PePiPoo Helping the motorist get justice

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

barnet hospital parkingEye parking charge court case, i never parked - only waited inside the car park
chawal2
post Tue, 12 Jun 2018 - 15:02
Post #1


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 78
Joined: 12 Jun 2018
Member No.: 98,396



please can you review and comment on the final defence i prepared and shared below? should i add, edit or remove something? thanks,
---------------------

parking eye (PE) manages barnet hospital car park. car park has no barriers. on 8 feb 2017, i waited in car park for 46 minutes to get a parking space desperately - as were several other drivers. i never parked nor i got out of the car. then i left car park to park somewhere else as i was getting late for my hospital appointment. PE sent me the parking ticket which i appealed against but both PE and POPLA rejected my appeal. then i got letter before action and now court letter. i have sent AOS online. i need your help to know if my defence is robust or can i add or remove something.

PE signage:

I have got the terms and conditions of PE from POPLA Appeal document: I have typed relevant text below from PE terms and conditions signage:

*PE is authorized by landowner to operate the private car park for and on its behalf. We are not responsible for car park surface, damage or loss to and from motor vehicles or general site safety. Parking is subject to the terms and conditions that apply are set within this notice (The Parking Contract). By parking, waiting, or otherwise remaining within this private car park, you agree to comply with these terms and conditions (the Parking Contract) and are authorized to park only if you follow these correctly, including making payment where directed... and so on. If you fail to comply, you accept liability to pay the fee for unauthorised parking (the Parking Charge)
This Parking Contract shall form the entire agreement between the parties.
...more text but irrelevant to our case...

By entering this private car park, you consent, for the purpose of car park management to: capturing of photographs of vehicle and registration by APNR cameras and/or by the attendant and for sub-contractor to check compliance with the Parking Contract.
Furthermore, you consent to the processing of this data to request registered keeper details from DVLA, where the Parking Contract is not adhered to and a) enforcement is undertaken remotely via ANPR; or ...;

Parking charges incurred: a) will be notified to the registered keeper by post, where ANPR system identifies non-compliance with the Parking Contract,...;

------------------------------------
based on above, my defence is:

Background:

Defendant took his 13 year old son to Barnet Hospital for Phototherapy appointment with the nurse. Defendant entered car park and saw that many other cars were waiting to get a vacant parking bay to park car. Defendant too waited in the car park hoping to eventually find a vacant parking bay to park car and visit the hospital dermatology nurse. Defendant desperately waited inside the car along with his son but when in 46 minutes no parking bay became available, then rushed out of the car park to avoid losing the hospital appointment slot. Defendant then found a parking bay in a street and ran with his son to visit hospital nurse. Defendant did not leave car or get any parking bay to park so there was no contract formed to pay to land owner of car park or claimant.

Defence:

1. This claim should be rejected by court as no parking took place due to absence of a vacant parking spot. No contract formed between Claimant and Driver/Defendant
1. signage does not talk about grace period so waiting or grace period does not form part of contract with driver
2. signage does not mention any contract for waiting so waiting does not form terms and conditions or contract.
3. parking charge - as mentioned in signage is for parking and since no parking took place for lack of space, no contract formed or got violated so this charge is unlawful
4. PE has violated consumer contract regulations: consumer-contract-regulations-2013

In this case, a parking charge for breach of the terms and conditions (i.e. the charges of £100) would be.

The signage at this location fails to create any contractual liability due to the failure to comply with the provisions of the Consumer Contracts (Information, Cancellation and Additional Charges) Regulations 2013. The purported contract created by the signage is a ‘distance contract’ as defined in section 5 of the Regulations, and is therefore subject to the mandatory requirements set out in section 13, relating to the statutory information which must be provided by the trader.

The Regulations state, at 13(1)(a), that the information listed in Schedule 2 must be given or made available to the consumer in a clear and comprehensible manner. The Claimant’s notice fails to comply with various clauses of Schedule 2, as follows:

2© – Requirement to provide a geographical address. The Claimant’s address is given as a PO Box number.
2(k) – Requirement to provide a complaint handling policy. This is not described on the signage.
2(o) – Requirement to provide information about the right to cancel, or to state that there is no right to cancel. This is not stated on the signage.
2® – Requirement to provide information about Codes of Conduct. This does not appear on the signage.
2(x) – Requirement for access to an Alternative Dispute Resolution mechanism. Not indicated by the signage.]


5. Claimant has failed to provide any evidence that Defendant parked in the parking area. The APNR images showing the time car entered and exited car park do not prove if i parked so this parking penalty is unlawful.
6. The signage has very small letters and cannot be read unless driver comes out of the car. Without getting opportunity to park the car, it is not possible to read the signage so no contact can be formed until car was parked and since in this case car was not parked, no contract was formed.
7. The claimant failed to include a copy of their written contract as per Practice Direction 16 7.3(1) and Practice Direction 7C 1.4(3A). No indication is given as to the Claimants contractual authority to operate there as required by the Claimants Trade Association's Code of Practice B1.1 which says;
If you operate parking management activities on land which is not owned by you, you must supply us with written authority from the land owner sufficient to establish you as the Creditor; within the meaning of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (where applicable) and in any event to establish you as a person who is able to recover parking charges. There is no prescribed form for such agreement and it need not necessarily be as part of a contract but it must include the express ability for an operator to recover parking charges on the landowner's behalf or provide sufficient right to occupy the land in question so that charges can be recovered by the operator directly. This applies whether or not you intend to use the keeper liability provisions.


Due to these significant breaches of the Regulations, it is submitted that Defendant cannot be held contractually liable, according to the wording of the Regulations at 13 (1) “Before the consumer is bound by a distance contract, the trader must …”.

8. Defendant is yet to have knowledge of all documents provided to the court in support of the application, despite sending an email request to the claimant's website contact form in first week of June.
9. In the pre court stage the Claimant refused to provide defendant with the necessary information requested in order for defence by Defendant against the alleged debt.
They did not send following to defendant:
9a. evidence that the occupants of car left the car.
9b. the car was parked in the Private Eye Car Park
9c. there was any vacant parking bay during the time of alleged use of car park.

10. no parking space was provided by claimant and no service was used by defendant so no contract applies in this case.

11. The Claimant has at no time provided an explanation how the parking charge has been calculated, the conduct that gave rise to it or how the amount has escalated from £60 to £100. This appears to be an added cost with apparently no qualification and an attempt at double recovery, which the POFA Schedule 4 specifically disallows.
11.1. The Protection of Freedom Act Para 4(5) states that the maximum sum that may be recovered from the keeper is the charge stated on the Notice to Keeper.
11.2. The driver did not enter into any 'agreement on the charge', no consideration flowed between the parties and no contract was established.
11.2.1. The Defendant denies that the driver would have agreed to pay the original demand of £60 to agree to the alleged contract had the terms and conditions of the contract been properly displayed and accessible.
Accordingly, it is denied that the Claimant has authority to bring this claim. The proper Claimant (if any debt exists, which is denied) would be the landowner. Strict proof is required that there is a chain of contracts leading from the landowner to Parking Eye and no proof has been provided.


12. The contract displayed on the signage by Claimant was actually discharged by frustration. The contract into which Driver (defendant) may have been willing to enter with the Claimant while entering the car park, was frustrated immediately upon entering car park - by the Claimant's lack of a parking space in the car park for the whole of the time when Defendant was there. Where a contract is found to be frustrated, each party is discharged from future obligations under the contract and neither party may sue for breach.
This proves that this claim is unlawful.


13. Claimant has failed to provide following details in the claim:
a) Full particulars of the parking charges
b) Who the party was that contracted with Claimant
c) The full legal identity of the landowner
d) A full copy of the contract with the landholder that demonstrated that Claimant had their authority.
e) If the charges were based on damages for breach of contract and if so to provide justification of this sum.

The Defendant asks that the court orders Further and Better Particulars of Claim and asks leave to amend the Defence.

14. the claimant is not trading responsibly and has clearly failed to secure its parking area by allowing every car to enter its premises - irrespective of whether any parking bay is vacant or not. Claimant should be forced to put barriers in its parking are and allow a car inside only if there is a vacant parking bay. the parking contract is frustrated as soon as claimant allows a car inside when no parking bay is available.

15. I suggest that parking companies using the small claims track as a form of aggressive, automated debt collection is not something the courts should be seen to support.



16. This case can be easily distinguished from ParkingEye v Beavis which the Judges held was 'entirely different' from most ordinary economic contract disputes.
Charges cannot exist merely to punish drivers. This claimant has failed to show any comparable 'legitimate interest' to save their charge from Lord Dunedin's four tests for a penalty, which the Supreme Court Judges found was still adequate in less complex cases, such as this allegation.


17. It is denied that there was any 'relevant obligation' or 'relevant contract' relating to any single parking event.

18. It is denied that the signs used by this claimant can have created a fair or transparent contract with a driver in any event. The signs were insufficient in terms of their distribution, wording and lighting hence incapable of binding the driver, which distinguishes this case from the Beavis case:
a) Sporadic and illegible (charge not prominent nor large lettering) site/entrance signage - breach of the BPA Code of Practice and no contract formed to pay any clearly stated sum.
b) The signs are believed to have no mention of any debt collection additional charge, which cannot form part of any alleged contract.
c) The signage was not lit and any terms were not transparent or legible; this is an unfair contract, not agreed by the driver and contrary to the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999.
d) No promise was made by the driver that could constitute consideration because there was no offer made nor accepted. No consideration flowed from the Claimant.
e) Absent the elements of a contract, there can be no breach of contract.

19. The defendant denies the claim in its entirety voiding any liability to the claimant for all amounts claimed due to the aforementioned reasons.
It is submitted that the conduct of the Claimant is wholly unreasonable and vexatious.
As such, I am keeping a note of my wasted time/costs in dealing with this matter.

20. I request the court strike out this claim for the reasons stated above, and for similar reasons cited by District Judge Hayes County Court on 17
th March 2014 Case No: 3JD08399 where a similar claim by the Claimant failed, as the Defendent was not parked (she only waited in car park like Defendent in this case) and therefore Claimant could not prove that any parking took place.

21. Claimant has failed to comply with the following documentation which specifically addresses hospital parking and are at least as authoritative as the Code of Practice: '07-03 Health Service Technical Memorandum - NHS Parking and the British Parking Association Charter for Hospital Parking'.
This failure disqualifies ParkingEye from relying on the Beavis decision

22. Appeal Court, considering Beavis, stated that the penalty could never be disengaged for a pay car park



Statement of Truth: I confirm that the contents of this statement are true to the best of my knowledge and belief.
Signature and Date

This post has been edited by chawal2: Sun, 17 Jun 2018 - 19:47
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
8 Pages V   1 2 3 > »   
Start new topic
Replies (1 - 19)
Advertisement
post Tue, 12 Jun 2018 - 15:02
Post #


Advertise here!









Go to the top of the page
 
Quote Post
Eljayjay
post Tue, 12 Jun 2018 - 22:34
Post #2


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 849
Joined: 1 Apr 2017
Member No.: 91,235



Usually, I only get involved in residential parking cases, but I noticed that no-one had replied to your post.

Have you tried contacting PALS - it stands for something like Patients A???? Liaison Service - explained the situation to them and asked them for help in getting this discontinued.

As it is late, I cannot spend time reading through the whole of your defence, but it should almost certainly say something about frustration of contract along the lines of "The contract into which I may have been willing to enter with the Claimant was frustrated by the Claimant's lack of a parking space in the car park for the whole of the time when I was there".

The fact that I have replied will bump you up the list and, hopefully, result in your post coming to the attention of regulars with other ideas.

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
ostell
post Wed, 13 Jun 2018 - 06:15
Post #3


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 8,441
Joined: 8 Mar 2013
Member No.: 60,457



Patient Advice and Liaison Service Get in touch with them NOW, though it may be too late.

I would mention that therre was no contract in existence as PE failed to provide a spcae to park.

For the court reference put in the case reference. A link is no good as it will not be looked at, and in any case your link is a link to a list of links.

The transcript can be added as an exhibit with your witness statement

This post has been edited by ostell: Wed, 13 Jun 2018 - 06:16
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Redivi
post Wed, 13 Jun 2018 - 07:45
Post #4


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 1,941
Joined: 31 Jan 2018
Member No.: 96,238



Do you have the POPLA evidence pack ?

ParkingEye has been known to send pictures of the wrong car park
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
chawal2
post Wed, 13 Jun 2018 - 10:40
Post #5


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 78
Joined: 12 Jun 2018
Member No.: 98,396



QUOTE (Eljayjay @ Tue, 12 Jun 2018 - 23:34) *
Usually, I only get involved in residential parking cases, but I noticed that no-one had replied to your post.

Have you tried contacting PALS - it stands for something like Patients A???? Liaison Service - explained the situation to them and asked them for help in getting this discontinued.

As it is late, I cannot spend time reading through the whole of your defence, but it should almost certainly say something about frustration of contract along the lines of "The contract into which I may have been willing to enter with the Claimant was frustrated by the Claimant's lack of a parking space in the car park for the whole of the time when I was there".

The fact that I have replied will bump you up the list and, hopefully, result in your post coming to the attention of regulars with other ideas.


many-many thanks!!

i wrote to PALS as soon as i got courts letter in 1 june. they refused to help me. i also emailed complaints department of barnet hospital. they refused me completely. i asked them that since PE - partking eye works for hospital trust, the hospital has responsibility to tell PE to take case back. anyone can take case back or change stand in court any time. i also said that barnet hospital trust is violating NHS guidelines by engaging PE - an unethical business to manage parking and sending parking fine and taking to court when no parking happened.

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/...king-principles

but they gave a standard reply that it is too late. trust will not get involved. i even complained to higher nhs complaints group but no outcome.

I will add frustration bit. many thanks again!!



QUOTE (Redivi @ Wed, 13 Jun 2018 - 08:45) *
Do you have the POPLA evidence pack ?

ParkingEye has been known to send pictures of the wrong car park



yes, i checked picture again. it shows time and my car registration number by APNR camera but not hospital name or any way to identify car park in picture.

should i pm you the evidence pack or what action can i take now please. thanks

QUOTE (ostell @ Wed, 13 Jun 2018 - 07:15) *
For the court reference put in the case reference. A link is no good as it will not be looked at, and in any case your link is a link to a list of links.

The transcript can be added as an exhibit with your witness statement


Am I right that witness statement will not be required in defence statement?

apologies for creating confusion. i just realise i added reference to the other court case that won for case where they too were waiting like me.

later in defence statement, point 20 as pasted by me below gives full details. will below suffice?

20. I request the court strike out this claim for the reasons stated above, and for similar reasons cited by District Judge Hayes County Court on 17
th March 2014 Case No: 3JD08399 where a similar claim by the Claimant failed, as the Defendent was not parked (she only waited in car park like Defendent in this case) and therefore Claimant could not prove that any parking took place.
http://www.parking-prankster.com/case-law.html


thanks a lot!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Redivi
post Wed, 13 Jun 2018 - 10:50
Post #6


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 1,941
Joined: 31 Jan 2018
Member No.: 96,238



Could ask the Trust if ParkingEye's contract includes the authority to take legal action in its own name

The other documents you want are 07-03 Health Service Technical Memorandum - NHS Parking and the British Parking Association Charter for Hospital Parking
You submit that these documents that specifically address hospital parking are at least as authoritative as the Code of Practice and failure to comply with them disqualifies ParkingEye from relying on the Beavis decision

Also include the point that the Appeal Court, considering Beavis, stated that the penalty could never be disengaged for a pay car park

Thought for others to comment :

Evidence packs have to be exchanged two weeks before a hearing
The deadline for a witness summons is one week

What's going to be the reaction of ParkingEye and the hospital if the OP warns that he'll issue a witness summons against the Trust Manager if the contract isn't in the evidence pack ?

This post has been edited by Redivi: Wed, 13 Jun 2018 - 10:52
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
chawal2
post Wed, 13 Jun 2018 - 10:52
Post #7


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 78
Joined: 12 Jun 2018
Member No.: 98,396



Hi All,
based on your valuable advice i have edited my original post - to make defence statement more effective.

I removed duplication of reference to the other court case won by a driver in similar case to mine - where no parking occured and only waiting occured.

i added frustration of contract as point 12 now.

many thanks again for all your help.

as soon as i get approval from you experts, i will submit this defence statement to the court.

This post has been edited by chawal2: Wed, 13 Jun 2018 - 10:53
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
ostell
post Wed, 13 Jun 2018 - 11:15
Post #8


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 8,441
Joined: 8 Mar 2013
Member No.: 60,457



No, you never created a contract in the first place. There was no parking provided, therefore there was no contract in place.

You can gove the case reference numbers in your defence, the detail will be in the witness statement.

Referencing the Parking Prankster page, excellent that it is, is no good, no one will follow the link.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
nosferatu1001
post Wed, 13 Jun 2018 - 12:54
Post #9


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 18,084
Joined: 27 Nov 2007
Member No.: 15,642



It is just a DEFENCE, no statement there!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Umkomaas
post Wed, 13 Jun 2018 - 15:16
Post #10


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 1,719
Joined: 8 Feb 2013
Member No.: 59,842



There's been lots of input on this over on the MSE parking forum.

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showth...d.php?t=5850201
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
chawal2
post Thu, 14 Jun 2018 - 11:19
Post #11


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 78
Joined: 12 Jun 2018
Member No.: 98,396



QUOTE (Umkomaas @ Wed, 13 Jun 2018 - 16:16) *
There's been lots of input on this over on the MSE parking forum.

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showth...d.php?t=5850201


correct. but if you notice, none gave any review comments both times i put my defence review there.
what is the purpose of referring to MSE link here?

Those comments have been incorporated and since there was less and slow progress - and none on the review request, I had to consider taking help from a larger forum.

QUOTE (nosferatu1001 @ Wed, 13 Jun 2018 - 13:54) *
It is just a DEFENCE, no statement there!


thanks. i understand now.

QUOTE (ostell @ Wed, 13 Jun 2018 - 12:15) *
No, you never created a contract in the first place. There was no parking provided, therefore there was no contract in place.

You can gove the case reference numbers in your defence, the detail will be in the witness statement.

Referencing the Parking Prankster page, excellent that it is, is no good, no one will follow the link.


thanks, i will amend my defence to incorporate that no contract was formed and remove the parking prankster link.

QUOTE (Redivi @ Wed, 13 Jun 2018 - 11:50) *
Could ask the Trust if ParkingEye's contract includes the authority to take legal action in its own name

The other documents you want are 07-03 Health Service Technical Memorandum - NHS Parking and the British Parking Association Charter for Hospital Parking
You submit that these documents that specifically address hospital parking are at least as authoritative as the Code of Practice and failure to comply with them disqualifies ParkingEye from relying on the Beavis decision

Also include the point that the Appeal Court, considering Beavis, stated that the penalty could never be disengaged for a pay car park

Thought for others to comment :

Evidence packs have to be exchanged two weeks before a hearing
The deadline for a witness summons is one week

What's going to be the reaction of ParkingEye and the hospital if the OP warns that he'll issue a witness summons against the Trust Manager if the contract isn't in the evidence pack ?


I will perform top 3 actions mentioned above.

Can someone please comment on Redivi's thought in above quoted post:

Thought for others to comment :

Evidence packs have to be exchanged two weeks before a hearing
The deadline for a witness summons is one week

What's going to be the reaction of ParkingEye and the hospital if the OP warns that he'll issue a witness summons against the Trust Manager if the contract isn't in the evidence pack ?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
nosferatu1001
post Thu, 14 Jun 2018 - 11:32
Post #12


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 18,084
Joined: 27 Nov 2007
Member No.: 15,642



It would be interesting to see what is the answer if you do summons them. It would be a good warning.

The point of the link to MSE is we dont want to say the same things twice. You will notice the same posters on both - myself, for example!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
chawal2
post Thu, 14 Jun 2018 - 12:10
Post #13


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 78
Joined: 12 Jun 2018
Member No.: 98,396



QUOTE (nosferatu1001 @ Thu, 14 Jun 2018 - 12:32) *
It would be interesting to see what is the answer if you do summons them. It would be a good warning.

The point of the link to MSE is we dont want to say the same things twice. You will notice the same posters on both - myself, for example!


thanks... regarding summons, what action do i have to take in defence document then? i am guessing none. please advise asap

nosferatu1001, there is zero duplication between MSE and PepiPoo.

I took all help from MSE to make defence document.

As you can see, i never got any review comment there, so I am here to get review comments and additions/changes.


All,

I emailed parking eye asking for their contract and they have replied that they will not share contract at this stage.

can i use this against them in my defence document?

'parking eye' response:

We can confirm that ParkingEye are authorised to install signage on site setting out the terms and conditions of parking, to issue Parking Charges for a breach of those terms and conditions, and to recover these charges. This authority stems from a contractual agreement with the site in relation to the Patient & Visitors car park at Barnet Hospital however, as the contract in question is commercially sensitive and largely irrelevant to the case, the document will not be supplied at this stage. Please note that ParkingEye is presented as the contracting party on the signage, and on the correspondence issued. ParkingEye are identified as the creditor on the claim form.


This post has been edited by chawal2: Thu, 14 Jun 2018 - 12:10
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
chawal2
post Thu, 14 Jun 2018 - 12:31
Post #14


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 78
Joined: 12 Jun 2018
Member No.: 98,396



Redivi,

I added following two statements in my defence document. I hope they are fit for purpose? thanks...

21. Following documentation specifically addresses hospital parking and are at least as authoritative as the Code of Practice: '07-03 Health Service Technical Memorandum - NHS Parking and the British Parking Association Charter for Hospital Parking'
Parking Eye has failed to comply with them and this disqualifies ParkingEye from relying on the Beavis decision

22. Appeal Court, considering Beavis, stated that the penalty could never be disengaged for a pay car park



Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
nosferatu1001
post Thu, 14 Jun 2018 - 12:41
Post #15


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 18,084
Joined: 27 Nov 2007
Member No.: 15,642



There is, however, background info
INstead of complaining at the lack of response there, and here, you instead appear to be thankful for the help volunteers have already given you? So far I'm not getting much sense of that, and it makes people want to help less, if they appear to be taken for granted.

Have you looked up a witness summons, before asking? THat would always be the preferred route,then you know what the actual rules say.

You can state that the claiant has refused to substantiate their claims to have locus standii, and are forcing court action that could otherwise be avoided if they complied with their obligations under the PAP for debt claims, and the overriding objectives of the court claim. It is NOT a defence against the charge IF they later produce it, but shows you have behaved reasonably, and perhaps that they have not behaved reasonably.

21) not really, it doesnt even read as a complete sentence. "The following ...." would be a better start. It also isnt even an argument - issue: rationale is the tuple you should follow. The C has failed to follow the...

Ditto 22. You cant just leave that there - because this is PE they know about PE v Beavis and know it went to supreme, so the trivial response to your defence point is that the SC overruled that.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Redivi
post Thu, 14 Jun 2018 - 12:50
Post #16


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 1,941
Joined: 31 Jan 2018
Member No.: 96,238



Dear Sir

Thank You for your response regarding the contract

The authority that you have described to recover parking charges only meets the requirement of the BPA Code of Practice Para 7.1
The Code of Practice Para 7.2, however, clearly states that you must have the land-owner's written authority to recover the charges by legal action
It does not provide for any exceptions such as the name of the contracting party on the signs

I therefore require a straight Yes or No answer with no qualifications
Does your contract at Barnet Hospital include the written authority to take legal action to recover parking charges?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
chawal2
post Thu, 14 Jun 2018 - 13:26
Post #17


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 78
Joined: 12 Jun 2018
Member No.: 98,396



QUOTE (Redivi @ Thu, 14 Jun 2018 - 13:50) *
Dear Sir

Thank You for your response regarding the contract

The authority that you have described to recover parking charges only meets the requirement of the BPA Code of Practice Para 7.1
The Code of Practice Para 7.2, however, clearly states that you must have the land-owner's written authority to recover the charges by legal action
It does not provide for any exceptions such as the name of the contracting party on the signs

I therefore require a straight Yes or No answer with no qualifications
Does your contract at Barnet Hospital include the written authority to take legal action to recover parking charges?


many thanks Redivi...

I have sent this message to PE.

biggrin.gif

QUOTE (nosferatu1001 @ Thu, 14 Jun 2018 - 13:41) *
There is, however, background info
INstead of complaining at the lack of response there, and here, you instead appear to be thankful for the help volunteers have already given you? So far I'm not getting much sense of that, and it makes people want to help less, if they appear to be taken for granted.

Have you looked up a witness summons, before asking? THat would always be the preferred route,then you know what the actual rules say.

You can state that the claiant has refused to substantiate their claims to have locus standii, and are forcing court action that could otherwise be avoided if they complied with their obligations under the PAP for debt claims, and the overriding objectives of the court claim. It is NOT a defence against the charge IF they later produce it, but shows you have behaved reasonably, and perhaps that they have not behaved reasonably.

21) not really, it doesnt even read as a complete sentence. "The following ...." would be a better start. It also isnt even an argument - issue: rationale is the tuple you should follow. The C has failed to follow the...

Ditto 22. You cant just leave that there - because this is PE they know about PE v Beavis and know it went to supreme, so the trivial response to your defence point is that the SC overruled that.



many thanks for your help Nosferatu1001...

I am grateful for each and every helpful gesture I have received.
I briefly read witness summons too. Time constraint is also worrying me. Thanks for bearing with me.

I will remove point 22. PE have referred to Beavis case even in email response to me.

All,


I am thinking of emailing now itself (in hope of them taking the case back etc) barnet hospital and parking eye the following:

I will issue a witness summons against the Barnet Hospital Trust Manager if the contract isn't in the evidence pack.

Any thoughts if it is good or bad idea?


Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
nosferatu1001
post Thu, 14 Jun 2018 - 18:23
Post #18


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 18,084
Joined: 27 Nov 2007
Member No.: 15,642



Seems ok to me

Re point 22 - I didn't say remove it. I said develop it. The development is the one redivi gave you already - which is that the appeal court said this is never lifted in pay and display and the Supreme Court did not disagree. That means they agree, in the logic of courts.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
I-LOV-MONEY
post Sun, 17 Jun 2018 - 09:18
Post #19


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 466
Joined: 26 Aug 2009
Member No.: 31,529



It has just occured to me that I cannot recall ever seeing a sign on entering the hospital that there are parking controls in place. I believe the first signs you see are once you are in the parking area (past the cameras). I will be at Barnet Hospital later this week (probably too late for the OP), but if this is the case, would it would be a defense for others in the future?


--------------------
I thank you for reading this message.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
chawal2
post Sun, 17 Jun 2018 - 19:17
Post #20


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 78
Joined: 12 Jun 2018
Member No.: 98,396



QUOTE (I-LOV-MONEY @ Sun, 17 Jun 2018 - 10:18) *
It has just occured to me that I cannot recall ever seeing a sign on entering the hospital that there are parking controls in place. I believe the first signs you see are once you are in the parking area (past the cameras). I will be at Barnet Hospital later this week (probably too late for the OP), but if this is the case, would it would be a defense for others in the future?



dear 'I-LOV-MONEY',

thanks for your response.

My defence needs filling and submitting by 28 june so it is not too late for me too. please can you help? many thanks in advance.

QUOTE (I-LOV-MONEY @ Sun, 17 Jun 2018 - 10:18) *
It has just occured to me that I cannot recall ever seeing a sign on entering the hospital that parking control is in place. I believe the first signs you see are once you are in the parking area (past the cameras). I will be at Barnet Hospital later this week (probably too late for the OP), but if this is the case, would it would be a defense for others in the future?



please can you advise - why is barnet hospital/PE obliged to put up sign on 'hospital entrance' that parking control is in place? What point can i raise in my defence? many thanks...
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

8 Pages V   1 2 3 > » 
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: Saturday, 20th October 2018 - 22:35
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.