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
    • ljmw
    • By ljmw 12th Sep 17, 10:31 AM
    • 11Posts
    • 0Thanks
    ljmw
    PCM, Trace & Gladstones
    • #1
    • 12th Sep 17, 10:31 AM
    PCM, Trace & Gladstones 12th Sep 17 at 10:31 AM
    Hi guys,

    So I got two parking tickets in the space of a week for parking in a visitor bay down a residential road. There are a number of spaces clearly marked with large 'V' for Visitor, the rest are numbered which are assigned to the flats down that road.

    Both myself, my brother and friends of mine have previously had parking tickets and follow up notices from PCM (Parking Control Management UK Ltd) for parking in these spaces, which have not been followed up and is why I have ignored both of these notices until now. Worth noting that I still have no inclination to give in and pay.

    After a couple of letters from Trace Debt Recovery UK Ltd suggesting "final demand for outstanding payment", I yesterday received a very generic looking letter from Gladstones Solicitors insisting that I make payment within 14 days or their client may instruct them to take legal action in a County Court. Now whilst I am adamant I do not want to give in and pay, I am conscious that this is getting a little more serious. That being said, having read your 'newbies' thread, I feel a little less threatened!

    Worth mentioning at this stage that my car is a private lease hire, and my lease company are aware of the tickets, but I am receiving correspondence directly from these companies now.

    Timeline of events is as follows:
    10th May 2017 - 1st Parking Ticket Issued
    17th May 2017 - 2nd Parking Ticket Issued
    15th June 2017 - Parking Charge Notice Received Via Lease Company (IRO 1st Ticket)
    23rd June 2017 - Parking Charge Notice Received Via Lease Company (IRO 2nd Ticket)
    23rd June 2017 - Parking Charge Notice Received Direct from PCM (IRO 1st Ticket)
    30th June 2017 - Parking Charge Notice Received Direct from PCM (IRO 2nd Ticket)
    18th July 2017 - Demand for Outstanding Payment Received from Trace (IRO 1st Ticket)
    4th August 2017 - Demand for Outstanding Payment Received from Trace (IRO 2nd Ticket)
    7th August 2017 - Second Final Demand Letter Received from Trace (IRO 1st Ticket)
    25th August 2017 - Second Final Demand Letter Received from Trace (IRO 2nd Ticket)
    11th September 2017 - Letter Received from Gladstones Solicitors (IRO 1st Ticket)

    (....I imagine that I may receive the same letter from Gladstones IRO the 2nd Ticket in the next week or so if the above pattern is to be followed.)

    Basically, just after some advice on what my next move is. Should I appeal, or now that it is with Gladstones, should I just ignore and it will go away?
Page 1
    • Umkomaas
    • By Umkomaas 12th Sep 17, 10:40 AM
    • 15,566 Posts
    • 24,303 Thanks
    Umkomaas
    • #2
    • 12th Sep 17, 10:40 AM
    • #2
    • 12th Sep 17, 10:40 AM
    Basically, just after some advice on what my next move is. Should I appeal, or now that it is with Gladstones, should I just ignore and it will go away?
    1. Too late to appeal.
    2. From your description it looks like a debt recovery letter - and can be ignored.
    3. It is very unlikely to go away. The likelihood is it will be followed up by a 'Letter Before Claim' from Gladstones, which will need a robust response (and it still won't go away!) followed shortly thereafter by court papers which MUST NOT BE IGNORED! Come back if you get either.

    Over the past 18 months PCM UK have become quite litigious.

    http://www.bmpa.eu/companydata/Parking_Control_Management_UK.html

    Both myself, my brother and friends of mine have previously had parking tickets and follow up notices from PCM (Parking Control Management UK Ltd) for parking in these spaces, which have not been followed up and is why I have ignored both of these notices until now.
    Have you ever wondered why organisations employ these parasite companies?
    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.
    • beamerguy
    • By beamerguy 12th Sep 17, 10:47 AM
    • 6,353 Posts
    • 8,159 Thanks
    beamerguy
    • #3
    • 12th Sep 17, 10:47 AM
    • #3
    • 12th Sep 17, 10:47 AM
    Nothing to fear about Gladstones, they are already known
    to be highly incompetent. The courts are fed up with Gladstones

    Read this to see just how incompetent Gladstones are
    http://parking-prankster.blogspot.co.uk/search?q=GLADSTONES

    Lot's of info to show how weak they are
    Last edited by beamerguy; 12-09-2017 at 10:49 AM.
    RBS - MNBA - CAPITAL ONE - LLOYDS

    DISGUSTING BEHAVIOUR
    • ljmw
    • By ljmw 12th Sep 17, 10:55 AM
    • 11 Posts
    • 0 Thanks
    ljmw
    • #4
    • 12th Sep 17, 10:55 AM
    • #4
    • 12th Sep 17, 10:55 AM
    So do you suggest I sit tight and just let you know if and when I receive a 'Letter Before Claim' or Court Papers? And in the event of either happening, our move would be to write a robust response?

    Appreciate your help
    • beamerguy
    • By beamerguy 12th Sep 17, 11:00 AM
    • 6,353 Posts
    • 8,159 Thanks
    beamerguy
    • #5
    • 12th Sep 17, 11:00 AM
    • #5
    • 12th Sep 17, 11:00 AM
    So do you suggest I sit tight and just let you know if and when I receive a 'Letter Before Claim' or Court Papers? And in the event of either happening, our move would be to write a robust response?

    Appreciate your help
    Originally posted by ljmw
    Yes, and you will get help from the experts on here
    RBS - MNBA - CAPITAL ONE - LLOYDS

    DISGUSTING BEHAVIOUR
    • ljmw
    • By ljmw 12th Sep 17, 11:05 AM
    • 11 Posts
    • 0 Thanks
    ljmw
    • #6
    • 12th Sep 17, 11:05 AM
    • #6
    • 12th Sep 17, 11:05 AM
    Brilliant. Thanks very much.

    I will keep you updated.
    • Umkomaas
    • By Umkomaas 12th Sep 17, 12:01 PM
    • 15,566 Posts
    • 24,303 Thanks
    Umkomaas
    • #7
    • 12th Sep 17, 12:01 PM
    • #7
    • 12th Sep 17, 12:01 PM
    So do you suggest I sit tight and just let you know if and when I receive a 'Letter Before Claim' or Court Papers? And in the event of either happening, our move would be to write a robust response?

    Appreciate your help
    Originally posted by ljmw
    Was my advice not clear enough? Or perhaps you doubted it?

    3. It is very unlikely to go away. The likelihood is it will be followed up by a 'Letter Before Claim' from Gladstones, which will need a robust response (and it still won't go away!) followed shortly thereafter by court papers which MUST NOT BE IGNORED! Come back if you get either.
    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.
    • ljmw
    • By ljmw 12th Sep 17, 12:29 PM
    • 11 Posts
    • 0 Thanks
    ljmw
    • #8
    • 12th Sep 17, 12:29 PM
    • #8
    • 12th Sep 17, 12:29 PM
    Was my advice not clear enough? Or perhaps you doubted it?
    No, I don't doubt it and it was clear. I just wanted to be absolutely certain that I understood it correctly.
    • nosferatu1001
    • By nosferatu1001 12th Sep 17, 12:56 PM
    • 869 Posts
    • 983 Thanks
    nosferatu1001
    • #9
    • 12th Sep 17, 12:56 PM
    • #9
    • 12th Sep 17, 12:56 PM
    If you get a court claim you are not "writing a robust response"

    At that point you do 2 things:
    1) Acknowledge the claim ONLINE , NOT starting the defence (myst be left completely blank) and only contesting jurisdiction if you live outside England and Wales
    2) Writing a defence.
    • Parkhelp111
    • By Parkhelp111 12th Sep 17, 2:06 PM
    • 1 Posts
    • 0 Thanks
    Parkhelp111
    Gladstones -
    I have also received a similar letter from gladstones, saying I have 14 days to pay £160 from a parking ticket I have continually ignored. My ticket was also issued from parking control management limited. I am unsure wether to just ignore the letter or write a reply?
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 12th Sep 17, 3:07 PM
    • 51,562 Posts
    • 65,178 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    Gladstones -
    I have also received a similar letter from gladstones, saying I have 14 days to pay £160 from a parking ticket I have continually ignored. My ticket was also issued from parking control management limited. I am unsure wether to just ignore the letter or write a reply?
    Originally posted by Parkhelp111
    Please read the NEWBIES FAQS thread (my signature tells you where to click to get there).
    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.

    • ljmw
    • By ljmw 25th Sep 17, 8:46 PM
    • 11 Posts
    • 0 Thanks
    ljmw
    Hi Everyone.

    So I today received another letter from Gladstones. It again threatens legal action, but offers me the chance to make a payment for the original amount due (£160) within 7 days of the letter (which will be Wednesday as it is dated 20th Sept).

    It then goes on to describe the additional costs that will be incurred which amount to £202.25 if I fail to settle the charge.

    Could use some advice now as to what my next move is. Any guidance would be much appreciated.

    Thanks.
    • beamerguy
    • By beamerguy 25th Sep 17, 9:02 PM
    • 6,353 Posts
    • 8,159 Thanks
    beamerguy
    Hi Everyone.

    So I today received another letter from Gladstones. It again threatens legal action, but offers me the chance to make a payment for the original amount due (£160) within 7 days of the letter (which will be Wednesday as it is dated 20th Sept).

    It then goes on to describe the additional costs that will be incurred which amount to £202.25 if I fail to settle the charge.

    Could use some advice now as to what my next move is. Any guidance would be much appreciated.

    Thanks.
    Originally posted by ljmw
    GLADSTONES, the now well known incompetent solicitors

    Best advice is to reply stating that the keeper denies
    any debt and for Gladstones to prove the purported debt

    You are dealing with scammers here, treat them as such

    With their reply come back here
    RBS - MNBA - CAPITAL ONE - LLOYDS

    DISGUSTING BEHAVIOUR
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 25th Sep 17, 9:47 PM
    • 51,562 Posts
    • 65,178 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    Hi Everyone.

    So I today received another letter from Gladstones. It again threatens legal action, but offers me the chance to make a payment for the original amount due (£160) within 7 days of the letter (which will be Wednesday as it is dated 20th Sept).

    It then goes on to describe the additional costs that will be incurred which amount to £202.25 if I fail to settle the charge.

    Could use some advice now as to what my next move is. Any guidance would be much appreciated.
    Originally posted by ljmw
    Find the same letter shown in other threads and follow the example replies used before. Gladstones letters are discussed too often...
    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.

    • Umkomaas
    • By Umkomaas 25th Sep 17, 10:47 PM
    • 15,566 Posts
    • 24,303 Thanks
    Umkomaas
    I bet the reference number on that letter commences 3xxx rather than 1xxx.
    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.
    • ljmw
    • By ljmw 25th Sep 17, 11:11 PM
    • 11 Posts
    • 0 Thanks
    ljmw
    Here is a copy of the letter received today. Could someone please help me find the appropriate response. I'm struggling work out which one to use from the Newbies FAQ thread or other existing threads.

    ibb.co/caKJR5
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 26th Sep 17, 1:11 AM
    • 51,562 Posts
    • 65,178 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    If you are still learning how the forum works, approach it from Google instead for now, keywords:

    gladstones final reminder site:forums.moneysavingexpert.com
    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.

    • Umkomaas
    • By Umkomaas 26th Sep 17, 8:11 AM
    • 15,566 Posts
    • 24,303 Thanks
    Umkomaas
    https://ibb.co/caKJR5
    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.
    • ljmw
    • By ljmw 26th Sep 17, 3:24 PM
    • 11 Posts
    • 0 Thanks
    ljmw
    Would this be along the right lines of a response at this stage?

    I have spent my afternoon scrolling through various threads trying to educate myself on what my best move is...




    To Whom it may concern,

    Your client has failed to comply with its pre-action obligations set out in the Practice Direction - Pre-Action Conduct and Protocols by not providing me with a sufficient explanation of the claim and the core documents upon which it will rely. Examples of these are photographs of the car parked at the relevant time, showing its location and the location and wording of all and any signage, and the contract between your client and the landowner granting it rights to manage the parking on the relevant land.

    Your refusal to properly particularise your claim and to comply with the Practice Direction (part of the CPR) will prevent me from being able to submit a proper Defence to the claim.

    Please send me the documents by return - your client must have them, and must be intending to rely on them to prove its claim. The whole point of the Practice Direction is to avoid trial by ambush and to encourage the parties to put their cards on the table. The fact is, my car was parked in a visitor bay so there is no grounds for a claim which I'm sure your client is only too aware of.

    Your client's and your firm's conduct will be brought to the court's attention on costs - may I remind you that even a successful Claimant can be made to pay the Defendant's costs if they have not complied with the Practice Direction.

    Yours sincerely...
    • ljmw
    • By ljmw 26th Sep 17, 3:48 PM
    • 11 Posts
    • 0 Thanks
    ljmw
    Or I have also tailored this one to better fit my situation. Any advice on which would be better to use at this stage? I think i prefer this one as it carries a lot more weight....


    This is a formal response to the abovementioned case. I remind you of the overriding objective and - if your company really has a 'Legal Department' - then the qualified staff member will recognise that PCM has no cause of action in law, but that I do.

    When your company issues a 'parking charge' you do not use Schedule 4 of the POFA 2012, therefore you have no basis whatsoever to write to a registered keeper, except for the single purpose allowed under the DVLA KADOE rules, namely to 'enquire who was driving'. You must not use the data for any other purpose whatsoever, and certainly not to pursue a registered keeper as if the alleged charge was their liability in law.

    You have failed to supply any photographs or evidence of the driver, nor even the 'contract' (in this case presumably a sign), nor have you set out clearly, the basis upon which you are attempting to hold me liable.

    The driver's identity will not be supplied to a company like yours. There is no dispute that the driver was entitled to drive the car and I can confirm that they were. As the keeper of the vehicle, it is my right to choose not to name the driver, yet still not be lawfully held liable if an operator is not using or complying with Schedule 4.

    Should you seek to proceed with a claim I will apply for it to be struck out, due to CPR Part 3.4:

    (a) that PCM’s statement of case will disclose no reasonable grounds for bringing the claim;
    (b) that the statement of case will be an abuse of the court’s process or is otherwise likely to obstruct the just disposal of the proceedings; and
    (c) that there has been a failure to comply with a rule, practice direction or court order.

    Breaches of the Pre-action Practice Direction (“the PD”):

    Paras 3, 8 and 12 of the PD set out its purpose, which is to primarily to avoid litigation (para 8) by laying down a procedure which allows the parties to:
    - understand each other’s positions (para 3)
    - make decisions about how to proceed (para 3)
    - explore settlement/consider ADR (para 3)
    - support the “efficient management” of any proceedings and reduce costs (para 3)
    - “stocktake” and review their respective positions after following the PD by exchanging information, to see if proceedings can be avoided and to “at least” narrow the issues (para 12).

    Paras 6(a) & (c) oblige a Claimant to enter into a meaningful dialogue with a Defendant at an early stage by imposing specific obligations to:
    - explain the claim in a Letter before Claim, and
    - provide relevant core documents.

    The only 'core document' you have enclosed is a mock-up of a claim form in the name of myself, the registered keeper. This will be drawn to the attention of the presiding Judge at the County Court Business Centre and then at my local Court, should a spurious claim of yours manage to get that far.

    Since you have no cause of action against me as registered keeper, should you proceed with a claim I will file a counter-claim for not less than £500 in compensation for distress caused by your unwarranted demands arising from misuse of the data you obtained from the DVLA for one purpose, yet are now processing it for another purpose not covered by the KADOE regulations.

    I would like to draw your Legal Department's attention to a landmark 2017 judgment at the Leeds County Court, 3SP00071 - Blamires v LGO. This was a claim for damages including a matter of a breach of the DPA, for which an award of £2,500 was granted as compensation for distress. As is now relatively well known, the DPA’s original drafting appeared to preclude compensation for distress alone, but the Court of Appeal, in Vidal Hall & ors v Google[2015] EWCA Civ 311, it was held that this was contrary to the provisions of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union and that, accordingly, there was a right under the DPA to claim compensation for “pure” distress.

    The award in Blamires was of “Vidal Hall” compensation, with the judge saying there was ''no doubt in my mind that the data breaches have caused distress to the claimant in their own rights as well as as a result of the consequences that flowed.'' The judge awarded a further £2,500 aggravated damages because of the manner in which the Defendant conducted its case, including the fact that, notwithstanding being told by the Claimant that its conduct/data was wrong, it took nearly two years for the Defendant to admit the mistake.

    I expect PCM to now cancel this 'parking charge' and admit its mistake in attempting to misuse my data, and in trying to mislead me by suggesting that a registered keeper is liable for a non-POFA parking charge 'debt', and that I could be liable for escalated costs/legal fees. As you will be aware, the general costs rule in Small Claims is that there is no costs order.

    However, in support of my own counter-claim, I must remind you that under CPR Rule 27.14(2)(g):

    ''costs can be awarded where a party behaves unreasonably''.

    I refer PCM to paragraph 16 of the Practice Direction – Pre-Action Conduct:
    ''a party who has not complied with its pre-action obligations can be ordered to pay costs (even if the party has succeeded in its claim/defence) and there is also a power to remit/increase interest.''

    I expect to hear from you within 14 days to confirm that the charge is cancelled. Should you fail to cancel this PCN and/or pursue a baseless claim without supplying any evidence of any breach of a relevant contract or relevant obligation, or photographs, or the contract, or your basis for pursuing a registered keeper out with the POFA 2012, you may consider this adequate notice of my intention to file a counter-claim.

    All letters exchanged will be used in evidence in court.

    I reserve the right to include your client (landowner/agent) in any claim made, since that party remains jointly and severally liable for the conduct of its agents on their land.

    Yours faithfully,
    Last edited by ljmw; 26-09-2017 at 4:11 PM.
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

34Posts Today

4,270Users online

Martin's Twitter