ES Parking Enforcement

Coupon-mad

billinghamn wrote: »

Now had a Letter before Claim from Gladstones. I assume I need to respond to this one, otherwise it may go further?

By now, I have no idea who was driving at the time, but still have the valid ticket. Is it worth sending a copy of it to Gladstones?

Please read the NEWBIES thread post #2 for examples of current replies to LBCs.

claxtome

I am currently defending against ES for the same issue. I have submitted my defence and just about to respond to DQ Questionnaire. I stupidly let it slip as to who was driving so some arguments about NTK not complaint with POFA 2012 can't be applied in my case but hopefully can in yours.
Here is the link to the thread which won't help you much now but will do in the future.
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/5715702

billinghamn

claxtome wrote: »

I am currently defending against ES for the same issue. I have submitted my defence and just about to respond to DQ Questionnaire. I stupidly let it slip as to who was driving so some arguments about NTK not complaint with POFA 2012 can't be applied in my case but hopefully can in yours.
Here is the link to the thread which won't help you much now but will do in the future.

Good luck - I hope you are successful. I've got a follow up coming next!

billinghamn

In response to the Letter before Claim from Gladstones, I sent back a firm response in line with the advice in the NEWBIES thread post #2.

billinghamn

About a week later, I received a further letter from Gladstones, which looks like a standard response. It doesn't specifically address any of the points I raised. It just covers points on the following:

1. You allege not to be the driver
2. Pay & Display not displayed
3. Unfair/immoral/unethical
4. You allege there was no contract
5. You did not see the signs/you think the terms are unfair
6. Insufficient signage on site
7. My client has no authority to enforce charges
8. You allege the charge is excessive & no loss was suffered by my client
9. The debt has increased

billinghamn

The_Deep wrote: »

Fluttering ticket claims rarely succeed in court, some reading

That's amazing - many thanks for posting the link. I feel confident of winning this now.

claxtome

Unfortunately I can't post images or links to anything, so I can't show you my letters!

MSE forum rules don't let you post links to things until you have posted about 10 posts.
(You might find you have done enough posts now )
Also I assume you know that you need to host your redacted (anonymous) letters on a cloud platform like dropbox, or equivalent, and then you post links to them from your post.

If MSE forum still doesn't let you post links then what the forum suggests is to put the link in your post but replace the 't' with 'x' s such as -> "http://" with "hxxp://" and some regular member will fix the links for you.

billinghamn

claxtome wrote: »

MSE forum rules don't let you post links to things until you have posted about 10 posts.
(You might find you have done enough posts now )
Also I assume you know that you need to host your redacted (anonymous) letters on a cloud platform like dropbox, or equivalent, and then you post links to them from your post.

If MSE forum still doesn't let you post links then what the forum suggests is to put the link in your post but replace the 't' with 'x' s such as -> "http://" with "hxxp://" and some regular member will fix the links for you.

Thanks - all sorted now. Have uploaded the images and edited the posts above.

claxtome

I was impressed by your letter. Good to see you mean business and have obviously been doing a lot of research.
I also had a look at their letter you have linked. A typical roboclaim letter.
I think it is similar to the one I received but can't check at work at the dropbox link of mine you can get to from my thread.
Please ensure, unlike what I did, that you don't tell them who was driving as I am sure you are well aware a lot of cases at court are won by not admitting who the driver is and arguing there NTK was not POFA 2012 Schedule 4 compliant.

Have you decided on what your response to their current letter will be?
(If it was me I would go though with a fine toothcoomb and point out what they haven't replied with in their template letter from them)

billinghamn

Yes - was thinking along similar lines. Firstly restate the things from my first letter, then include the additional fluttering ticket case evidence that you have provided a link to. Let's see what they say to that.

Also worth highlighting that this time they included pictures taken at the time of the alleged offense. They don't have a clear view of the dashboard (e.g. harsh reflections obscuring parts of the dash - strong sunlight). In my mind that questions whether you can conclude, without reasonable doubt, that there is no ticket on the dash.