Free Traffic Legal Advice

Unless the claimant discontinues, you will be expected to attend the hearing. If you're unsure about what this involves, here is a short video that explains what will happen on the day:

https://youtu.be/n93eoaxhzpU?feature=shared

It would be worthwhile calling the court the day before to double check that the hearing hasn't been vacated. Arrive early at the court and find out at what time your hearing has been listed. You can let the usher know you have arrived.

The Claimant themselves are not likely to be there but they will have engaged a local gun-for-hire legal rep, who may try and make contact with you before the hearing. My advice is don't engage with them but be polite. It is also likely that they will not know much about your case and will have had very little time to prepare.

Make sure you fully understand your case and the points being made in your WS. Your main points are that the claim did not comply with SCR 16.4 as it did not adequately explain the claim against you. It was not until you received the claimants WS at the latest minute that you were able to fully understand the claim.

You should understand why the claimant, from what we can tell from the contract they have evidenced, does not actually have any right to make the claim as they are not a party to the contract itself. The Land Registry records have revealed this and you need to understand that point.

The other argument you are making and their own evidence proves it is that their signage at the location is terrible and unreadable, especially in the dark.

Let us know how you get on.

If you carefully read the Land Registry document you showed us the information about the lease dates and the parties to the lease was sourced directly from Entry 2 of the A: Property register section of the Land Registry Title LT504504 for the car park at Nelson Street, Leicester (LE1 7BA).

Here is the exact text from that section:


This confirms:


Paragraph 22 should be "version 8". Unfortunately, this forum software tries to replace some text as smileys and the "8)" is the text for that smiley. I've asked for smileys to be turned off, so it should appear normally now. Even with that, I hope you sent it yesterday.

I've got out of the hearing. The judge ruled in their favour effectively arguing that I entered into a contract when I parked there and bought a ticket. His mind was made before I got into room, i was in the room with their solicitor too.

He didn't acknowledge really any of my arguments, specifically the land registry argument, he said "it doesn't help my case" in fact. The signage argument was dismissed, he simply argued that i entered into a contract and therefore I'm liable.

I tried.

My WS was heard and considered but like i said, I could tell from the moment I walked in, the judges mind was made up. He didn't want to set a precedence.

Appreciate all your help.

Which county court and which judge?

We try to keep a record of the courts that are up to speed with these rogue operators and those where there appears to be a dismal lack of understanding.

What made you say that the moment you walked in, the judges mind was made up?

Based on what you have reported, the following concerns arise from the conduct of the hearing:

1. Apparent predisposition and impartiality concerns

It is deeply troubling that the judge volunteered that he "knew the car park well" and agreed with the solicitor representing the Claimant regarding the signage and site conditions. A judge’s personal familiarity with a location subject to dispute — especially when untested by evidence and based on personal experience — raises a real risk of apparent bias. The correct course for the judge would have been to recuse himself if he considered he could not be wholly objective. The test for apparent bias is whether a fair-minded and informed observer, having considered the facts, would conclude that there was a real possibility that the judge was biased (Porter v Magill [2001] UKHL 67).

2. Failure to address the pleaded issues

Your witness statement raised cogent legal challenges regarding:


The Defendant is entitled under the Civil Procedure Rules (CPR) to have pleaded matters properly considered. The court is obliged by CPR 1.1 (Overriding Objective) to ensure that cases are dealt with fairly and justly. A failure to engage with key issues raised may amount to an error of law.

3. Weight attached to signage and contract formation

While it is correct that a driver may enter a contract by parking and paying, it must still be a fair and lawful contract with adequate and transparent signage. ParkingEye v Beavis [2015] UKSC 67 was predicated on very clear, prominent, and simple signage, unlike here where you evidenced small print, unreadable signs, and lack of entrance signage.

4. Possible grounds for appeal

There appear to be arguable grounds that the judgment was unjust due to:


However, appealing a small claims judgment is not easy. Permission to appeal would be required, and the standard is whether the decision was wrong in law or unjust due to serious procedural irregularity (CPR 52.21). There is usually a 21-day deadline from the date of the hearing to apply for permission to appeal.

It is important to note that appeal courts are reluctant to interfere with a judge’s findings of fact unless there is clear evidence of material error or injustice.

Given the circumstances of the hearing and the potential concerns regarding apparent bias, procedural unfairness, and the dismissal of key arguments without proper consideration, I strongly recommend that you now seek formal legal advice.

In particular, I would suggest that you contact Contestor Legal Services and ask to speak with Jackson Yamba. Jackson is a barrister with considerable experience in parking litigation and small claims appeals. He has successfully acted in several notable appellate cases, including Scott Brennan v Premier Parking Solutions (2023) [H6DP632H], Civil Enforcement v Ming Tak Chan (2023) [E7GM9W44], CPM v Akande (2024) [K0DP5J30], and VCS v Edward (2023) [HOKF6C9C]. He is particularly experienced in issues relating to procedural irregularities arising in parking claims.

Jackson will be well placed to advise you on:


He can assess your situation fully, including whether it is worth pursuing an appeal based on the judge's apparent predisposition and failure to address material issues. Given the strict 21-day deadline to apply for permission to appeal from the date of the judgment, I recommend you make contact without delay.

As a disclaimer, I have no connection with Contestor Legal Services but I do occasionally communicate with Jackson Yamba.