ES Parking Enforcement Ltd

nochargenotice

Thanks IamEmanresu.


I was picking up on forum guidance to request the attendance of the Claimant, in person, at court.


I am likely to not make this request now, and rely on my defence, witness statement and skeleton argument now.


Thanks.

nochargenotice

Hi all,

Just an update. Skeleton argument and costs schedule submitted. Not long to court date now. Will update again when there is any news.

Thanks for all your guidance and support.

nochargenotice

Hi All,

So, the case was today. Hearing was in a "formal" court room, not an office.

Judge opened by stating the documents in her posession. Court had all but the defence (my) witness statement (I had hand delivered this to the court), but discussed with claimants rep that if they had a copy the Judge would be happy to continue. Claimants rep said they has all but defence (my) Skeleton Argument, but they had the exhibits associated with it. Claimants rep (Gladstones) were happy to continue.

In summary:

1. Practice direction compliance - Judge satisfied that the totality of the documents satisfied the spirit of the PD PAP requirements and would enable sufficient understanding of the claim.

2. The contract provided by ESPEL clearly granted them permission to charge for car parking on the land.

3. The matter that the ticket had flipped over - if the Defendant had checked the car before leaving the car park then they would have noticed the ticket was incorrectly displayed. Judge stated there seemed to be no issue between the parties that a contract was entered into, however the defendant had not complied with the terms of the contract.

Result: Judge found in favour of ESPEL.

Costs: Award to ESPEL of contract amount (£100), plus interest (reduced rate), plus legal fees, plus court costs. All to be paid in 14 days to Claimants solicitor.


Thanks for the help everyone on this forum.

Castle

Shocking decision !!

nochargenotice

Yes, indeed.

umbroshinpad

Hi everyone, hoping I can piggyback on this.

I received a postal parking charge from ES Parking for my car. I was not driving and I should be able to prove it easily. I thought it was a bluff so ignored it, thinking it'd go away. I was wrong. I got a letter from Gladstones, which I googled and saw numerous reviews from people saying they were bluffers, so I ignored that too.

I have now received an MCOL (I think.) I have followed the guidance on the newbie thread by replying online and saying I will defend the claim. I have also made a subject access request. I am now emailing Gladstones to inform them of this and ask for a hold on the case whilst this is processed. I was wondering if it is worth mentioning in this letter that I was not the driver and that I would not be able to disclose who was?

Additional question, if I was able to say who had been driving at the time, would the better defence be to maintain I was not driving therefore the contract was not with me, or transfer to the possible driver and let them make a defence based on unclear signage?

For context, this ticket is for using a disused car park, that was not blocked off and there was no obvious signs or deterrence from using this car park. Thanks for any help.

Umkomaas

Hi everyone, hoping I can piggyback on this.

Please don't. This is an old thread (over 12 months old) and advising more than one poster on any thread only leads to confusion.

Just start your own thread - copy and paste what you've already written above.

umbroshinpad

Oh sorry, I thought it was generally best to try keep these things together. I'll make a new post. Thanks!

Umkomaas

umbroshinpad wrote: »

Oh sorry, I thought it was generally best to try keep these things together. I'll make a new post. Thanks!

But we must have had over 100 separate ESP cases since this thread was started, it would be an utter mess if all the different cases were added to the thread, with all sorts of advice flying back and to across over 100 affected motorists.