Your browser isn't supported
It looks like you're using an old web browser. To get the most out of the site and to ensure guides display correctly, we suggest upgrading your browser now. Download the latest:

Welcome to the MSE Forums

We're home to a fantastic community of MoneySavers but anyone can post. Please exercise caution & report spam, illegal, offensive or libellous posts/messages: click "report" or email forumteam@.

Search
  • FIRST POST
    • Birdo26
    • By Birdo26 11th Jul 17, 7:58 PM
    • 53Posts
    • 24Thanks
    Birdo26
    HX Car Park Management, Gladstones Letter Before Claim
    • #1
    • 11th Jul 17, 7:58 PM
    HX Car Park Management, Gladstones Letter Before Claim 11th Jul 17 at 7:58 PM
    Hi,

    Received a PCN from HX Car Park Management

    Spoke to the bowling who said cameras were only installed recently. Signs are not clear at all. But said they can't cancel them.

    Didn't reply to it which was a bit silly but now have received a letter before claim from Gladstones solicitors asking to pay £160 within 14 days.

    Had a search on here and found a reply so sent that by email which I hope is ok. Said not to admit who was driving which i made sure I didn't.

    Just want to know what I should do now and what is likely to happen next.

    Thanks
    Last edited by Birdo26; 11-07-2017 at 8:40 PM.
Page 7
    • Birdo26
    • By Birdo26 8th Feb 18, 11:26 AM
    • 53 Posts
    • 24 Thanks
    Birdo26
    So can I be a lay rep or just mckenzie friend?
    • Lamilad
    • By Lamilad 8th Feb 18, 11:32 AM
    • 1,295 Posts
    • 2,563 Thanks
    Lamilad
    You should be allowed to be either, show the judge the lay rep order on your phone if you have to

    https://www.dropbox.com/s/rot92ktulu1jnc4/Lay%20Rep%20RoA.pdf?dl=0
    • IamEmanresu
    • By IamEmanresu 8th Feb 18, 11:38 AM
    • 2,054 Posts
    • 3,650 Thanks
    IamEmanresu
    You should be allowed to be either, show the judge the lay rep order on your phone if you have to

    https://www.dropbox.com/s/rot92ktulu1jnc4/Lay%20Rep%20RoA.pdf?dl=0
    Ushers who are the first point of contact tend not to know about the Lay Rep order but do understand a McKenzie so if you explain to the Usher as a McKenzie but when you are in front of the judge as about being a Lay Rep in a polite way and give the judge confidence you are helping the court and not hindering it.

    There is a lot of antagonism in the legal profession about fee collecting Lay Reps/McKenzies who just !!!!!! up the system - and as the Indigo case showed, it can go badly. So work with the judge.
    Idiots please note: If you intend NOT to read the information on the Notice of Allocation and hand a simple win to the knuckle dragging ex-clampers, then don't waste people's time with questions on a claim you'll not defend.
    • Birdo26
    • By Birdo26 8th Feb 18, 12:26 PM
    • 53 Posts
    • 24 Thanks
    Birdo26
    All done and dusted and we won! Will type up more when I!!!8217;m home. Thank you for all advice .
    • claxtome
    • By claxtome 8th Feb 18, 12:42 PM
    • 518 Posts
    • 581 Thanks
    claxtome
    Great to hear.
    Did you manage to claim costs?
    • Lamilad
    • By Lamilad 8th Feb 18, 12:49 PM
    • 1,295 Posts
    • 2,563 Thanks
    Lamilad
    Fantastic! Well done. Looking forward to your report. Please tell us which court and judge.
    • Birdo26
    • By Birdo26 8th Feb 18, 3:04 PM
    • 53 Posts
    • 24 Thanks
    Birdo26
    Ok, so I arrived at court with OH at around 5 past 11. As we got through to security the representative for HX was in front of us as I heard her mention our case. Followed upstairs to the usher where I asked about being a lay rep. At this point he seemed confused and said about a McKenzie friend. Started to get a little bit worried as I was the one who had done the paperwork and knew what to say.

    Once we into the courtroom the judge introduced herself and said I wanted to be a lay rep. Asked my OH why and then asked Gladstones if there was any objections. Nope so we were all set.

    Judge started by asking why HX had not attended themselves and seemed a bit annoyed they had not attended. Then asked if I would have like to asked questions of HX to which I said yes.

    She also said their was a preliminary matter that the NTK was not compliant to protection of freedoms act and started quoting parts. Luckily I had a copy on me and was frantically marking bits off. She didn't seemed satisfied but said we will continue anyway. ( The part in question is Section 4 Paragraph 9 so have a read through that).

    Gladstone rep went first saying that they had complied with this and that, showed their signage and a map of the car park. Their paperwork seemed to be a bit all over the placed which didn't impress the judge. Jude was making a lot of notes and then it was my turn to speak.

    I wrote a list of all the points I would like to make and just followed them through quoting evidence and then referencing it in the reports. Started with usual unclear signage and then showed her a copy of the Beavis signage. The explained that it was a new system and referenced her to the IPC CoP where it says their must be additional signage. The judge again went back to the NTK and started asking why it was non compliant. I just started quoting from the PoF act and said it seems a bit all over the place and poorly worded. Next I went through their WS and said the things like Elliot vs Loake was criminal case and not relevant. Also the non reply to communication. I also bought up the inflated cost of £160 and she asked HX rep to explain this. Which they couldn't as they weren't there. I also bought up the point that Gladstones owners also own the IPC creating a conflict of interest. HX rep sai directors are now different but didn't have the evidence.

    Judge asked if we had any questions to ask each other. HX rep asked my OH why she wouldn't admit who was driving. She just said it was almost a year ago and cant remember.

    Jude then run through what both parties had said. She then said as she believed the NTK in her view was not compliant with PoF she said case dismissed. She then carried on and said there were many reasons why the case could be dismissed. Signage, that the onus to prove the driver lay with HX and not us to prove our innocence. She seemed to be very against them from the beginning and knew we was not experienced in court so took time to explain things.

    Jude asked about costs and awarded £90, then asked if we had to pay for parking today and awarded another £4.70 for that as well.


    Hope all that makes sense haha.

    It was Southend County Court in front of DJ Molineaux.
    Last edited by Birdo26; 11-02-2018 at 10:42 AM.
    • muleskinner
    • By muleskinner 8th Feb 18, 3:09 PM
    • 108 Posts
    • 104 Thanks
    muleskinner
    Congrats - well done!
    • The Slithy Tove
    • By The Slithy Tove 8th Feb 18, 5:12 PM
    • 3,250 Posts
    • 4,720 Thanks
    The Slithy Tove
    She seemed to be very against them from the beginning
    Originally posted by Birdo26
    We've seen a number of court reports recently on the forums where the judges are less than impressed with the whole thing. I imaging that word is getting round amongst the DJs, and many of them will have noticed their courts being clogged up with these things in any case. I bet they're really frustrated when a poorly defended case comes up, as they know they are winnable for the defendant, but they can only go on what's in front of them.
    • Lamilad
    • By Lamilad 8th Feb 18, 5:39 PM
    • 1,295 Posts
    • 2,563 Thanks
    Lamilad
    Great stuff, Birdo. Thanks for that report

    HX.... You've been Gladstoned!
    • Birdo26
    • By Birdo26 8th Feb 18, 5:48 PM
    • 53 Posts
    • 24 Thanks
    Birdo26
    We've seen a number of court reports recently on the forums where the judges are less than impressed with the whole thing. I imaging that word is getting round amongst the DJs, and many of them will have noticed their courts being clogged up with these things in any case. I bet they're really frustrated when a poorly defended case comes up, as they know they are winnable for the defendant, but they can only go on what's in front of them.
    Originally posted by The Slithy Tove
    Doesn't surprise me. I overheard the rep saying shes had quite a few parking related ones this week already.
    • Umkomaas
    • By Umkomaas 8th Feb 18, 5:54 PM
    • 16,636 Posts
    • 26,004 Thanks
    Umkomaas
    Excellent report - thank you, and a great result. Well done!
    We cannot provide you with a silver bullet to get you out of this. You have to be in for the long run, and need to involve yourself in research and work for you to get rid of this. It is not simple. We will help, but can't do it for you.

    Give a man a fish, and you feed him for a day; show him how to catch fish, and you feed him for a lifetime.
    • IamEmanresu
    • By IamEmanresu 8th Feb 18, 6:05 PM
    • 2,054 Posts
    • 3,650 Thanks
    IamEmanresu
    Firstly congrats and secondly, this is a textbook defence and should be referred to for others.

    The OP has gone through the stages in a structured way that a judge would appreciate. Clearly far superior in preparation to a Gladstones rent-a-mouth who was hoping just to turn up and collect the fee.

    They won't be doing many more gigs now. Note the lie about their paperwork being POFA compliant. Shows how low this lot will sink to get a win.
    Idiots please note: If you intend NOT to read the information on the Notice of Allocation and hand a simple win to the knuckle dragging ex-clampers, then don't waste people's time with questions on a claim you'll not defend.
    • beamerguy
    • By beamerguy 8th Feb 18, 6:10 PM
    • 6,940 Posts
    • 9,031 Thanks
    beamerguy
    Well done Birdo26

    Probably most judges are fed up with the incompetent
    Gladstones who have become a blight in the courts
    and a liability to themselves

    Never mind Gladstones, another zapping for you
    RBS - MNBA - CAPITAL ONE - LLOYDS

    DISGUSTING BEHAVIOUR
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 9th Feb 18, 12:48 AM
    • 53,942 Posts
    • 67,624 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    Firstly congrats and secondly, this is a textbook defence and should be referred to for others.
    Originally posted by IamEmanresu
    Agreed, I will add it to the NEWBIES thread and maybe delete an old one or two when I have more time next week (half term). Especially good to see how this progressed from when Lamilad remarked:

    It looks like you've put a load of defences and witness statements into a blender then poured the mixture out above.



    Brilliant outcome, great court report to read. Well done to you and Mrs Birdo26!

    Another case won!

    PRIVATE PCN? DON'T PAY BUT DO NOT IGNORE IT TWO Clicks needed for advice:
    Top of the page: Home>>Forums>Household & Travel>Motoring>Parking Tickets, Fines & Parking - read the 'NEWBIES' FAQS thread!
    Advice to ignore is WRONG, unless in Scotland/NI.

Welcome to our new Forum!

Our aim is to save you money quickly and easily. We hope you like it!

Forum Team Contact us

Live Stats

2,607Posts Today

8,265Users online

Martin's Twitter