Free Traffic Legal Advice

We won this one guys!! Thank you for all your help everyone especially to @b789

I was awarded 2 lots of £95 for 2 court appearances and my parking costs.

The judge completely agreed that the signs were unreadable especially as it was dark and this location had no lighting. She did not refer to any of the legal arguments in my documents but as I had the opportunity to cross-examine the Gladstones solicitor I asked him about why the particulars of the claim as filed and served did not set out the conduct which
amounted to the breach and he did not have an answer. I also asked him how he expects motorists to read the signs at night without any lighting and he argued that the signs have been approved by the law to which I showed the judge the example of the Beavis case.

Glad to see the back of this! Thanks all once again this forum is a life saver!!

@b789 I had another copy of the whole bundle in the post today which includes all of my paperwork and theirs.

Here is a link to my skeleton argument - https://file.io/Y8KJaBpJ1Ubn

I have never done one before so it might need some edits. Can you let me know what you think before I submit it, please?

@DWMB2 @b789 Have you guys got any thoughts on what would be the main focus points for me at the hearing?

Where did you park?

From looking back at your defence and witness statement, the argument that the signage is forbidding and therefore incapable of forming a contract (as it doesn't make an offer to those who are not authorised) doesn't come across particularly strongly. Did you communicate this point in court?

I also wonder whether an argument that the signage was unlit and not visible is undermined by your argument that you did read the signage but found it confusing...

I parked by the entrance but left the walkway clear for pedestrians and no cars were in the site and so I was not blocking anyone. I stayed in the car with the lights on so could easily move if I did block anyone.

Should I focus on this point at the next hearing? - the argument that the signage is forbidding and therefore incapable of forming a contract

An update.

I went to the court hearing today and the Gladstones solicitors came and spoke to me before the hearing asking if I wanted to talk and settle. I said I wanted the judge to strike out the claim and would not be settling to pay any costs.

We went into the courtroom and the judge asked if we wanted to settle I said I was not willing to pay a fine or costs because the signs are unlit, confusing and cannot form a contract. The judge after asking questions about my parking and asking the Gladstones solicitor what he wanted to do said that we both had a 50/50 chance of winning because the signs were unlit and in darkness when I parked but that he thought the way I parked was obstructing others cars as I parked near the entrance.

It has been adjourned until next month so I have to go to court again.

I have had Gladstones paperwork through the post today. It says that the terms and conditions were breached because -

'The photographic evidence shows the vehicle to be parked at the entrance of the site during xxxxxx and xxxxx thus outside of a marked bay causing an obstruction. The vehicle was therefore not authorized to park at the site.'

There are no marked bays in this location. Is it worth changing para 9 to -

I took care to park in a manner that I perceived as compliant with the rules in the immediate vicinity as this layby does not have any marked parking bays and was completely empty of any other vehicles.

I haven't had any hearings or reserved costs awarded so I will remove this line. I would like to add costs for the time taken to prepare the papers and appearance at the courts. Can these costs be added anywhere?