Claim Form received. Here's what happened.. (Parking Control Management)

dazster

pixeLm wrote: »

I tried finding the owner from the land registry website, but I couldn't get any results back with the postcodes I found on the map. I will try other ways later on.

Thank you very very much for your lengthy reply.

I managed to draft something up based on your comments and the failure to mitigate the loss mentioned by Unicorn51, but I don't know if it's in the right "spirit". I'm posting it here so you can provide some feedback if possible, and I'll submit it tomorrow. As per your advice I'm only dealing with evidence provided by them, and not adding anything else to the defence.

Also one recommended approach I have read is that in the defence I should only deny the Particulars of Claim, and leave all other points I have in my favour for the court day. What is your opinion on that?

here goes, please feel free to comment on the content as well as the grammar or expressions, as English is not my mother tongue

---

The claim is denied in its entirety. I assert that I am not liable to the Claimant for the sum claimed, or any amount at all, for the following reasons:

According to the photographic evidence provided by the Claimant I believe that

1) The signage at the location is not readable from within the vehicle due to the very small font used on the signs and the height at which they are mounted. A driver could not have known that stopping is forbidden unless the vehicle comes to a full stop and the driver exits the vehicle in order to get closer to the signs to read them.

2) The wording on the signs on the location mentioning the £100 charge was written with small characters making it non readable from a distance between the driver and the sign.

3) The wording on the signs that can be read only from a close distance mention the following: “No stopping or waiting outside of the marked bays at anytime”. The sentence indicates forbidding and not a contractual offer, which the Claiming is claiming a breach of.

4) A driver must be allowed sufficient time to read the sign, which obligates him or her to exit the vehicle to do so, understand the statements and conditions that apply, and choose to accept or reject them. If no sufficient time is provided to the driver, there can be no entry to a contract between the driver and the Claimant.

According to the date and time-stamps of the photographic evidence, a total time of approximately 2.5 minutes is elapsed between the photographs that the vehicle reached a full stop and the last photograph showing the vehicle leaving the area. That time includes a lengthy conversation made between the driver and the operators on site that is also shown in the photographic material provided by the Claimant.

In addition, the photographs show that there are multiple signs displayed on site behind the signs placed by the Claimant, for which a driver would require additional time to read and understand in order to conclude if parking, stopping or disembarking is allowed and under which conditions.

5) The road is marked with double yellow lines, which causes confusion as for which purpose the driver is allowed to stop, given the fact that unless stated clearly in road signs, picking up or dropping off passengers on double yellow lines is permitted in public highways.

6) The photographers were stationed very close to the vehicle and were in direct contact with the driver, yet they did not direct the driver to move on. I consider this as a clear indication that there was no attempt to prevent or deter a breach of contract, but the only motive in their actions was to entrap the driver for profit.
Additionally regarding the above, the evidence show that there was no attempt for Mitigation of Loss, which according to English law “The rule of mitigation requires a claimant to take steps to minimise its loss and to avoid taking unreasonable steps that increase its loss. An injured party cannot recover damages for any loss (whether caused by a breach of contract or breach of duty) which could have been avoided by taking reasonable steps.”

7) As shown in the photographs the vehicle was never parked. Disembarking a passenger cannot be considered as parking. As Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act does not apply, only the driver and not the keeper can be held liable. There is no admission regarding the identity of the driver during the events taken place on the mentioned date.

8) The sign shown in the Claimants evidence states that the amount of £100 is to be paid by the violators of the terms. Yet the Claimant is requesting indemnity costs without providing detailed explanation on what the additional costs are, if and how these costs occurred and the reason for which the defendant is held liable for them. I believe that an effort is made to inflate the value of the claimed amount in order to intimidate the defendant.

9) The Claimant is not the lawful occupier of the land and it is disputed that the Claimant has authority to operate and issue charges on the mentioned location in its own name. If the Claimant believes otherwise I request for the Claimant to produce the full, unredacted contract with the lawful occupier which authorises him to so operate in his own name.

---

Thanks again everyone for the time you're spending on reading this! I'm amazed by this community! :T

You've used the exact points I gave you but for some reason you've hacked the wording around to make it more flowery and harder to understand. IMNSHO what I wrote was much better.

Personally I wouldn't mention mitigation of loss (I deliberately avoided doing so) because as soon as a judge notices a hook labelled "Beavis" he might decide to hang his hat on it.

pixeLm

dazster wrote: »

You've used the exact points I gave you but for some reason you've hacked the wording around to make it more flowery and harder to understand. IMNSHO what I wrote was much better.

Personally I wouldn't mention mitigation of loss (I deliberately avoided doing so) because as soon as a judge notices a hook labelled "Beavis" he might decide to hang his hat on it.

Thanks. I was thinking not to mention any previous case unless they mention it during the court day.

For the changes, you are right. It was late, I was tired and thought to use more flowering as you say. Maybe it's not for the best. I've adjusted back the style to be closer to your initial points.

***

[FONT=&quot]The claim is denied in its entirety. I assert that I am not liable to the Claimant for the sum claimed, or any amount at all, for the following reasons:

According to the photographic evidence provided by the Claimant I believe that

1) The signage on the location is not readable from inside a vehicle. A driver cannot possible know that stopping is forbidden unless he stops and exists the vehicle in order to get closer to the signs to carefully read them.

2) The wording on the signs on the location mentioning the £100 charge was written with small characters making it unreadable from almost any distance.

3) The wording on the signs mention the following: “No stopping or waiting outside of the marked bays at anytime”. The sentence indicates forbidding and not a contractual offer, yet the claim is for breach of contract.

4) A driver must be allowed sufficient time to read the sign, which means exiting the vehicle to get closer, understanding the terms and conditions that apply and choosing to accept or reject them. If sufficient time is not allowed, then no contract is being entered into.

The operator’s own photographs show an elapsed time of 2.5 minutes between the photograph that the vehicle had stopped, and the last photograph showing the vehicle leaving the area. That time includes a lengthy conversation made between the driver and the operators on site, which is also shown in the photographs.

In addition, the photographs show that there are multiple signs displayed on site behind the signs placed by the Claimant, for which a driver would require additional time to read and understand in order to conclude if parking, stopping or disembarking is allowed and under which conditions.

5) As shown in the photographs the road is marked with double yellow lines. This is misleading: on public highways picking up or dropping off passengers is permitted on double yellow lines. Given the fact that the signs are unreadable from within the vehicle, there is nothing to indicate to a driver that the double yellow lines have any meaning other than their standard, public highway meaning.

6) The photographers were stationed very close to the vehicle and were in direct contact with the driver, yet they did not direct the driver to move on. Clearly this is not a genuine attempt to prevent or deter a breach of contract but is entrapment for profit.

7) According to the photographs the vehicle was never parked. Disembarking a passenger cannot be considered as parking. As Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act does not apply, only the driver and not the keeper can be held liable. No admission has been made or will be made as to who was driving.

8) The charge stated on the hard to read sign is £100. Yet the Claimant is requesting additional indemnity costs without providing detailed explanation on what they are, if and how they have been occurred and the reason for which the defendant should be held liable for them. It is suggested that this is nothing but a means of artificially inflating the value of the claim.

9) The Claimant is not the lawful occupier of the land and it is disputed that the Claimant has authority to operate and issue charges on the mentioned location in its own name. If the Claimant believes otherwise I request for the Claimant to produce the full, unredacted contract with the lawful occupier which authorises him to so operate in his own name.

***


Does it look better?

[/FONT]Unicorn51 I think I wont mention previous cases, but will study harder until the court day so I'm prepared for any references and have more points in case I need to defend myself further.

Sorry I'm not replying imminently. I can't really reply properly while at work or on mobile.

Thank you so much for replying people. Your support is huge.

If you agree I'll go through with the defence above later tonight!

p.s. should I mention also something about the legal costs of £50 that they are requesting in the claim or is it covered by point number 8?

pixeLm

Defence statement sent.

I would like thank all of you for helping me out during the whole thing!

I will keep this threat open and I will provide updates as soon as I get a response.

Goodnight!

pixeLm

Hello again!

I've got some updates: So I received a confirmation that my defence was received and that a copy was sent to the claimant as well.

Now I received the completed Directions Questionnaire from Gladstones Solicitors, as they act for the Claimant.

In their questionnaire it says the following:

- Do you agree to this case being referred to the Small Claims Mediation Service? --> No
- Do you agree that the small claims track is the appropriate track for this case? --> Yes
- About the hearing:
- Hearing venue: Request for special direction: (they had a separate sheet of paper attached that said)

" The matter will be considered on paperwork without a hearing. The parties attendant is not required and the judge will determine the matter based upon the documents and evidence supplied and any written representations received "

and then they say "If the Defendant does not consent to the special direction then we request the claim be transferred to the Claimant's home court."
-Expert evidence: Are you asking for the court's permission to use the written evidence of an expert? --> No

-Witnesses: How many witnesses, including yourself, will give evidence on your behalf at the hearing? --> 1

-Hearing: asking if for any dates they wont be able to attend the hearing --> No

---

In addition I received another letter written "Notice of Proposed Allocation to the Small Claims Track"
(I will attach an image) but there is no County Court print on this one. It's just a printed page but the info on it are correct. Is this letter from the court or from the Solicitors?

In the same envelope there is the Directions questionnaire for me to fill in, and the "defendant" option is circled. It says on the top "in the NORTHAMPTON CCBC" and the claim number.

My questions are: Do I accept their proposal or do I reject and do my day in court? I would assume the second but I'm eager to hear your advice!

For the questions I need to answer:

Mediation Service: It doesn't matter as the Claimant has already ticked "no". But is it better for me to say "yes" ?

Is small claims track the appropriate track for this case? : I'm assuming I will answer "Yes"

Hearing Venue: I should request for the hearing to be held at the Defendant's home court (right?)

Expert Advice: No

Witnesses: "how many witnesses including yourself, will give evidence on your behalf at the hearing?" Since there is no confirmation on who the driver was, I should write zero? Or 1 since it says including yourself?

Hearing dates: I'll put what dates I won't be available

Interpreter: I guess not

---

And then there is the EX730 document attached that explains what mediation is, and the document I need to send if I want to use mediation for this case, but since the Claimant put "no" for mediation, I'm guessing it's not applicable.


What are your thoughts on this?

Here is the Notice of Proposed Allocation to the Small Claims Track: i.imgur.com/uJMvdT6.jpg
Here is the Directions Questionnaire for me to complete: i.imgur.com/Y03lFwd.jpg

(sorry still not able to put clickable links )

Umkomaas

Hearing venue: Request for special direction: (they had a separate sheet of paper attached that said)

" The matter will be considered on paperwork without a hearing. The parties attendant is not required and the judge will determine the matter based upon the documents and evidence supplied and any written representations received "

You MUST resist this! You want the case to be dealt with in person at YOUR (the defendant) choice of county court.

Refusing mediation will not harm your case. Agreeing to it will find you under pressure from the mediator, whose sole purpose is to get you to agree to pay something. Not what you want to be dealing with!

Coupon-mad

My questions are: Do I accept their proposal or do I reject and do my day in court? I would assume the second but I'm eager to hear your advice!

You 100% reject it. Gladstones always try this little trick:

http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showtopic=105175&st=20

See post #32 and Gan's reply post #34.

And as regards the queries below, you have it right but I would suggest you re-read Bargepole's post linked in the NEWBIES FAQS thread, the second link under 'Small Claim?' where he explains which boxes to tick and how to fill in and serve each document. A copy goes to Gladstones and to the court so you can communicate your rejection of their sneaky suggestion that the case is heard 'on the papers' to both, as a sheet attached as a covering note with the DQ.

Gladstones suggest this because as a firm of solicitors, they know their case in its ring-binder - all points numbered and written in legalese and set out as the Judge might expect to receive it - will (probably) look better to a Judge than paperwork from an unrepresented defendant. But put that defendant in person in front of a Judge, giving their honest account and showing their evidence of signage with photos being handed out and discussed face to face, and the defendant has a fighting chance. Add that to the fact that Gladstones do not generally appear and just send a hired local qualified solicitor who sees the paperwork the night before and isn't a private parking expert, and the balance can tip in favour of the consumer.

Gladstones know some people would breathe a huge sigh of relief to read their suggestion, thinking they don't have to attend a scary hearing, but if you want to hand an advantage to the claimant then that's the way to go about it!

For the questions I need to answer:

Mediation Service: It doesn't matter as the Claimant has already ticked "no". But is it better for me to say "yes" ?

Is small claims track the appropriate track for this case? : I'm assuming I will answer "Yes"

Hearing Venue: I should request for the hearing to be held at the Defendant's home court (right?)

Expert Advice: No

Witnesses: "how many witnesses including yourself, will give evidence on your behalf at the hearing?" Since there is no confirmation on who the driver was, I should write zero? Or 1 since it says including yourself?

Hearing dates: I'll put what dates I won't be available

Interpreter: I guess not

pixeLm

Umkomaas wrote: »

You MUST resist this! You want the case to be dealt with in person at YOUR (the defendant) choice of county court.

Refusing mediation will not harm your case. Agreeing to it will find you under pressure from the mediator, whose sole purpose is to get you to agree to pay something. Not what you want to be dealing with!

Coupon-mad wrote: »

You 100% reject it. Gladstones always try this little trick:

http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showtopic=105175&st=20

See post #32 and Gan's reply post #34.

And as regards the queries below, you have it right but I would suggest you re-read Bargepole's post linked in the NEWBIES FAQS thread, the second link under 'Small Claim?' where he explains which boxes to tick and how to fill in and serve each document. A copy goes to Gladstones and to the court so you can communicate your rejection of their sneaky suggestion that the case is heard 'on the papers' to both, as a sheet attached as a covering note with the DQ.

Gladstones suggest this because as a firm of solicitors, they know their case in its ring-binder - all points numbered and written in legalese and set out as the Judge might expect to receive it - will (probably) look better to a Judge than paperwork from an unrepresented defendant. But put that defendant in person in front of a Judge, giving their honest account and showing their evidence of signage with photos being handed out and discussed face to face, and the defendant has a fighting chance. Add that to the fact that Gladstones do not generally appear and just send a hired local qualified solicitor who sees the paperwork the night before and isn't a private parking expert, and the balance can tip in favour of the consumer.

Gladstones know some people would breathe a huge sigh of relief to read their suggestion, thinking they don't have to attend a scary hearing, but if you want to hand an advantage to the claimant then that's the way to go about it!

Thank you both! Thanks Coupon-mad for the link. And I read the newbies posts as well.

I will be sending the following (I'm writing them down so someone might benefit in the future by this post):

Directions Questionnaire:
A1: Do you agree to this case being referred to the
Small Claims Mediation Service? : No

Your contact details: Name and address , but is it OK if I don't put my phone number and email ? I don't want GS to have more information about me than they already have.

C1: Do you agree that the small claims track is the appropriate track for
this case: Yes

D1: Hearing venue: At which County Court hearing centre would you prefer the small claims hearing to take place and why?

** SEE ATTACHED RESPONSE TO THE REQUEST FOR SPECIAL DIRECTION **
I request the case to be transferred to the Defendant's home court.

D2: Are you asking for the court’s permission to use the written evidence of
an expert? No

D3: How many witnesses, including yourself, will give evidence on your
behalf at the hearing? N/A (I put N/A as in the newbies posts it says that witnesses and evidence are not applicable. Should I put 0 instead? or 1? I wont be giving evidence, but I will be taking their photographic material to prove that they were in the wrong.

D4: Are there any days within the next six months when you, an expert or
a witness will not be able to attend court for the hearing? -Yes. I put dates that I'll be away

And on a different page that I will attach to the DQ, I wrote the following

RESPONSE TO THE REQUEST FOR SPECIAL DIRECTION

The Defendant has been informed that the Claimant has proposed a hearing on the papers because it considers the matter to be relatively straightforward.
The Claimant also requests to transfer the hearing to the claimant’s local court if the Defendant does not consent.
The Defendant objects strongly to these proposals.
The Defendant denies that the matter is relatively straightforward.
The issues in dispute include uncertainty about the signage that was put in place at the time and the fact that the particulars of claim are very vague.
As a litigant in person, the defendant would be seriously disadvantaged against the claimant, a parking company that has employed its trade association's solicitor to prepare its documents.
The defendant will probably also wish to question the claimant regarding its witness statement and other documents.
The defendant will in particular wish to verify that any photographs submitted by the claimant show the signage in place at the time of the event and not the new clearer signs that have since been painted or erected, and the nature of the alleged violation.
The defendant therefore requests that the matter is transferred to his local court.

What do you think? Is it good to go or should I add/remove something?

From what I understand I need to send one copy to the County Court Business Centre in Northampton, and one to Gladstones Solicitors at the address that they have put in their DQ as an address for Service.

Is that correct?

Thanks everyone, you have no idea how much I appreciate your feedback throughout all of this process!

Coupon-mad

D3: How many witnesses, including yourself, will give evidence on your behalf at the hearing? N/A (I put N/A as in the newbies posts it says that witnesses and evidence are not applicable. Should I put 0 instead? or 1? I wont be giving evidence, but I will be taking their photographic material to prove that they were in the wrong.

Put '1' because the witness who will give evidence at a hearing is you.

What do you think? Is it good to go or should I add/remove something?

Looks good to go, to me.

From what I understand I need to send one copy to the County Court Business Centre in Northampton, and one to Gladstones Solicitors at the address that they have put in their DQ as an address for Service.

Is that correct?

Yes, that's right.

pixeLm

Hello again! A few updates and a question:

I've received a Court Order saying that the case has been allocated to the small claims track, and at the court close to me. So that's the good news!

The bad news is: they've set the trial date on a date that I have stated I wont be available. I've emailed the personal support unit explaining what happened and I'm waiting for a response.

My question: in the court order it states that I should send copies of all the documents I will submit at the trial. But since I'm the defendant do I need to send anything? Isn't it the claimant that will submit their "evidence" in order to prove that I was in the wrong?

In addition to that, the order also says "The documents to be sent to the other party and the court must include the statements of all witnesses (including the parties themselves)"

Is this something that I need to do? As I have not admitted that I was or wasn't the driver and I'm being accused because I am the registered keeper of the vehicle, it doesn't make sense to write a witness statement. But I could be wrong.

Thanks in advance !

pixeLm

Any thoughts guys?

If I need to send something it has to be done by tomorrow at the latest..

cheers!