PePiPoo Helping the motorist get justice Support health workers

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

court action advice needed please :-)
eggybread1922
post Fri, 23 Feb 2018 - 21:13
Post #1


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 64
Joined: 23 Feb 2018
Member No.: 96,741



Hi all, this is my first post.

if a parking company who is a member of the IPC took court action over an unpaid PCN, with evidence of who the driver is, would there be other grounds to build up a good defence against the PCN? or is it a lost cause?


Many thanks in advance :-)
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
8 Pages V  « < 6 7 8  
Start new topic
Replies (140 - 149)
Advertisement
post Fri, 23 Feb 2018 - 21:13
Post #


Advertise here!









Go to the top of the page
 
Quote Post
nosferatu1001
post Wed, 25 Apr 2018 - 10:15
Post #141


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 28,687
Joined: 27 Nov 2007
Member No.: 15,642



Well you point out in your defence that they have lied by sending a different sign to the one in the actual car park...
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
eggybread1922
post Sun, 29 Apr 2018 - 17:00
Post #142


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 64
Joined: 23 Feb 2018
Member No.: 96,741



6.The Claimant is likely to assert that ParkingEye v Beavis applies to disengage the charge as a penalty. The Defendant denies that the Claimant can rely on the decision as none of its conditions has been met.

(a) The Court of Appeal stated that the penalty could never be disengaged for a pay car park. The Supreme Court did not dispute this point and it therefore stands.

(b) The signs must be clear. In the present case they were not and the Defendant refers the Court to Lord Denning's Red Hand Rule that the charge should have been effectively: 'in red letters with a red hand pointing to it'

© The Claimant must be in compliance with its Code of Practice. The Claimant is in breach of at least two of its terms




in this part should I also state that the claimant said that the case was a direct result of comments made online by a 3rd party?


thanks
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
nosferatu1001
post Mon, 30 Apr 2018 - 07:31
Post #143


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 28,687
Joined: 27 Nov 2007
Member No.: 15,642



No, that isnt related to it being a penalty, but htat the aciton was vexatious, as it has nothing to do with the merits or otherwise of the original charge, but the Cs hurt feelings.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
eggybread1922
post Mon, 30 Apr 2018 - 20:29
Post #144


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 64
Joined: 23 Feb 2018
Member No.: 96,741



QUOTE (nosferatu1001 @ Mon, 30 Apr 2018 - 08:31) *
No, that isnt related to it being a penalty, but htat the aciton was vexatious, as it has nothing to do with the merits or otherwise of the original charge, but the Cs hurt feelings.


should this be part of the defence? or later on in a witness statement?


ive altered paragraph 3. to include what they originally stated, and then the contradicting answers afterwards, is this ok or would you suggest something else?

3. The Claimant has made contradictions as to why it believes the Driver was in breach of the terms and conditions of parking.
The Claimant has stated that there was no ticket present whatsoever.
The Defendant has asked the Claimant to explain whether "not displaying a valid ticket for inspection" means that the parking period was unpaid, the paid for time was exceeded or a parking ticket might have been paid for but was not visible.
The Claimant in reply has stated that it is making no assumptions; the photos of the vehicle dashboard are not visible because of the poor lighting.
The Defendant has the reasonable belief that the Claimant does not even know why it has issued the claim and submits that the Court should not be used an oracle to define a cause of action.




also the parking company are no longer operating on the land, its about to be sold by the current landowner. probably has no relevance but thought id mention it here

This post has been edited by eggybread1922: Mon, 30 Apr 2018 - 20:35
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Redivi
post Mon, 30 Apr 2018 - 20:52
Post #145


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 4,126
Joined: 31 Jan 2018
Member No.: 96,238



QUOTE (eggybread1922 @ Mon, 30 Apr 2018 - 21:29) *
should this be part of the defence? or later on in a witness statement?


ive altered paragraph 3. to include what they originally stated, and then the contradicting answers afterwards, is this ok or would you suggest something else?

3. The Claimant has made contradictions as to why it believes the Driver was in breach of the terms and conditions of parking.
The Claimant has stated that there was no ticket present whatsoever.
The Defendant has asked the Claimant to explain whether "not displaying a valid ticket for inspection" means that the parking period was unpaid, the paid for time was exceeded or a parking ticket might have been paid for but was not visible.
The Claimant in reply has stated that it is making no assumptions; the photos of the vehicle dashboard are not visible because of the poor lighting.
The Defendant has the reasonable belief that the Claimant does not even know why it has issued the claim and submits that the Court should not be used as an oracle to define divine a cause of action.


This post has been edited by Redivi: Mon, 30 Apr 2018 - 20:52
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Umkomaas
post Mon, 30 Apr 2018 - 21:09
Post #146


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 3,124
Joined: 8 Feb 2013
Member No.: 59,842



QUOTE
Court should not be used as an oracle to define divine a cause of action.

Should that read 'devine' as in the French for 'to guess'? Or am I misunderstanding the purpose of 'divine' (= God-like) ?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Redivi
post Mon, 30 Apr 2018 - 21:20
Post #147


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 4,126
Joined: 31 Jan 2018
Member No.: 96,238



Not according to the dictionaries I checked - I had the same concern

You also go dowsing for water with a divining rod

This post has been edited by Redivi: Mon, 30 Apr 2018 - 21:21
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
eggybread1922
post Tue, 8 May 2018 - 16:45
Post #148


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 64
Joined: 23 Feb 2018
Member No.: 96,741



Hi all, mt defence has been sent via email, do i also need to send a copy to the parking company?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Eljayjay
post Tue, 8 May 2018 - 16:55
Post #149


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 901
Joined: 1 Apr 2017
Member No.: 91,235



deleted

This post has been edited by Eljayjay: Tue, 8 May 2018 - 16:56
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
nosferatu1001
post Wed, 9 May 2018 - 07:34
Post #150


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 28,687
Joined: 27 Nov 2007
Member No.: 15,642



No. CCBC sends it to the C

This si the ONLY time they do that, however - as youwill see, from reading carefully every form after, it will tel you to send to ALL parties ie court and claimant.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

8 Pages V  « < 6 7 8
Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 



Advertisement

Advertise here!

RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: Thursday, 28th March 2024 - 17:31
Pepipoo uses cookies. You can find details of the cookies we use here along with links to information on how to manage them.
Please click the button to accept our cookies and hide this message. We’ll also assume that you’re happy to accept them if you continue to use the site.
IPS Driver Error

IPS Driver Error

There appears to be an error with the database.
You can try to refresh the page by clicking here