ParkingEye Small Claims Court Action on PNC - May have written a rubbish Defence

[Gunner]

Hi there,

I am being taken to court my Parking Eye over a Payment Notice Charge in the next 2 weeks.

As a newbie to things I have made some mistakes.
I think I have bugged up my defence (it has already been done and sent off a while ago). I didn't know how set in stone it was for proving my case, and I still don’t. I believe at the very least I will need to make an amendment.

Basically, I am disputing that I think their charge of £85 is reasonable and fair, I haven’t cited any previous cases to support me in my defence, I also am disputing that I entered a contract, due to the signage being hard to view.

What I wish to include now is:

Cases covering Breach of Contracts and unenforceable penalties, partially:
Murray v. Leisureplay (2004)
The court in Excel Parking Services vs Hetherington-Jakeman
Ford Motor Co. v. Armstrong (1915)
Bridge v. Campbell Discount Co. Ltd. (1962)

Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations (1999)

Photos of the inadequate signage.

I’m using these two as a reference (kindly provided my Mystery1)

• http://www.hms-worcester.me.uk/Judge...lStatement.pdf
• http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?...post&id=16231)

I am to mention all of the case above by name, in my defence, or do I have to summarise them as well?


Is there also a verifiable source for checking how much it cost Parking Eye to look up a car from the DVLA, I read it was £2.50

On another note, Parking Eye did also submit an amendment to their defence; does this change anything for me?


In short:

• How much do I rely on my defence on the day hearing?
• When is too late to amend my defence?
• How do I correctly reference previous cases and law in my defence?
• Does Parking Eye's Amendment mean I can to amend with or without penalty?
• How much does the DVLA look-up cost?

Big thanks to Mystery1 who I PM'd (I didn't realise it was against the rules, so I apologise) who pointed me in the right direction. I would prefer not to post every intricate detail of the case as I have heard of Parking Firms looking at the forums to get a leg up on the defendant, but ask away if I haven't provided enough.

Many thanks for any help offered.

[mystery1]

Re: ParkingEye Small Claims Court Action on PNC - May have written a rubbish Defence

It's an unwritten rule, i think, so not to worry.

Your defence needs to refute the claim so any cases can be cited but you don't quote huge chunks of the text as the is for arguments be it skeleton or on the day.

The best arguments are those employed by Thurlow although it does depend on what they claim and the signage. It's hard to say exactly without seeing. them.

My take on posting on fora is that the basics are nothing new to any parking company so posting makes no difference anyway. You cannot turn up at court and just ambush the claimant on the day. Yes you can expand on a point but to raise an entirely new unpleaded point takes a friendly judge. As a litigant in person you're going to need a judge who hates parking companies as they got stung. Pepipoo regulars are way over the top on this in my opinion (but good at what they do). It is way more important to understand your arguments than to hide them.

Pepipoo MSE and Cag are trawled by parking eye et all but honestly as long as you get the arguments correct it won't matter. I'm not sure they know of here, yet.

One further point i'd make is that it's not to late to involve the landowner whoever that may be (it's not always the shopkeeper) http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/....php?t=4766249

As a minimum you need to post up the particulars of claim, defence and signage all of which Parking eye will have.

M1

[labman]

Re: ParkingEye Small Claims Court Action on PNC - May have written a rubbish Defence

I'd agree with M1 - and yes, we're VERY lucky to have him here.

Have you got copies of the judgments M1 provided you with? As a LiP it's important to have read and understood them.

At the end of the day, however much they trawl the internet for the advice being given (and because it comes under bailiffs here, it's not so obvious, so am inclined to think bailiff companies come here, but not so much PPC's yet) - it really doesn't matter. It's the arguments on the day that win or lose. I'm a little unsure why M1 makes the comment about needing a judge who hates parking companies; what you need is a judge who is fair AND who recognises you're a LiP.

After the Jackson reforms, I think they've been given guidance on this issue as the number of LiP's is likely to increase significantly now.

[mystery1]

Re: ParkingEye Small Claims Court Action on PNC - May have written a rubbish Defence

I was talking about raising new stuff that wasn't pleaded when i was talking of needing a parking hater as a judge.

M1

[labman]

Re: ParkingEye Small Claims Court Action on PNC - May have written a rubbish Defence

I was talking about raising new stuff that wasn't pleaded when i was talking of needing a parking hater as a judge.

M1

Right, I'm with you! Thanks.