PARKING CONTROL MANAGEMENT

Stop or Suspend Enforcement. Appeal the PCN. Claim Damages for Unlawful Interference with Vehicles.
Tuttsi
Posts: 28
Joined: 01 Aug 2012 22:35

#36 Re: PARKING CONTROL MANAGEMENT

Post by Tuttsi » 21 May 2017 11:27

Hi Amy, yes I do. My court date is early July at Shoreditch. As you can see where the car is parked the sign cannot be seen by the driver. Also where the people are walking under the left hand sign it is much higher, from the bottom of the sign it is over 90" from the ground.
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

Tuttsi
Posts: 28
Joined: 01 Aug 2012 22:35

#37 Re: PARKING CONTROL MANAGEMENT

Post by Tuttsi » 23 May 2017 10:42

Anyone?

User avatar
Pote Snitkin
The Watcher
Posts: 6568
Joined: 28 Apr 2014 09:43
Location: In your loft, waiting

#38 Re: PARKING CONTROL MANAGEMENT

Post by Pote Snitkin » 23 May 2017 11:15

Take a pic of how they've since lowered the signs to raise the question as to why they've done that. It could be used in defence that they've acknowledged the signs were not clearly visible.
On 29/07/17, Compo said "If you are interested I actually typed the word label. My spell checker interpreted it as liable" Discuss.

Tuttsi
Posts: 28
Joined: 01 Aug 2012 22:35

#39 Re: PARKING CONTROL MANAGEMENT

Post by Tuttsi » 23 May 2017 23:01

heath parade 190517 (5).jpg

Tuttsi
Posts: 28
Joined: 01 Aug 2012 22:35

#40 Re: PARKING CONTROL MANAGEMENT

Post by Tuttsi » 23 May 2017 23:05

I must be a numpty as I cannot figure out how to post.

the only difference is that it displays a parking sign round the back of Sainsbury's and it is only just slightly lower than 80" but is a yellow sign so it can be seen more clearly if you are looking.

User avatar
Amy
Admin
Posts: 4089
Joined: 22 Jul 2012 22:47

#41 Re: PARKING CONTROL MANAGEMENT

Post by Amy » 25 May 2017 16:21

Tuttsi, can you post up the particulars of claim and have you entered your defence?

What do the signs say in the photo you posted?

Tuttsi
Posts: 28
Joined: 01 Aug 2012 22:35

#42 Re: PARKING CONTROL MANAGEMENT

Post by Tuttsi » 28 May 2017 12:07

Defence
It is admitted that the defendant is the keeper of the vehicle.
The claim is denied in entirety for the following reasons:
1. The claimant has failed to show a cause for action by way of a copy of a contract with the landowner as requested on 5/10/2015 by way of appeal. The claimant did not show by way of reply that it had a right to issue a parking charge or a ticket on the land in question. The claimant has not demonstrated or proved that it has clear authorisation from the landowner to issue a parking charge or a ticket on their land by presenting the contract as evidence.
2. Genuine pre-estimate of loss where the parking charge is for damages (and not a contractual charge) the British Parking Association in their code of practice requires the claimant parking to be able to demonstrate that the charge is a genuine pre-estimate of loss. If the company cannot prove this loss then the action is not enforceable unless the claimant has evidence to the contrary. At 10/10/2015 the claimant did not appear to be a member of the British Parking Association.
3. The defendant has also as part of the appeal process pointed out to the claimant that (1) The parking enforcement signage was located extremely high up and not visible to the human eye either a driver sitting or standing position. (2) The pictures of the vehicle were taken with a mobile phone and not a proper camera and no notice was left on the defendants vehicle. The 2 pictures that were taken have been doctored showing the alleged vehicle parked in 2 different places which cannot be correct.
4. At the time of the incident the height of the left sided parking enforcement signage was 9.67feet from ground level to the bottom of the signage and the right sided signage was 9.29 feet from ground level to the bottom of that signage. This was measured on 7/10/2015.
5. In regard to paragraph 2 of the defence I rely on the case of Dunlop Pneumatic Tyre Co Ltd - v - Selfridge & co (1915) Ac 847 and also regulation 5 of the unfair terms in consumer contracts regulations 1999.
dated 23/1/2017

Tuttsi
Posts: 28
Joined: 01 Aug 2012 22:35

#43 Re: PARKING CONTROL MANAGEMENT

Post by Tuttsi » 28 May 2017 12:13

Amy, above is the defence.
The only changes to the parking area is a small yellow box showing that there is customer parking around the back this again is higher than the right hand signage and must be over 9ft high. It is alright if you are tall. There is another very small sign one which I have not been able to read as yet that looks about 5 feet high. Again these have been put up more recently as they were not there when I parked for under 3 minutes.
Thanks
Dx

Tuttsi
Posts: 28
Joined: 01 Aug 2012 22:35

#44 Re: PARKING CONTROL MANAGEMENT

Post by Tuttsi » 31 May 2017 07:32

anyone?

User avatar
Pote Snitkin
The Watcher
Posts: 6568
Joined: 28 Apr 2014 09:43
Location: In your loft, waiting

#45 Re: PARKING CONTROL MANAGEMENT

Post by Pote Snitkin » 31 May 2017 10:49

Not really sure what else you're asking for. You've got evidence that the signs were at a height that couldn't be seen by a driver nor easily noticed when on foot. The company have provided no evidence that they are authorised to issue tickets on that land.
On 29/07/17, Compo said "If you are interested I actually typed the word label. My spell checker interpreted it as liable" Discuss.

Tuttsi
Posts: 28
Joined: 01 Aug 2012 22:35

#46 Re: PARKING CONTROL MANAGEMENT

Post by Tuttsi » 31 May 2017 10:54

Thank you Peter

Do I need to do a witness statement before the hearing

User avatar
Pote Snitkin
The Watcher
Posts: 6568
Joined: 28 Apr 2014 09:43
Location: In your loft, waiting

#47 Re: PARKING CONTROL MANAGEMENT

Post by Pote Snitkin » 31 May 2017 11:01

A defence statement, yes.
On 29/07/17, Compo said "If you are interested I actually typed the word label. My spell checker interpreted it as liable" Discuss.

Tuttsi
Posts: 28
Joined: 01 Aug 2012 22:35

#48 Re: PARKING CONTROL MANAGEMENT

Post by Tuttsi » 31 May 2017 22:38

My daughter found this on Inside Edgware on Facebook this afternoon. This is excellent for my case against them.

Good morning Folks.....One of our members has made us aware about the parking in the Sainsbury's local in Colindale, Heath Parade. She received a parking ticket over 2 years ago and appealed twice on unclear signage. She says PCM, the company in charge has since received a lot of local media attention and have even added additional lower signs. Yesterday our member went to court and had her case dismissed on grounds of insufficient evidence by the claimant. She would like to urge all local residents to fight their appeals especially, if their fines were received before the new signs were added.

I have done the defence as above (42) which was sent back to them before they gave me the date for the court hearing. I believe I have to do a witness statement?

Tuttsi
Posts: 28
Joined: 01 Aug 2012 22:35

#49 Re: PARKING CONTROL MANAGEMENT

Post by Tuttsi » 31 May 2017 22:43

Stop press

Anita has just posted this :-

Hello! Aren't you the lady who was in the paper! I used that story as part of my evidence xxx

Yes I was that lady who had my story published, and she used my story and got off as well as the other lady who got off yesterday.

User avatar
Amy
Admin
Posts: 4089
Joined: 22 Jul 2012 22:47

#50 Re: PARKING CONTROL MANAGEMENT

Post by Amy » 31 May 2017 23:48

Who is Anita and what are their POCs?

Tuttsi
Posts: 28
Joined: 01 Aug 2012 22:35

#51 Re: PARKING CONTROL MANAGEMENT

Post by Tuttsi » 01 Jun 2017 22:21

What is POC's ???

User avatar
Amy
Admin
Posts: 4089
Joined: 22 Jul 2012 22:47

#52 Re: PARKING CONTROL MANAGEMENT

Post by Amy » 01 Jun 2017 23:13

Particulars of claim.

Tuttsi
Posts: 28
Joined: 01 Aug 2012 22:35

#53 Re: PARKING CONTROL MANAGEMENT

Post by Tuttsi » 02 Jun 2017 22:42

Ok, I will try and find out. Thanks x

User avatar
Pote Snitkin
The Watcher
Posts: 6568
Joined: 28 Apr 2014 09:43
Location: In your loft, waiting

#54 Re: PARKING CONTROL MANAGEMENT

Post by Pote Snitkin » 02 Jun 2017 23:21

Tuttsi, see this thread > viewtopic.php?f=33&p=67463#p67463
On 29/07/17, Compo said "If you are interested I actually typed the word label. My spell checker interpreted it as liable" Discuss.

User avatar
Amy
Admin
Posts: 4089
Joined: 22 Jul 2012 22:47

#55 Re: PARKING CONTROL MANAGEMENT

Post by Amy » 03 Jun 2017 00:01

Tuttsi wrote:
02 Jun 2017 22:42
Ok, I will try and find out. Thanks x
They should have been detailed on the original court claim you received.

Tuttsi
Posts: 28
Joined: 01 Aug 2012 22:35

#56 Re: PARKING CONTROL MANAGEMENT

Post by Tuttsi » 05 Jun 2017 22:04

"The driver of the vehicle registration KPxxxxx (the Vehicle') incurred the parking charge(s) on 29/9/2015 for breaching the terms of parking on the land at Heath Parade NW9.

The defendant was driving the Vehicle and/or is the Keeper of the vehicle.

AND THE CLAIMANT CLAIMS
£150 for Parking Charges / Damages and indemnity costs if applicable, together with interest of £4.47 pursuant to s69 of the County Courts Act 1984 at 8%, continuing to Judgment at 0p per day."

Amy this is my POC, I did not get an answer to my question from the girl that won. But guess this is what you are looking for.
Dx

Tuttsi
Posts: 28
Joined: 01 Aug 2012 22:35

#57 Re: PARKING CONTROL MANAGEMENT

Post by Tuttsi » 07 Jun 2017 22:28

Anyone?

Tuttsi
Posts: 28
Joined: 01 Aug 2012 22:35

#58 Re: PARKING CONTROL MANAGEMENT

Post by Tuttsi » 10 Jun 2017 09:12

Why ask me to post up and you do not advise what is next to do??????

User avatar
Pote Snitkin
The Watcher
Posts: 6568
Joined: 28 Apr 2014 09:43
Location: In your loft, waiting

#59 Re: PARKING CONTROL MANAGEMENT

Post by Pote Snitkin » 10 Jun 2017 09:27

You've got your defence! The signage was too high to be seen or properly read. They've as good as acknowledged this by lowering the signs since you were ticketed. You've got the before and after photos of the signs - they've only got photos of your car, no signs. They cannot even prove there were signs in place on that day.

In any case, as that recent court case has ruled, they need to prove that you were actually driving the car at the time. You have no obligation to tell them as this is not a criminal matter. Never admit to being the driver, don't contact them, don't acknowledge anything - just let the process continue.

I doubt they will even turn up on the day.
On 29/07/17, Compo said "If you are interested I actually typed the word label. My spell checker interpreted it as liable" Discuss.

User avatar
Amy
Admin
Posts: 4089
Joined: 22 Jul 2012 22:47

#60 Re: PARKING CONTROL MANAGEMENT

Post by Amy » 10 Jun 2017 09:47

Tuttsi wrote:
10 Jun 2017 09:12
Why ask me to post up and you do not advise what is next to do??????
Because there is nothing else to do...

As Pote has said so many times now, you have your defence, so use it.

Tuttsi
Posts: 28
Joined: 01 Aug 2012 22:35

#61 Re: PARKING CONTROL MANAGEMENT

Post by Tuttsi » 10 Jun 2017 22:38

I am preparing a witness statement as one of the others did this and also just got off.
Thanks

Tuttsi
Posts: 28
Joined: 01 Aug 2012 22:35

#62 Re: PARKING CONTROL MANAGEMENT

Post by Tuttsi » 03 Aug 2017 18:01

I went to court on the day, it was then adjourned as we had used some law cases which the judge said she needed to look at also the other side had not sent some stuff to the court or to their barrister. Looks like it will be October before we will know the outcome of this case. Just awaiting to receive a new court date.

Tuttsi
Posts: 28
Joined: 01 Aug 2012 22:35

#63 Re: PARKING CONTROL MANAGEMENT

Post by Tuttsi » 03 Aug 2017 18:02

I went to court on the day, it was then adjourned as we had used some law cases which the judge said she needed to look at also the other side had not sent some stuff to the court or to their barrister. Looks like it will be October before we will know the outcome of this case. Just awaiting to receive a new court date.

User avatar
Pote Snitkin
The Watcher
Posts: 6568
Joined: 28 Apr 2014 09:43
Location: In your loft, waiting

#64 Re: PARKING CONTROL MANAGEMENT

Post by Pote Snitkin » 03 Aug 2017 19:32

Why do the courts allow so many adjournments? If a claimant is so adamant to bring a claim they should at least be expected to have everything prepared rather than keep wasting a defendant's time. There should be a rule that, barring exceptional circumstances, that if a claimant hasn't prepared their evidence then they automatically lose.
On 29/07/17, Compo said "If you are interested I actually typed the word label. My spell checker interpreted it as liable" Discuss.

User avatar
Amy
Admin
Posts: 4089
Joined: 22 Jul 2012 22:47

#65 Re: PARKING CONTROL MANAGEMENT

Post by Amy » 03 Aug 2017 22:14

The courts are all about being fair and rightly so. If one side has not submitted something they should have then they are given a chance to rectify it. If the shoe was on the other foot everyone would be up in arms.

User avatar
Pote Snitkin
The Watcher
Posts: 6568
Joined: 28 Apr 2014 09:43
Location: In your loft, waiting

#66 Re: PARKING CONTROL MANAGEMENT

Post by Pote Snitkin » 04 Aug 2017 11:31

That's not what I'm on about really. My point is you get these serial claimants chasing made-up debts causing the defendant untold grief, then they can't even be bothered to prepare a case properly, get an adjournment causing more stress for the defendant. I do feel that in civil cases, if a claimant hasn't bothered to prepare or furnish information then the claim is struck out.
On 29/07/17, Compo said "If you are interested I actually typed the word label. My spell checker interpreted it as liable" Discuss.

Post Reply