**WON!!!!!** County Court claim letter over parking fines

[mystery1]

Re: County Court claim letter over parking fines

There should be a witness statement in the bundle? The plan provided is Gulson Road, which also doesn't have any markings however I haven't provided photos of this. The car park I took pictures is the other in question which I have provided photos but there is no plan provided.

[MENTION=49370]Kati[/MENTION] can you check if you missed the witness statement please ?

Are the tickets all for 1 car park ? The one in the plan they sent ?

M1

[jord22]

Re: County Court claim letter over parking fines

[MENTION=49370]Kati[/MENTION] can you check if you missed the witness statement please ?

Are the tickets all for 1 car park ? The one in the plan they sent ?

M1

In the witness statement it lists the different fines for both car parks - the ones pictured are from both car parks.

[jord22]

Re: County Court claim letter over parking fines

[MENTION=5354]mystery1[/MENTION]

Can I upload this for you?

[Kati]

Re: County Court claim letter over parking fines

there's this ... sorry, it had been cut off when I split the file last time xx

[mystery1]

Re: County Court claim letter over parking fines

That's not a witness statement ?

M1

[jord22]

Re: County Court claim letter over parking fines

That's not a witness statement ?

M1

[MENTION=49370]Kati[/MENTION] [MENTION=5354]mystery1[/MENTION]

for some reason it doesn't appear to be in the download I sent you - I'll free type this on the the board later today when I get back home - I don't have it to hand.

[Kati]

Re: County Court claim letter over parking fines

That's not a witness statement ?

M1

you've had the whole pdf now M1. 113 pages of photos etc... and they didn't send a witness statement

- - - Updated - - -

@Kati @mystery1

for some reason it doesn't appear to be in the download I sent you - I'll free type this on the the board later today when I get back home - I don't have it to hand.

you could email it to me later on if that would be easier?? xx

[jord22]

Re: County Court claim letter over parking fines

you've had the whole pdf now M1. 113 pages of photos etc... and they didn't send a witness statement

- - - Updated - - -


you could email it to me later on if that would be easier?? xx

Leave it with me guys, I'll get it you ASAP, bizzare how it's not in the digital file but is in paper form...

[jord22]

Re: County Court claim letter over parking fines

So here's the witness statement from UKPC:

Witness statement of ******** *****

I ******** ***** of UKPC Ltd, (Address) state as follows:

1. I am employed by the internal legal adviser by the claimant and make this statement in support of the claim. Unless otherwise stated, the facts contained herein are form my own knowledge and from the claimants records.

2. The claimant managed parking at the locations known as CVU Cox Street Short Stay, Coventry University, Cox Street, CV15QJ and CVU Gulson Road Car Park, CV15RW (the sites) pursuant to a contract with Coventry University, the landowner of the sites. The contract confers authority on the claimant to levy parking charges on vehicles parked on the site in breach of the terms and conditions of parking. The contract further authorises the claimant to take such action it considers appropriate (including brining court proceedings) to recover unpaid parking charges. As such, the claimant is entitled to bring court proceedings in its own name. A copy of the contract with commercially sensitive parts is redacted at Exhibit AY/1

3. The terms and conditions of parking are clearly displayed on signage at the site. This makes clear that terms and conditions apply to parking, details the same and that, in the event of a breach of the terms and conditions, a charge of £80 will be issued against the vehicle. The terms and conditions further detail further charge of £60 will become due and owning in the event that an issued parking charge notice remains unpaid and is referred to the claimant's debt recovery agent. A copy of the signage is attached at Exhibit AY/2 By parking their vehicle at the site, the driver agrees to be bound by the terms and conditions of parking.

4. On 19 March 2015, 7 April 2015, 9 April 2015, 8 May 2015, 11 May 2015, 2 July 2015 and 13 August 2015, a vehicle with registration number **** *** was recorded as having breached the terms and conditions of parking, namely, the requirement to clearly display a valid ticket whilst parked in a designated 'pay and display' parking space. The driver of the vehicle was in breach by virtue of having parked in a designated pay and display parking space without clearly displaying a valid ticket.

5. On each occasion, photographs were taken of the vehicle in situ and a parking charge notice was issued. The parking charge notice was affixed to the windscreen of the vehicle and in particular informed the driver / registered keeper of the vehicle that a charge of £80 had been incurred as a result of the aforementioned breach.

6. The claimant subsequently obtained the details of the registered keeper from the DVLA these being the details of the defendant. A notice to keeper informing the defendant of each parking notice has been sent to the defendants address pursuant to schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012. Upon their being no response from the defendant informing the claimant tat they were not the driver of the vehicle at the time of the parking charge notices were issued, the operation of the Act 2012 was such that the defendant was taken to be liable for the parking charge notices. Thereafter, a reminder letter was sent to the defendant asking for the parking charges notices to be paid. A copy of each parking charge notice, photos and notices to keeper and final reminder letters are attached Exhibit AY/3

7. Upon no payment having been received from the Defendant, the parking charge notices were referred to the claimant's debt recovery agent, Debt Recovery Plus Ltd, thereby incurring a further charge of £60 in relation to each parking charge notice. Debt Recovery Plus Ltd sent further letters to the defendant. There being no payment from the defendant, the matter was referred to the claimants solicitors who sent a letter before action. A copy of the letter before action is attached at Exhibit AY/4. No payment was forthcoming from the defendants and the claimant subsequently instructed solicitors to commence court proceedings to recover the sums due pursuant to the parking charge notices, being £980. Unless otherwise informed by the defendant, the claimant uses the registered address for the defendant per the DVLA's records as the address for service of court proceedings, this being the last known address.

8. The court will no doubt be aware of the finding of the Supreme Court in ParkingEye Ltd v Beavis [2015] UKSC 67 which considered whether parking charge notices of this nature amount to unenforceable penalties. The Supreme Court found that whilst parking charge notices could engage the penalty rule on the basis that where applicable, they may not amount to genuine pre-estimates of loss, they have a legitimate interest and commercial justification namely the control of parking such that the penalty rule was not contravened. As such, parking charge notices of the nature of those which are the subject of this claim are payable when validly issued as a result of a breach of the T&C's of parking at the relevant site.

9. The defendant makes a number of assertions in his defence which I will respond to the paragraphs below.

10. The Defendant denies the existence of a contract with the Claimant. The signage at Exhibit AY/2 clearly states that parking conditions apply and details T&C's including the consequences of breaching the same. An offer was made on the ample and clear signage at the site. Due to the sufficiency of the signage, the defendant was put on notice of this offer. The defendant accepted this offer via his own conduct when he parked on the site, thereby giving rise to a contractural relationship. The consideration was the permission to allow parking in return for the driver purchasing a ticket to park and displaying it. The Defendant subsequently breached those conditions by failing to clearly display a valid pay and display ticket on the relevant dates and as such the claimant rightly issued parking charge notices against the defendant.

11. Furthermore, the defendant's assertion that signage was incapable of forming a contract is wrong. The finding of District Judge Gillman in the recent case of UK Parking Control Ltd v Mr Somduth Peenith (2016), sitting at the County Court at Edmonton, which has decided on similar facts, stated that such signage is not an absolute prohibition but merely states that if a driver is to park a vehicle at this site, they must be authorised to do so and will be authorised if they comply with the T&C's of parking, it is reasonable and logical to interpret from the signage that parking is offered subject to the clearly displayed terms and conditions. A copy of the judgement is attached at Exhibit AY/5.

12. The Defendant is wrong in his assertion that 'per ParkingEye v Beavis the charge is a penalty which is unenforceable'. I would repeat paragraph 8 in response. I would also add that controlled parking was introduced on the site to manage and facilitate access to parking for all users of the site, There is therefore a lear and legitimate interest in applying and enforcing the parking restrictions on the site and as such, the claimant submits that the amount sought in relation to the charges is proportionate in furtherance of protecting this legitimate interest.

13. As to the defendant's assertion that the claimant's has suffered no loss or damage, I would repeat paragraphs 8 & 10 and add that claimant levies parking charge notices on vehicles parked at the in breach of the T&C's of parking in performance of its contractual obligations with the landowner of the site. The claimant's performance of its contractual duties are representative of the parking charge notices having a legitimate interested and commercial justification in relation to the management of parking at the site, the ultimate aim of which is to provide an efficient and reliable parking service on this site.

14. For the reasons detailed above, it is the claimant's position that the driver of the vehicle was aware of the T&C's attached to the offer of parking at the site and that, by parking at the site, they agreed to be bound by the same. As a result of breaching the T&C's of parking, a parking charge notice was validly issued and remains unpaid. I therefore invite the court to enter judgement and award the claimant its reasonable costs associated with having to bring this claim.

[jord22]

Re: County Court claim letter over parking fines

So here's the witness statement from UKPC:

Witness statement of ******** *****

I ******** ***** of UKPC Ltd, (Address) state as follows:

1. I am employed by the internal legal adviser by the claimant and make this statement in support of the claim. Unless otherwise stated, the facts contained herein are form my own knowledge and from the claimants records.

2. The claimant managed parking at the locations known as CVU Cox Street Short Stay, Coventry University, Cox Street, CV15QJ and CVU Gulson Road Car Park, CV15RW (the sites) pursuant to a contract with Coventry University, the landowner of the sites. The contract confers authority on the claimant to levy parking charges on vehicles parked on the site in breach of the terms and conditions of parking. The contract further authorises the claimant to take such action it considers appropriate (including brining court proceedings) to recover unpaid parking charges. As such, the claimant is entitled to bring court proceedings in its own name. A copy of the contract with commercially sensitive parts is redacted at Exhibit AY/1

3. The terms and conditions of parking are clearly displayed on signage at the site. This makes clear that terms and conditions apply to parking, details the same and that, in the event of a breach of the terms and conditions, a charge of £80 will be issued against the vehicle. The terms and conditions further detail further charge of £60 will become due and owning in the event that an issued parking charge notice remains unpaid and is referred to the claimant's debt recovery agent. A copy of the signage is attached at Exhibit AY/2 By parking their vehicle at the site, the driver agrees to be bound by the terms and conditions of parking.

4. On 19 March 2015, 7 April 2015, 9 April 2015, 8 May 2015, 11 May 2015, 2 July 2015 and 13 August 2015, a vehicle with registration number **** *** was recorded as having breached the terms and conditions of parking, namely, the requirement to clearly display a valid ticket whilst parked in a designated 'pay and display' parking space. The driver of the vehicle was in breach by virtue of having parked in a designated pay and display parking space without clearly displaying a valid ticket.

5. On each occasion, photographs were taken of the vehicle in situ and a parking charge notice was issued. The parking charge notice was affixed to the windscreen of the vehicle and in particular informed the driver / registered keeper of the vehicle that a charge of £80 had been incurred as a result of the aforementioned breach.

6. The claimant subsequently obtained the details of the registered keeper from the DVLA these being the details of the defendant. A notice to keeper informing the defendant of each parking notice has been sent to the defendants address pursuant to schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012. Upon their being no response from the defendant informing the claimant tat they were not the driver of the vehicle at the time of the parking charge notices were issued, the operation of the Act 2012 was such that the defendant was taken to be liable for the parking charge notices. Thereafter, a reminder letter was sent to the defendant asking for the parking charges notices to be paid. A copy of each parking charge notice, photos and notices to keeper and final reminder letters are attached Exhibit AY/3

7. Upon no payment having been received from the Defendant, the parking charge notices were referred to the claimant's debt recovery agent, Debt Recovery Plus Ltd, thereby incurring a further charge of £60 in relation to each parking charge notice. Debt Recovery Plus Ltd sent further letters to the defendant. There being no payment from the defendant, the matter was referred to the claimants solicitors who sent a letter before action. A copy of the letter before action is attached at Exhibit AY/4. No payment was forthcoming from the defendants and the claimant subsequently instructed solicitors to commence court proceedings to recover the sums due pursuant to the parking charge notices, being £980. Unless otherwise informed by the defendant, the claimant uses the registered address for the defendant per the DVLA's records as the address for service of court proceedings, this being the last known address.

8. The court will no doubt be aware of the finding of the Supreme Court in ParkingEye Ltd v Beavis [2015] UKSC 67 which considered whether parking charge notices of this nature amount to unenforceable penalties. The Supreme Court found that whilst parking charge notices could engage the penalty rule on the basis that where applicable, they may not amount to genuine pre-estimates of loss, they have a legitimate interest and commercial justification namely the control of parking such that the penalty rule was not contravened. As such, parking charge notices of the nature of those which are the subject of this claim are payable when validly issued as a result of a breach of the T&C's of parking at the relevant site.

9. The defendant makes a number of assertions in his defence which I will respond to the paragraphs below.

10. The Defendant denies the existence of a contract with the Claimant. The signage at Exhibit AY/2 clearly states that parking conditions apply and details T&C's including the consequences of breaching the same. An offer was made on the ample and clear signage at the site. Due to the sufficiency of the signage, the defendant was put on notice of this offer. The defendant accepted this offer via his own conduct when he parked on the site, thereby giving rise to a contractural relationship. The consideration was the permission to allow parking in return for the driver purchasing a ticket to park and displaying it. The Defendant subsequently breached those conditions by failing to clearly display a valid pay and display ticket on the relevant dates and as such the claimant rightly issued parking charge notices against the defendant.

11. Furthermore, the defendant's assertion that signage was incapable of forming a contract is wrong. The finding of District Judge Gillman in the recent case of UK Parking Control Ltd v Mr Somduth Peenith (2016), sitting at the County Court at Edmonton, which has decided on similar facts, stated that such signage is not an absolute prohibition but merely states that if a driver is to park a vehicle at this site, they must be authorised to do so and will be authorised if they comply with the T&C's of parking, it is reasonable and logical to interpret from the signage that parking is offered subject to the clearly displayed terms and conditions. A copy of the judgement is attached at Exhibit AY/5.

12. The Defendant is wrong in his assertion that 'per ParkingEye v Beavis the charge is a penalty which is unenforceable'. I would repeat paragraph 8 in response. I would also add that controlled parking was introduced on the site to manage and facilitate access to parking for all users of the site, There is therefore a lear and legitimate interest in applying and enforcing the parking restrictions on the site and as such, the claimant submits that the amount sought in relation to the charges is proportionate in furtherance of protecting this legitimate interest.

13. As to the defendant's assertion that the claimant's has suffered no loss or damage, I would repeat paragraphs 8 & 10 and add that claimant levies parking charge notices on vehicles parked at the in breach of the T&C's of parking in performance of its contractual obligations with the landowner of the site. The claimant's performance of its contractual duties are representative of the parking charge notices having a legitimate interested and commercial justification in relation to the management of parking at the site, the ultimate aim of which is to provide an efficient and reliable parking service on this site.

14. For the reasons detailed above, it is the claimant's position that the driver of the vehicle was aware of the T&C's attached to the offer of parking at the site and that, by parking at the site, they agreed to be bound by the same. As a result of breaching the T&C's of parking, a parking charge notice was validly issued and remains unpaid. I therefore invite the court to enter judgement and award the claimant its reasonable costs associated with having to bring this claim.

[MENTION=49370]Kati[/MENTION] & [MENTION=5354]mystery1[/MENTION]

This is what was in the bundle that was sent to me but not in the digital bundle for some reason.

For me this plays on the fact that they're assuming a contract, which is what we're disagreeing with.

[mystery1]

Re: County Court claim letter over parking fines

So the contract has no commencement date ?

The site plan is Gulson street and there isn't one for Cox street ?

The signs are unreadable (the ones that appear in situ) unless you read the ones that look like scans . They also have no reference to which of the 2 car parks they were in ?

Sorry i've been behind and i realise we are short but you are my number 1 priority since it's 3 days to court.

M1

[jord22]

Re: County Court claim letter over parking fines

Just looked back through the contract and it appears that there's no commencement or end date - the other sensitive information has been blacked out and the date is just a white empty space.

The site plan included is for Gulson Road, there is nothing included for Cox Street.

The signs are the same in each car park I'm assuming, there's clearly no difference between the two.

Cheers, [MENTION=5354]mystery1[/MENTION], I'm just a natural worrier!

[mystery1]

Re: County Court claim letter over parking fines

Cool. I wanted this done already but have so much to do. Got a meeting tomorrow and should get it done Monday later on.

M1

[jord22]

Re: County Court claim letter over parking fines

Cheers [MENTION=5354]mystery1[/MENTION]! Looking forward to seeing what we can beat them with Thanks to [MENTION=49370]Kati[/MENTION] for your help too.

[mystery1]

Re: County Court claim letter over parking fines

I'm still preparing this. I think we are best going for no written argument (or more accurately only giving them a copy on the day as you read through it and present it as an oral argument) as we do not wish to tip them off regarding the undated contract etc that i already pointed out.

In the meantime this may help so print off the relevant info in case it helps. http://parking-prankster.blogspot.co...rights-of.html If you get their legal rep booted out then you are in a significantly stronger position.

M1