Spring Parking ltd/DCB(Legal) 6 2019 ANPR PCNs claimform - 1-3 Upper Green East, Mitcham, Surrey, Cr4 2pe ***Claim Discontinued***

[hitman126]

@FTMDave 

unfortunately, proving I was elsewhere will be a hard ask due to the amount of time that has passed and the limited record or recollection of my activities back then.

 

Even the electronic copies of my bank statements obtained only give a high-level summary of my transactions on the dates in question and do not confirm any time and location.

[dx100uk]

What about social media posts Facebook etc for the time(s) location too, and of course Google tracking might have been enabled if location is ticked. Mine both show going back years 

 

Dx

[Nicky Boy]

Don't know whether it's significant but having looked at the PCN's earlier in the thread and using google view, it seems that the "photographic evidence" shows the vehicle to be on a public road?

(Outside the car park).

[hitman126]

@Nicky Boyyou're absolutely right and it's something I'd picked up too because those sneaky 

images are of the vehicle being on the public road..........not within the car park premises. There

is even another exit as you approach the entrance to the car park.

 

Initially, I dismissed the alleged PCNs because they only showed me driving on that public road

and besides, I was most convinced there was absolutely no chance of me staying 2+ hours in

that car park on any visit. 

[Nicky Boy]

Also, using Google street view date change, it seems that the entrance signage "disappears" sometime between October 2015 

Google Maps

WWW.GOOGLE.CO.UK

---

Find local businesses, view maps and get driving directions in Google Maps.

   and June 2016

Google Maps

WWW.GOOGLE.CO.UK

---

Find local businesses, view maps and get driving directions in Google Maps.

  and is absent all the way up to this August.

 

Does this mean there can't be a "parking contract" formed?

Edited October 24, 2022 by Nicky Boy

[hitman126]

@dx100ukthat was a brilliant suggestion!! I'd forgotten completely about the option of

Google Location Tracking.......even though the disappointing aspect of it is that it doesn't

always provide 100% guaranteed tracking history.

 

Unfortunately, none of my location data is logged for four of the dates in question, but for

one of the dates, Google logged my time at my Gym (car park premises) as 15:22 - 17:19 

which is less than 2 hours. The morons on the other hand claim my entry and exit times

were 15:21 and 17:38 respectively.

 

I intend to contact my banks, etc, to provide me with all location and transaction times for

the remaining dates, if Google can't provide the needed supporting evidence.

 

@Nicky BoyI'm assuming you mean the yellow signage that was originally located to the left of the

car park entrance and next to the end-terrace building?

 

[Nicky Boy]

Yes, I  believe the entrance signage is quite important. The experts will probably confirm or shoot me down in flames.

[FTMDave]

There is not one person on this forum who hasn't made mistakes in legal disputes.  Especially if they've never been in that position before.  I've made loads.

 

However, learn from this experience if anything similar happens in future.  Of course you can't remember now what you were doing on a certain day in 2019.  But you could a fortnight after the day in question when the fleecers' letter popped through the letter box.  The time to be coming here & dealing with the fleecers was straight away, not three years later.

 

Anyway, the SAR will give you more details.

 

All the points already made by the others are good ammo: a de facto overstay of one minute on a busy Saturday when it would have taken ages to park and later get away; PCN issued for the wrong reason; Google tracking; car on public road; lack of signage; etc.

 

Good idea to get on to your bank(s).

 

 

[lookinforinfo]

Hitman you referred to them as morons-a bit unfair on morons lumping them in with Spring parking- but if it was a deliberate act to increase the leaving time by 19 minutes think of all the extra money they could make .........................

[hitman126]

@lookinforinfoand therein lies the issue I raised some days ago regarding the accuracy and validity of the evidence they claim to gather via their cameras?

 

Is it ever put to any proper scrutiny at all?

 

Let's say the defendant couldn't dig up any backing evidence like Google Location History or some other evidence to exonerate them, does that mean they become "sitting ducks" and are left entirely at the mercy of the parking company's claim and perhaps the leniency of a court?

 

We've already seen DCB Legal come out with the excuse that a faulty IT system was the reason for them submitting a completely incorrect Claim.

 

Is there any reason therefore not to believe that those car park camera data aren't falsified or inaccurate too................whether deliberate or accidental?

[lookinforinfo]

To a certain extent it may depend on the company involved. With some one could think there was no way it could be anything other than deliberate and with a few [probably less than five] it could have been a genuine error. Though it is strange that the "errors" always seem to work in their favour.

[hitman126]

By the way, is it unusual that a full week after DCB emailed me that N180 Directions Questionnaire and also the N244, 

there's no evidence of it logged or recorded in my case profile, on the MCOL portal?

[brassnecked]

They might not have submitted it yet sent as a frightener?

[lookinforinfo]

Or it could be they have lost their bottle.............................

[hitman126]

Hi All,

 

So, some further update to share. 

 

1. Unfortunately, my bank (Lloyds) has advised that they do not retain account transaction details that include location of those transactions, over such lengthy time periods.

 

2. I have in the last couple of days received from the court, an N149 (front copy attached) advising of a proposal to allocate the case to the Small Claims Track. The letter requests that I complete and file with the court office, a Form N180 (Small Claims Directions Questionnaire by Monday 14th November 2022. 

 

Would be grateful for any advice on how to proceed next.

 

 

N149 - Notice_of_Proposed_Allocation_to_SCT_pg001.pdf

[FTMDave]

For the DQ look at the last post here  https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/453628-ukpcldcb-legal-pcn-claimform-marlborough-road-estate-braintree-essex-cm7-9uz/

 

[dx100uk]

https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/347310-legal-n180-directions-questionnaire-small-claims-track-correct-at-sept-2016/#comment-5088148

3 copies

yes to mediation (unless you filed our Statute Barred Defence OR this is a claim for a Private Parking Ticket)

1 wit you

Suitability for determination without a hearing? no (read all the posts in N180 link above for the reason)

the rest is obv

1 to the court

1 to sols (omit phone/sig/email)

1 for your file

 

dx

you should also not be wasting 2 weeks by not reading like threads here..

 

dx

 

[FTMDave]

Realistically you are going to have problems here.

 

It's a lot of money so the fleecers will go all the way.  They have even forked out to amend the Particulars of Claim which they didn't think worth their while when they messed up in the same way in chinoky's case.

 

Given the sheer volume of tickets the judge is likely to think that some at least must be justified.

 

Remind me what date you sent the SAR?  I think Spring Parking are in default.

[lookinforinfo]

One of the things to ask for in your WS is the accuracy and synchronisation of their ANPR cameras over the periods of the tickets.

[hitman126]

On 06/11/2022 at 13:45, FTMDave said:

They have even forked out to amend the Particulars of Claim

@FTMDavehmmmm, did they actually amend and resubmit the Particulars of Claim to the court.............or did they simply send me that hand-written amendment to give me the jitters?

 

Perhaps I may be wrong,

but if they'd amended and resubmitted the Particulars of Claim, surely my expectation would have been that the court would send me the revised copy and also update the case on the MCOL portal with that information.

 

To date, none of this has happened, suggesting to me that they never resubmitted a revised claim..........hence they opting now to apply for the case to be sent to the Small Claims Track...................or have I got this all completely wrong?

 

On 07/11/2022 at 01:58, lookinforinfo said:

One of the things to ask for in your WS is the accuracy and synchronisation of their ANPR cameras

 

@lookinforinfo agree completely. Yes, I really believe that is very much a valid argument to be made, with regards these claims by parking companies.

 

My personal view is that the burden of proving a defendant guilty in law always rests with the prosecution (or claimant in this case) and must be beyond reasonable doubt. Does presenting some still images with some unverified dates and times constitute "beyond reasonable doubt"?

 

In one of my previous posts, I even confirmed Google's Location Tracking Service logged my car with a different entry and exit time on one of the days stated on the claim and if this was presented as evidence, should there be any reason why the court wouldn't consider it valid..............and therefore by extension, question the validity of all of the other dates and times stated on the claim?

 

Maybe this is a line of defence that's been debunked by the court already and someone here may confirm so, but if not, I strongly feel it is very much a subject to be challenged. In other words, who is policing the "Policeman" aka car parking companies on these ANPR claims? Are those data verified and validated...........or simply accepted as gospel?

[Gick]

Hitman: post #97 'My personal view is that the burden of proving a defendant guilty in law always rests with the prosecution (or claimant in this case) and must be beyond reasonable doubt.'

Unfortunately you are trying to apply the Criminal requirement to a Civil case where the the onus  on the claimant is actually only to prove probability' to the satisfaction of the adjudicator/judge.

Edited November 9, 2022 by Gick
clarity

[hitman126]

@Gickthanks very much for your input. It's quite an interesting point you've made and very insightful, as I 

was never aware of that legal disparity between the burden of proof required for Civil cases, in contrast with

that of Criminal cases. Wow!!

 

@dx100ukthanks ever so much for your feedback on my completion and submission of the N180 form. It is much appreciated.

 

I couldn't however help making the curious observation from this similar case with Highview Parking last year, albeit for a smaller claim amount, that you advised back then was to decline a mediation by responding "NO" on the N180 form.

 

Just for my own understanding and learning,

are you able to shed a bit more light on the reasons for those two conflicting responses please?

 

Does the claim amount determine the appropriate response perhaps.......or is this  latest response simply down to some changes in legislation, etc? 

 

[Andyorch]

2 minutes ago, hitman126 said:

 

@dx100ukthanks ever so much for your feedback on my completion and submission of the N180 form. It is

much appreciated.

 

I couldn't however help making the curious observation from this similar case with Highview Parking last year,

albeit for a smaller claim amount, that your advice back then was to decline a mediation by responding "NO" on

the N180 form.

 

 

  On 06/11/2022 at 13:44, dx100uk said:

yes to mediation (unless you filed our Statute Barred Defence OR this is a claim for a Private Parking Ticket)

[brassnecked]

There is nothing to mediate on with a parking Charge Notice, you either owe it or don't mediation will just give them hope of getting what they claimed for minis a tenner and they will be happy their dodgy POC didn't get challenged in front of a judge.

[hitman126]

2 hours ago, Andyorch said:

OR this is a claim for a Private Parking Ticket