor did they have to comply with PoFA 2012. CEL were mentioned but in very small print and appeared to be minor partners in  the  relationship. ABC appear to be the major company running the car park so one would expect that the contract to run the car park would be in their name. If CEL were involved one would expect that they would comply with KADOE terms and show the BPA membership logo.

The signs appear to show that the car park is run by ABC a company in liquidation so no breach of their T7Cs could have occurred.,. the PCN does nor comply with the protection of Freedoms Act 2012 since it does not specify the parking period. Obviously the ANPR cameras only record the entry and departure times of vehicles but have no clue how long it takes for motorists  to find a parking spot and then drive into it being careful to park between the lines and then later leave the parking spot and drive to the exit. This can take anywhere from a few minutes to perhaps half an hour depending on the volume of traffic in the car park at the time and how difficult it may be to leave the car park and filter into a busy road , not to mention returning the trolley tio the car park or strapping children or disabled people int o the car before being able to drive off..

 

You can also complain about their LOC bei I will post it when I find it.ng sparse on info. leading to the Court cancelling the case altogether but I cannot find it at the moment.