Please help with park with ease/IAS appeal

Zero_Gravitas

seasailor46 wrote: »

So nearly 8 months on out of the blue yesterday I received a letter from Gladstones solicitors informing me that their client has instructed them to recover the total amount due.

They are asking for £100 within 14 days or they go on to say "our client may now instruct us to take legal action against you in the county court"

The letter then highlights how much I am likely to pay if it goes to court (£202.25) and warns that a judgememt will seriously affect my ability to obtain future credit.

I think it's completely wrong that these parking companies have 6 years in which to pursue you, the trouble is we had a clear out recently and I'm sure a lot of the correspondence with PWE has been thown out, plus I've forgotten what my original objection was now...which is probably why they leave it a few months before trying their luck again.

Any further advice would be very welcome as to what I should do next.

The key word here is "may"... They do not say "will".

So, continue to ignore completely. The time to stop ignoring is if you receive a proper LBCCC (Letter before County Court Claim), at which point come back to this thread to ask for more advice.

hoohoo

I would write to gladstones

Dear Gladstones,
Please confirm if this is a letter before claim or if this is still at the debt collector stage?

In any case, I confirm that I was not the driver at the time of the parking event. The IAS have confirmed that the parking charge was not POFA 2012 compliant and so keeper liability does not apply. As there was no keeper liability and I was not the driver there is not cause of action against me. Please therefore refer the debt back to the operator. I look forward to your confirmation that the charge against me will be cancelled.



You can beef this up by actually including proof you were not the driver.

seasailor46

Thank you for the help/replies, I did reply to Gladstones as suggested and informed them that the PCN was not POFA 2012 compliant and as keeper I therefore have no liability.

Today I received a letter from them again saying as I have made no attempt to nomiate the driver I should refer to Elliot V Loake (1983) Crim LR 36 which established that the registered keeper of a vehicle is presumed to be the driver unless they suffiently rebut the presumption.

The letter goes on to say their client (park with ease) intends to continue to pursue me as the driver. The letter also claims if payment is not received within 14 dys a claim will be issued against me and their client will seek to recover its costs.

This all seems totally outrageous, am I missing something here? The PCN was not POFA 2012 compliant (even the IAS said that!) The Data Protection Act was breached in obtaining my details but I'm presumed guilty unless I prove my innocence? If Park with Ease haven't followed the correct procedure and haven't for that matter even complied with the IPC code of practise (for which they are a member) why should I be bullied into naming the driver?

Question is what should I do now? Can I tell Gladstones to stop sending these letters or else I will take action against them? But what about the line that says "a claim will be issued against you and our client will seek to recover its costs" ?

Redx

I thought you would be aware by now that this is an unregulated industry and until something is tested in court then its all smoke and mirrors

ie:- you have the right to defend yourself on these matters using those legal arguments in a court of law, where a judge, and only a judge , will decide

its at that time you can have those doctrines and rules and laws examined in the context of this parking charge, including POFA2012

gladstones can say whatever they like, you cannot stop them from doing so, for 6 years, until its statute barred , so I would put those questions to a judge, if it ever gets that far

this is CIVIL law , not Criminal law

you do not have to name the driver, there is no legal framework that can make you name the driver, so if they havent followed POFA2012 then that would be your first (or second) defence point, after locus standii

salmosalaris

seasailor46 wrote: »

Thank you for the help/replies, I did reply to Gladstones as suggested and informed them that the PCN was not POFA 2012 compliant and as keeper I therefore have no liability.

Today I received a letter from them again saying as I have made no attempt to nomiate the driver I should refer to Elliot V Loake (1983) Crim LR 36 which established that the registered keeper of a vehicle is presumed to be the driver unless they suffiently rebut the presumption.

The letter goes on to say their client (park with ease) intends to continue to pursue me as the driver. The letter also claims if payment is not received within 14 dys a claim will be issued against me and their client will seek to recover its costs.

This all seems totally outrageous, am I missing something here? The PCN was not POFA 2012 compliant (even the IAS said that!) The Data Protection Act was breached in obtaining my details but I'm presumed guilty unless I prove my innocence? If Park with Ease haven't followed the correct procedure and haven't for that matter even complied with the IPC code of practise (for which they are a member) why should I be bullied into naming the driver?

Question is what should I do now? Can I tell Gladstones to stop sending these letters or else I will take action against them? But what about the line that says "a claim will be issued against you and our client will seek to recover its costs" ?

Stating you were not the driver in a statement of truth, on the understanding that telling porkies is contempt of court,would be taken as adequate proof that you were not the driver on the balance of probabilities absent any evidence from the Red Cow gang to tip the balance ,regardless of Elliott v Loake

seasailor46

Hello again!

Well I came home today (after a rotten day) to find a claim form from the County Court Business centre on my mat. The issue date is the 22nd January.

I'm busy trying to find all the relevant information as I believe I have a limited time to respond, therefore I'd really appreciate a quick heads up as to what I should do next?

Redx

read the COURT section in post #1 of the NEWBIES sticky thread

then you go online to say you will defend it (also checking its real and valid) and get an extra 14 days to prepare a skeleton defence , discussed heavily in this court claim thread (but a different PPC)

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/5398916

seasailor46

Thanks Redx, it may be my eyes after last nights wine intake but I cannot see a COURT section in the NEWBIES thread, it appears to end with dealing with debt collector letters and complaints?





I read through the paperwork last night and will be acknowledging the claim online this evening but will no doubt need some assistance in putting the defence wording together! Thanks again for all the help on here.

ManxRed

If it's any consolation, Gladstones don't have a great record in court claims. I don't think they've won one yet where the defendant presented a forum-assisted defence. Go to the parking prankster website and look up some blogs relating to them.

I'm sure you'll get help with the defence.

Coupon-mad

seasailor46 wrote: »

Thanks Redx, it may be my eyes after last nights wine intake but I cannot see a COURT section in the NEWBIES thread, it appears to end with dealing with debt collector letters and complaints?

It's low down in post #1 of the sticky thread. I have made it short & sweet with only recent & relevant stuff, post the Beavis decision.