Northampton Court Claim arrived (MCOL)

JackBasta · 10 November 2016 at 2:45PM

Just recieved a claim form through. Solicitor involved is Gladstones.

The "parking event" occured in Summer of 2012. Original notices (if there were any - I had various at the time) ignored and it went away until this year when letters were sent again (I guess Beavis case gave them impetus to try again?).

I replied asking for evidence (via email and letter) - they then sent though pictures of my car with parking noticed attached to windscreen.

I then looked though these forums and sent Gladstones an EMAIL, not a letter (a mistake?) where I asked them to fully comply with Practice Direction, stating that they hadn't

1. Sent a clear summary of facts,
2. How the "charge amount" has been calculated and justified
3. A list of documents on which their client intends to rely
4. Any form of ADR.

I got no response to that email, and now I have an N1SDT form though from Northampton (I believe this is known as an MCOL).

Any ideas on what my next actions should be. I know I need to reply to the MCOL (I can do this online), but should I just be paying it, or if I put up a standard defence, am I likely to win?
Will POFA 2012 help me for example?

Thanks

Jack

Half_way · 10 November 2016 at 2:54PM

Not enough information in your post to offer meaningful help.
For starters who was the ppc? And in who's car park was it?

Herzlos · 10 November 2016 at 3:04PM

JackBasta wrote: »

Will POFA 2012 help me for example?

Very much so; it only came into effect in October 2012, so legally, there's no way the keeper can be held liable, and you presumably didn't identify the driver. As this was over 4 years ago, with vague details, you can't be expected to remember who the driver actually was.

Even then, you've got all of the usual points about signage, contract, authority and so on.

You'll need to defend this to court though (they might drop out but don't rely on it), and you'll need to follow all of the court directives carefully in case you lose by default.

JackBasta · 10 November 2016 at 3:13PM

OK that's great news. No mention of a driver in any correspondance. I honestly couldn't remember anyway. So I acknowledge the MCOL, but do I need to put up a defence now?

I'm guessing that a lot of people fold and just pay up as as soon as they see official court papers, and the PPC is banking on that.

As I have the Northampton form through, what does this actually mean? The court case has started? Once I acknowledge, seeing as I have a robust pre-POFA defence, is it likely that they'll pull out?

And if they don't pull out, is there any chance whatsoever i could lose this?

Redx · 10 November 2016 at 3:52PM

read the court sub-section of the newbies sticky thread, especially the link to the bargepole explanation

and read the parking pranksters court guide book too

yes the court case has started , hence the MCOL from Northampton, read their website for explanations

I doubt they will "pull out" as Gladstones get paid either way

yes you could lose , some do , some dont , depends on the arguments, the defence , and the judge as well , its a lottery, with no guarantees for either side

JackBasta · 10 November 2016 at 4:05PM

OK. Sorry for the newbie questions. I've been though the stickies but don't understand a lot of it.

So the court case has started, I have 28 days to put together a defence. I can do that by trawling through forums. The fact that the alleged event was pre POFA should give me a solid defence? There were multiple people with access to the car at that time. I have no idea who was driving. It being pre POFA is a good thing yes?

If the pre POFA thing is solid, why would the PPC risk taking me to court?

Redx · 10 November 2016 at 5:06PM

pointless asking all the "what if" or "why" questions , nobody can really tell you what their intentions are or why they do it , maybe its a loss leader as it seems to cost them more than they win , if they win

you only get 28 days if you acknowledge it, otherwise its 14 days

as for the defence, the first defence can be either a skeleton defence with a fuller defence later, or a full defence from from the get go, YOUR CHOICE

there is no keeper liability before oct 2012 (POFA2012) so yes its a strong defence argument , one of many legal arguments that will be in your defence

I doubt that you have read the parking pranksters court guide in the time since my last reply , nor have you fully digested the bargepole explanation either

the PPC or their solicitors will try to use legal arguments to persuade a judge that you are still accountable and liable , ELLIOTT vs LOAKE was the main argument they try to use , but there could be others , especially as they tried to use those arguments before POFA2012 came in

rome wasnt built in a day ,so acknowledge the claim and spend 28 days learning about your defence (by reading countless similar threads that are ongoing or are concluded)

wondering why the PPC or Gladstones do what they do isnt going to help you and is deflecting you from what you must do in your defence

you were asked to provide the name of the PPC, and the name of the car park as well , so far you have omitted those details

this thread is similar http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.php?t=5550721 but may not be using pre-POFA2012 as an argument , although POFA may feature in the defence

either way , you are both at the initial stages of the court case

JackBasta · 10 November 2016 at 5:53PM

Redx wrote: »

you were asked to provide the name of the PPC, and the name of the car park as well , so far you have omitted those details

I've omitted the PPC and the car park, as I know they have the capability of looking on these forums, and don't want to give out any information that could later be used to hurt me.

What I can say is that the PPC is a local 2 man outfit based in my town. And the car park is a very small 6-car car park outside the office block where the PPC company actually reside. I know this because my father-in-law once had an office in the same block, and knows these charlatans. So this isn't ParkingEye or one of the big ones. If you still think me divulging the exact information will help, and would not harm my defence, let me know.

JackBasta · 10 November 2016 at 5:58PM

Further to this. the PPC are acting as an agent to the owner of the office block, of which this 6 car car park is part of

Half_way · 10 November 2016 at 6:55PM

I've omitted the PPC and the car park, as I know they have the capability of looking on these forums, and don't want to give out any information that could later be used to hurt me.

while this place is probably read by PPCs, its possible to be a little too paranoid.
As it is as long as you dont give away driver details, or any other such personal stuff ( ie driver home address etc) there shouldn't be a problem.
Its the PPCs ( and those that allow them to exist as parasites) that should be worried about getting hurt ( financially) and not you.
You need to be honest and truthful, a concept that escapes many, if not all Parasitic Parking Companies.
Nothing to hide, Nothing to fear.

Name of PPC: this is important as it will allow us to determine if its a BPA or IAS member, as such it will determine if an ADR regulation complaint appeals service was offered, the PPC may not even be in an ATA, and you may have slipped up by giving the driver details to them, either which way not an immediate problem.

You said it was/is an office car park, does the driver work there, weas he/she visiting? why was the vehicle parked there?
does the driver have a permit? is there a sign in system, key fob entry barrier other system?
Are you, or is the driver an employee of the company that took the PPC on? is the drivers employer/registered keepers employer a tenant on a site that took the PPC on?

And the car park is a very small 6-car car park outside the office block where the PPC company actually reside.

shame i dont work there, that would be an invitation for me to have some real fun and games

More questions:
Are there any signs in the car park? do these have planning consent/permission? do the signs have advertising consent?

you really have nothing to fear, however getting the PPC kicked out of the car park ( especially their home car park) , or charging the management company/whoever allowed the PPc to run rampant in the car park for your wasted time ( or at the very least giving them a bit of a headache) would be a pleasant victory

JackBasta · 21 November 2016 at 3:32PM

I've already acknowledged. I have until December 6th to get everything in.

The LBC contained the following paragraph

"The debts relate to the parking charges for which you are liable. Full details of the charges have previously been provided to you within the parking charge notices and/or noticed to driver/keeper that have been served upon you. The claimant will rely on these documents in the forthcoming action against you."

So the LBC is referring to previous documentation sent out, but doesn't actually contain any information itself. It also makes no mention of how the amount was calculated and justified, and contains no offer of any negotiation or ADR. Are all these things I can put in my defence?

Also, I can't remember if the original documents back in 2012 contained any offer of halving the amount if I paid within 14 days. Others I've seen have done that. If they did, does that count as negotiation or ADR?

Northampton Court Claim arrived (MCOL)

Comments

Categories

Get our FREE Weekly email full of deals & guides - and it’s spam-free