Letter before claim GPB Solicitors

Guys_Dad

Gardener48 wrote: »

The main thing though is this. Right across these threads people are saying that these charges are unenforceable. Well, are they or aren't they??????????????

If you are asking if any PPCs have been successful in court, the answer is "Yes".

But these are infinitesimal and are usually connected with bad defences, idiot judges or defendants not turning up.

But it depends upon your definition of enforceable. The invoices "for excess parking" are subject to the same level of legal proof and process as any other disputed debt.

Gardener48_2

Thanks Guys dad.
These two occasions were my son (really) parking at college without a permit. I don't dispute that except that there was no signage etc
At the time the vehicle was registered in my name though he was fully insured etc.
PCN have constantly stated and assumed I was the driver. I was told that they have no right to demand that I name the driver.
As previously stated, PCN, Roxburgh, Graham White, and now GPB have, between them got the dates mixed up. To such an extent that this letter before claim refers to dates which bare no relation to the original tickets
Surely, if this goes to court it will be dismissed?

Scouse_Magic

Gardener48 wrote: »

Scouse Magic.
Thanks for the info re; Roxburghe sharing an office with GPB (are you certain about that?). Very fishy. One of the things which concerned me most was that GPB checked out as a reputable, kosha firm but this information changes that. Check out their website though, it's very impressive.

LazyDaisy,
The more I look at the letter, following your detailed advice, the less worried I am. I've just noticed that the letter isn't even signed. Well, it is, bit the signature is GPB solicitors. Their website certainly gives the impression of a highly professional outfit. Strange then, that the letter is so woeful. They couldn't be allowing Roxburghe to use their name under license could they?

I have stuffed roxburghe twice in court, they dont like me very much, as a result my hospital trust had a meeting with steve dargonne (not gary osner md) they promised new solicitors after sobell was humilliated... All of a sudden they linked up with GPD, a reputable firm in stratford upon avon who denied any connection then suddenly pop up on the law societs website as being in both statford upon avon and roxburghes address.... I smell a rat and look forward to taking them on

Scouse_Magic

Gardener48 wrote: »

Scouse Magic.
Thanks for the info re; Roxburghe sharing an office with GPB (are you certain about that?). Very fishy. One of the things which concerned me most was that GPB checked out as a reputable, kosha firm but this information changes that. Check out their website though, it's very impressive.

LazyDaisy,
The more I look at the letter, following your detailed advice, the less worried I am. I've just noticed that the letter isn't even signed. Well, it is, bit the signature is GPB solicitors. Their website certainly gives the impression of a highly professional outfit. Strange then, that the letter is so woeful. They couldn't be allowing Roxburghe to use their name under license could they?

Trust me Im somewhat of an expert when it comes to Roxburghe.. You can look on the website of The Law Society under the headings of "Find a Solicitor" or "Firm" and you will see both Sobell & GPB registered at roxburghes address and not surprisingly roxburghe call staff take all calls pmsl.....The previous set up was Roxburghe staff sending out thousands of Graham White letters with photo copied signatures of sobell which appeared to be a bona fide company....In reality there was a part time legal secretary called misbah zahid (Very arrogant too) No wonder the Judge in my wife's case couldn't get through to them either !!

When you write your letter, demand a copy of the contract between GPB and the Actual landowner that allows them to issue legal proceedings as roxburghe are not the landowner...They normally do pursue claims in a shocking manner that even the judge could not believe how much of a mess it was, so just have it struck out, and dont forget to make a note of all of your costs..

Scouse_Magic

I wouldn't worry about going to Court, its a fabulous day out, and the small claims track is very informal in fact very helpful.......Just think how the claim would read...GPB who act on behalf of Roxburghe who act on behalf of PCN NW who do not own the land in this matter :rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:

Scouse_Magic

Gardener48 wrote: »

Thanks Guys dad.
These two occasions were my son (really) parking at college without a permit. I don't dispute that except that there was no signage etc
At the time the vehicle was registered in my name though he was fully insured etc.
PCN have constantly stated and assumed I was the driver. I was told that they have no right to demand that I name the driver.
As previously stated, PCN, Roxburgh, Graham White, and now GPB have, between them got the dates mixed up. To such an extent that this letter before claim refers to dates which bare no relation to the original tickets
Surely, if this goes to court it will be dismissed?

Just for your entertainment I have copied & pasted a part of the Judgement in my wife's case in March 2013....picture the scene...Roxburghe & Sobell had just been humiliated in court by me, then they realised they had to come back to to the same court to take on my Mrs, and the entire claim was incorrect, and Roxburghe & Sobell were acting like babies and refused to pay the judgement.

It was not so un-surprising that proceedings were suddenly dropped......just a shame really that he did not file the correct form and offer my wife's costs to that point!

The wife counter claimed, the initial particulars of claim which was totally wrong.......Sobell said they related to one car .....but the roxburghe letters stated two different vhehicles.

For your purusal and enjoyment I post some of the judges comments in my wife's case...................

JUDGE "The Claimant notwithstanding being advised by the Court that the application to
adjourn was not being granted, makes no appearance or indeed any
communication with the Court whatsoever. My reaction to that is that any firm
of solicitors, and it may well be that Mr Sobell is the only solicitor employed by
that firm, but notwithstanding that, any solicitor in practice engaged in litigation
who simply fails to attend Court, does not take notice of a message that was left
on his firm’s answering machine, even if he is hospitalised, as per the 15th March
application avers, must have some administrative staff to ensure that whilst he is
personally unable to work, that the work is going to be covered. The world does
not stop simply because a solicitor goes into hospital.
And I am not impressed by the absence of any response to the telephone message that was left and the fact that he even thought it was appropriate to apply for an
adjournment in the first place when it would have been easy to engage either
another solicitor by way of an agency agreement or simply to instruct counsel to
attend on behalf of the client.
So I am dealing with this counterclaim in the absence of anything from the Claimant and also, as Miss Fever has pointed out, in the absence of any
documents put forward in defence of the counterclaim.
The way in which the claim was being pursued is quite frankly a mess.


The second complaint that Miss Fever makes is that in the letter before the claim and this is from Graham White Solicitors, the letter dated the 23RD October 2012, it
says this:
“Registered keeper details were obtained from the DVLA and my
client wrote to the registered keeper requesting either payment or
details as to who was driving the car at the time of the
unauthorised parking events. During various recorded
communications between the registered keeper, you, and my client
you have admitted to being the driver at the time of these events.
Both my client and my firm have written to you on several
occasions to request payment of the above debt and to date you
have not paid despite offering to pay.”

Well, those two assertions are clearly both wrong. And it is a matter of concern that a solicitor would write to a Defendant setting out not one but two grossly
inaccurate assertions.


Needless to say Judgement awarded in my wife's favour for £235.00 and £180.00 costs awarded.


Now then, old Sobell decided he would appeal this.....and was shot down in flames by His Honour Judge Scarrat...." There being no realistic prospect of success".


I then turned the tables on them, threatening them with a warrant of execution.....They ignored me .....The claimant (hospital) paid out in the end!

Although in the first case Roxburghe paid......

Custard_Pie

trisontana wrote: »

Don't forget this is a small claims court, so forget what you see on TV with wigs, gowns and very formal procedures. The small claims court is very informal. No wigs or gowns, just people sitting round a table. So don't be intimidated.

Agreed, no one should ever be scared of going to The Small Claims. It's a Court in name and powers only and like has been said above is very informal, over the table meeting.

I hate the fact that these people are allowed to pray on people's fears with bullying tactics and intimidation.

Gardener48_2

Thanks All, I have written a letter demanding all which you mention above. If GPB are as repurable as they claim to be then I can't see them lending their name to this shambles for much longer. If they fail to supply what I have requested, landowner, contracts, losses etc. Can they still get a date in Court?

Scouse_Magic

Gardener48 wrote: »

Thanks All, I have written a letter demanding all which you mention above. If GPB are as repurable as they claim to be then I can't see them lending their name to this shambles for much longer. If they fail to supply what I have requested, landowner, contracts, losses etc. Can they still get a date in Court?

Hi there,
Yes is the answer to your question, anyone can start a Northampton County Claim form online for £15..When you receive the papers they explain what you can do..E.G. submit a defence within 14 days or acknowledge service and request 28 days.. You will also get an allocation questionnaire which is pretty self explanatory and say no to ADR (Alternative dispute resolution.) The claim then gets transferred to your local court and the claimant has to pay a hearing fee £55 i think !

If the claimant drops the case they must do so on the correct form and pay all your costs up to that point.. Otherwise all parties submit to the court and each other the evidence which they intend to rely upon in court (The Bundle) no later than 14 days prior to the hearing. Note: If you lodge a counter claim, the claim will be heard regardless although you will have to pay the hearing fee but that gets added to your costs.

You have enough ammo to really go to town here, keep checking with your court that there have been no changes.....don't forget to mention how roxburghe are demanding money from you, and explain that their CC License is refused to renew by the OFT for previous irregularities, and they refused to pay a court order in the matter of East Kent Hospitals V Fever 2013

There will also be a serious question by the court in the remote chance the claim is actually correct, about what the claimants authority is that states that the Registered Keeper is liable as one of the events is pre october 2012.

If they are in Court pursuing the RK then they may well be in multiple breaches of the OFT Guidelines.

I have other info when the time gets nearer

Kind Regards :T

Coupon-mad

Gardener48 wrote: »

Hi,

Very long running saga. Two 'fines dating back to Jan 2012 and Jan 13.
I have ignored everything so far from Rowborough, Graham White etc. The usual clowns sending me hopelessly inaccurate, badly worded letters and demands.
Last week though I received a Letter before claim from GPB Solicitors stating that their client WILL pursue this in court.
The usual 'respond within two weeks' etc.
I intend to ignore this one as well as I expect that it is yet another hollow threat but this one is worded differently and has me a little worried.
Is there any experience out there of GPB? Are they likely to take this further? Should I be worried?
Many thanks in anticipation.

I suspect the PPC has failed to establish Keeper Liability anyway, in terms of dates/detail on their Notices so far:

http://www.parkingcowboys.co.uk/keeper-liability/

Similar thread to this one, you may like to pm this OP to compare notes each time you send or receive a letter!

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/4728830


HTH