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
    • boulder17
    • By boulder17 2nd Jan 18, 8:03 PM
    • 2Posts
    • 0Thanks
    boulder17
    Help with claim form
    • #1
    • 2nd Jan 18, 8:03 PM
    Help with claim form 2nd Jan 18 at 8:03 PM
    Hi, I'm after guidance with my claim from Gladstones Solicitors. My Background is, I joined my local gym and was given a permit to display in my car to park on a private car park. I was never told I had to park in a designated bay and parked here for a few months until I received the fine through my door. I appealed the fine stating I'd parked using my permit and I had parked correctly. ES parking then replied starting I hadn't parked in a designated bay. I then checked with the gym who informed me I should have been told I could only park where the REAL GYM signs where situated. I believe this is unreasonable as it was a genuine mistake, the car park very quiet as this was a Sunday morning and there were lots of other spaces available.



    I've put together the defence below and would be grateful for any help


    Statement of Defence


    In the County Court Business Centre

    Claim Number: ___



    Between:



    Uk Car Park Management v ___



    DEFENCE





    Preliminary



    1. The Particulars of Claim lack specificity and are embarrassing. The Defendant is prejudiced and is unable to prepare a full and complete Defence. The Defendant reserves the right to seek from the Court permission to serve an Amended Defence should the Claimant add to or expand his Particulars at a later stage of these proceedings and/or to limit the Claimant only to the unevidenced allegations in the Particulars.



    1.1 The Claimant’s solicitors are known to be a serial issuer of generic claims similar to this one, with no due diligence, no scrutiny of details nor even checking for a true cause of action. HMCS have identified thousands of similar poorly pleaded claims.



    1.2 The Defendant believes the term for such conduct is ‘robo-claims’ which is against the public interest, demonstrates a disregard for the dignity of the court and is unfair on unrepresented consumers. I have reason to believe that this is a claim that will proceed without any facts or evidence supplied until the last possible minute, to my significant detriment as an unrepresented Defendant.



    2. The Particulars of Claim fail to refer to the material terms of any contract and neither comply with the CPR 16 in respect of statements of case, nor the relevant practice direction in respect of claims formed by contract or conduct.



    Background



    3) It is admitted that at all material times the Defendant was the owner of the vehicle in question.



    4) It is denied that any "parking charges or indemnity costs" (whatever they might be) as stated on the Particulars of claim are owed and any debt is denied in its entirety.



    5) It is denied that the Claimant has standing to bring any claim in the absence of a contract that expressly permits the Claimant to do so, in addition to merely undertaking 'parking management'. The Claimant has provided no proof of any such entitlement.



    6) It is admitted that the Defendant parked the vehicle on the material date, whilst using the gym and displaying a parking permit . It is denied that there was any relevant obligation upon the Defendant that can have been breached. The Defendant did not enter into any 'agreement on the charge', no consideration flowed between the parties and no contract was established.





    Authority to Park and Primacy of Contract



    7) It is denied that the Defendant was in breach of any parking conditions or was not permitted to park, in circumstances where the Lease/Tenancy Agreement does permit the parking of vehicle(s) on this land. The Defendant avers that there was at the very least, a prior and overriding grant of a licence to park, and indeed believes there was an absolute entitlement to park, deriving from the terms of the lease, which cannot be fettered by any alleged parking terms. The gym permit provides memberss with the right to park a vehicle on this private land, without limitation as to type of vehicle, ownership of vehicle, the user of the vehicle or any reference to any 'undesignated bays'.



    8) It is not admitted that the Claimant has contractual or other lawful authority to make contracts with members at this location, and/or to bring proceedings against the Defendant. The Claimant is put to strict proof. Further, and in the alternative, the Defendant avers that the Claimant requires the permission the owner of the relevant land - not merely another contractor or site agent not in possession - in order to commence proceedings.









    9) It is denied that the vehicle was “parked outside of designated area”. The Defendant parked legitimately in a bay, displaying a valid parking permit as instructed by real gym staff members used without penalty for many months.





    10) The is no site plan of bays in existence (the Defendant has checked with the site Managing Agents). If such a plan now exists, the Claimant is put to strict proof of its origin and on what basis/on whose authority this particular bay has been decided to be 'undesignated' after many years of normal use by residents, and how this change of use was communicated to residents and/or agreed.



    11) It is denied that there was any breach of contract or of any relevant parking terms. The Claimant's claim is wholly misconceived.

    12) The Defendant respectfully suggests that parking companies using the small claims track as a form of aggressive, automated monetary demands against gym users, alleging 'debts' for parking at the car park advised to by real gym staff members is not something the Courts should be seen to support.



    13) The Court is invited to take Judicial Notice of the fact that the Claimant's solicitors, Gladstones, is engaged in a course of conduct which involves issuing tens of thousands of totally meritless Claims, which are routinely dismissed by District Judges sitting in this Court, and other County Court hearing centres in all parts of England & Wales. The Court is therefore invited to refer the matter to the Designated Civil Judge, for consideration of the issuing an Extended Civil Restraint Order against the Claimant, pursuant to CPR Practice Direction 3.1(3).



    14) The Defendant denies the claim in its entirety, voiding any liability to the Claimant for all amounts due to the aforementioned reasons. The Defendant asks that the court gives consideration to exercise its discretion to order the case to be struck out under CPR Rule 3.4, for want of a detailed cause of action and/or for the claim having no realistic prospects of success.



    15) If the court is not minded to make such an order, then when Directions are given, the Defendant asks that there is an order for sequential service of witness evidence (rather than exchange) because it is expected that the Claimant will use its witness statement to provide the sort of detail which should have been disclosed much earlier, and the Defendant should have the opportunity to consider it, prior to serving evidence and witness statements in support of this defence.



    I confirm that the above facts and statements are true to the best of my knowledge and recollection.





    Signed



    Date

    Thanks for your help
Page 1
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 4th Jan 18, 12:55 AM
    • 52,869 Posts
    • 66,392 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    • #2
    • 4th Jan 18, 12:55 AM
    • #2
    • 4th Jan 18, 12:55 AM
    Yep looks good, nice research. A little bit long, but not badly so, IMHO.

    Remove 'lease/tenancy agreement' from this as you are not talking about a residential flat, it's the gym.

    7) It is denied that the Defendant was in breach of any parking conditions or was not permitted to park, in circumstances where the Lease/Tenancy Agreement does permit the parking of vehicle(s) on this land.
    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.

    • boulder17
    • By boulder17 12th Jan 18, 8:57 PM
    • 2 Posts
    • 0 Thanks
    boulder17
    • #3
    • 12th Jan 18, 8:57 PM
    • #3
    • 12th Jan 18, 8:57 PM
    Thank you for your reply. I'll remove the part above, much appreciated ��
    • KeithP
    • By KeithP 12th Jan 18, 9:33 PM
    • 5,143 Posts
    • 3,607 Thanks
    KeithP
    • #4
    • 12th Jan 18, 9:33 PM
    • #4
    • 12th Jan 18, 9:33 PM
    Your paragraph 10) mentions 'residents' twice.

    Perhaps that should be changed to something that reflects that it is customers of the gym that are affected.

    Also, same para, have you really checked with the managing agents?
    .
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

3,136Posts Today

8,325Users online

Martin's Twitter