DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Private parking tickets
*****************************************************
#Post#: 65506--------------------------------------------------
Re: Excel Parking PCN - Took longer than 5 minutes to pay -
Feethams Leise Car Park, Darlington
DIR By: DWMB2
Date: April 3, 2025, 4:38 am
---------------------------------------------------------
If the mediator genuinely said that you should complain about
them, that's nonsense. It is the claimant's job to prove you owe
the money (subject to the standard required by the court).
#Post#: 65515--------------------------------------------------
Re: Excel Parking PCN - Took longer than 5 minutes to pay -
Feethams Leise Car Park, Darlington
DIR By: b789
Date: April 3, 2025, 6:28 am
---------------------------------------------------------
I absolutely concur with [member=103]DWMB2[/member] above. What
the mediator said was not only legally incorrect, but also well
beyond their remit. The Small Claims Mediation Service (SCMS) is
not there to advise, pressure, or prejudge a case — especially
not by misrepresenting the burden of proof or the legal
framework.
[indent]"The burden would be on you to prove you didn’t breach
the terms and conditions..."[/indent]
This is legally wrong. In a civil claim for breach of contract —
such as a private parking claim — the burden is on the claimant
to prove:
[indent]• That a contract existed,
• That the terms were breached,
• That they suffered a loss or were entitled to a set amount as
a result.[/indent]
The defendant need not prove a negative (i.e. that they didn’t
breach anything). They are entitled to deny the allegations and
put the claimant to strict proof.
SCMS mediators are not legally trained, not judges, and not
permitted to offer:
[indent]• Legal advice,
• Legal assessments of either party’s case,
• Predictions of court outcomes,
• Threats or pressure to settle.[/indent]
They are supposed to facilitate discussion and pass offers
between parties in a neutral, confidential setting. Anything
more is a misconduct of role.
I strongly advise you to email the following complaint to the
HMCTS Small Claims Mediation Service at
scmreferrals@justice.gov.uk and also CC in yourself:
--- Quote ---
> To: HMCTS Small Claims Mediation Service
>
> scmreferrals@justice.gov.uk
>
> Subject: Formal Complaint – Misconduct by Mediator During
Mediation Call
>
> Dear Sir/Madam,
>
> I wish to raise a formal complaint regarding the conduct of
the mediator assigned to my recent small claims mediation call
in relation to a parking charge dispute.
>
> During the call, the mediator made the following statement:
>
> [indent]“The burden would be on you to prove you didn’t breach
the terms and conditions of the parking, not on them.”[/indent]
>
> This is both legally incorrect and entirely beyond the scope
of what a Small Claims mediator is authorised or qualified to
say. In civil proceedings, it is well established that the
burden of proof lies with the claimant, who must demonstrate
that a contract existed, that its terms were breached, and that
they are entitled to the sum claimed. A defendant is under no
obligation to disprove a breach, and any suggestion otherwise
misrepresents the legal framework.
>
> Furthermore, the mediator advised that the only way to avoid
court was to offer a settlement on the day, thereby implying
that refusal to settle would automatically lead to adverse
consequences. This was clearly an attempt to pressure me into
making a payment, contrary to the intended voluntary nature of
the mediation process.
>
> The call lasted no more than four minutes, during which the
mediator:
>
> [indent]• Misstated the law regarding burden of proof;
> • Asked me to explain my defence in a way that felt more like
cross-examination than facilitation;
> • Made a second call to advise that the claimant would now
proceed to court, again implying that a refusal to settle was
ill-advised.[/indent]
>
> Such conduct undermines the integrity of the mediation
process. Small Claims mediators are not legal advisers and
should not make legal pronouncements or strategic suggestions.
Their role is to act as a neutral facilitator of discussion
between parties, and not to coerce or mislead unrepresented
litigants.
>
> I request that this matter be investigated and that the
mediator concerned be reminded of the limits of their authority
and the importance of impartiality. I also ask that a record of
this complaint be retained in case the issue arises in future
proceedings.
>
> I look forward to your acknowledgment and to confirmation that
this matter is being properly reviewed.
>
> Yours faithfully,
>
> [Full Name]
> [Case Reference Number / Claim Number]
> [Date of Mediation Call]
--- End Quote ---
Please let us know the response.
#Post#: 68442--------------------------------------------------
Re: Excel Parking PCN - Took longer than 5 minutes to pay -
Feethams Leise Car Park, Darlington
DIR By: eggybread123
Date: April 24, 2025, 8:17 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Hi guys
Had the notice of transfer of proceedings today. Assuming I just
now sit tight and wait for next steps?
Quite surprised they are still going for it especially with all
the latest (& local) rulings for the same car park, same problem
and same court!
[attachment deleted by admin]
#Post#: 68541--------------------------------------------------
Re: Excel Parking PCN - Took longer than 5 minutes to pay -
Feethams Leise Car Park, Darlington
DIR By: Charitynjw
Date: April 24, 2025, 8:37 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
If it were me I'd take a punt at seeing whether a judge might
feel that this could be applied retrospectively.
HTML https://www.britishparking.co.uk/write/Documents/AOS/Sector%20Code%20Templates/sectorsingleCodeofPracticeVersion1.1130225.pdf
HTML https://www.britishparking.co.uk/write/Documents/AOS/Sector%20Code%20Templates/sectorsingleCodeofPracticeVersion1.1130225.pdf
This Code was first published in 2024. In
January 2025 the BPA and IPC created the
Private Parking Scrutiny and Advisory Panel
(the Panel). The Panel’s remit includes
oversight and review of The Code to uphold
standards in private parking management for
motorists and consumers. Consumer led
feedback identified an issue that the Panel
determined required an agile response and
which is reflected in this updated version of the
Code.
The Panel has created a new category of
Exempt Vehicle in Annex F.1. The category
relates to vehicles parked on land managed by
fixed camera technology. This change puts in
place protection to ensure that where a
genuine user is unable to make prompt
payment when entering a pay on entry car park
they do not receive a parking charge.
Annexe F.1
F.1 Exempt circumstances
Parking operators should take all reasonable steps to avoid
issuing a notice to exempt
classes of vehicle (listed below) by scrutinising images and
weighing the balance of doubt.
The Appeals Charter is a statement of the way certain grounds of
appeal based on an
error or mitigating circumstances will be handled by the parking
operator. There are 2
scenarios considered within the Appeals Charter:
Where the parking charge should be cancelled.
Annex F.1(j)
(j) a vehicle parked in a car park managed by fixed camera
technology (ANPR and/or
CCTV) for which payment has been made for the full period of
parking prior to the vehicle
leaving the car park.
NOTE: This exempt circumstance only relates to the timing of
making payment. It does not
exempt a motorist from parking charges which have been issued
for other contraventions
such as;
• Partial or under payment for the time parked,
• Where the driver has paid the tariff but made a major keying
error when registering their
vehicle,
• Parking in a bay where the vehicle was not permitted to park
(this list is not exhaustive)
#Post#: 68564--------------------------------------------------
Re: Excel Parking PCN - Took longer than 5 minutes to pay -
Feethams Leise Car Park, Darlington
DIR By: b789
Date: April 25, 2025, 4:12 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: eggybread123 link ---
>
>
> Had the notice of transfer of proceedings today. Assuming I
just now sit tight and wait for next steps?
>
> Quite surprised they are still going for it especially with
all the latest (& local) rulings for the same car park, same
problem and same court!
>
--- End Quote ---
You wait for the order from a judge at the local county court
where this has been allocated to (no need to redact as it's not
a secret).
#Post#: 71822--------------------------------------------------
Re: Excel Parking PCN - Took longer than 5 minutes to pay -
Feethams Leise Car Park, Darlington
DIR By: eggybread123
Date: May 16, 2025, 9:25 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Hello I’ve received a court date now, slightly worried! Any
advice I feel a bit out of my depth now.
[attachment deleted by admin]
#Post#: 71847--------------------------------------------------
Re: Excel Parking PCN - Took longer than 5 minutes to pay -
Feethams Leise Car Park, Darlington
DIR By: b789
Date: May 16, 2025, 12:22 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Stop worrying. I will still place money on DCB Legal
discontinuing on or before Wednesday 25th June. Even if, in the
very unlikely event that the trial fee is paid before then, you
have until 9th July to submit a Witness Statement. The claimant
is under the same deadlines.
Expect some correspondence or calls from DCB Legal offering to
settle for a reduced amount. Resist the urge to respond. There
is no requirement and is part of their modus operandi before
throwing in the towel once the penny finally drops that you are
not low-hanging fruit on the gullible tree.
#Post#: 77303--------------------------------------------------
Re: Excel Parking PCN - Took longer than 5 minutes to pay -
Feethams Leise Car Park, Darlington
DIR By: eggybread123
Date: June 20, 2025, 3:03 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Good morning!
A positive result, thank you for all your help!
[attachment deleted by admin]
#Post#: 77339--------------------------------------------------
Re: Excel Parking PCN - Took longer than 5 minutes to pay -
Feethams Leise Car Park, Darlington
DIR By: b789
Date: June 20, 2025, 6:02 am
---------------------------------------------------------
As predicted. Please post a copy of the N279 NoD.
*****************************************************
Page 3 of 3
DIR Previous Page