Armtrac PCN/Gladstones County Court Business Centre, Please help??

digitalfield

Hey guys,

I have been reading this forum as a guest for the past week but thought I would actually make an account and explain my story. Basically Back in Feb this year driver was down in Cornwall visiting a friend, driver parked in a residentual car park run by ARMTRAC ( arsetrack ) SECURITY SERVICES the car park has no pay and display machines and no way to pay to park there, it is for residents and visitors with a permit only. drivers friend normally has has a visitor permit but couldn't find it on the day in question so he gave me a calling card from the housing association where he lives ( to prove he lives there and he is a resident ) driver left this in my window clearly to be seen.

The car park was practically empty, and this was very late at night on a Saturday maybe around 10/11pm? anyway driver left at around 5am and came back to my car and all was fine so I assumed everything was ok. 2/3 months later driver get a letter through the door from ARMTRAC stating driver owe them £100 for a unaid PCN and it needs to be paid within 14 days or it will be passed onto debt recovery agents or the county court. Driver stupidly emailed them, and asked them what proof they have of this and he dont know what they are talking about because no PCN was left on the windscreen.

They then reply to driver and send me photo proof with a yellow PCN on my vehicle, only assumption is that they removed it after they took the pictures so driver wouldnt have a chance to appeal, or someone else removed it or it blew away in the wind? although I believe they are crafty enough to remove it after they took the pictures of my car.

Anyway driver ignored them after this and thought it might go away, then driver then gets a letter from Gladstones who have slapped another £50 on top and a LBCCC, ignored this and sent it back to them "return to sender, person not recognised" the last letter driver have recieved is a county court CLAIM FORM from northampton business centre bulk.

driver has now acknowledged service online, and need to prepare my defence. The point is the car park doesn't have any pay and display machines so driver don't see how the landlord has suffered any loss, driver was visiting friend who does have a visitor permit although he couldn't find it, they never gave driver a chance to appeal by taking the PCN off my car after they took photos ( even though this is my word against theirs ) and the whole thing just stinks!

Any help on this matter would be mostly appreciated, driver has noticed there are some informed people on here.

Thanks in advance!

Quentin

You now need to read up on defending a court claim.

See the newbies FAQ thread for advice and links.

First gain an extra 14 days to prepare by sending in acknowledgement of claim

digitalfield

driver already acknowledged the claim online at moneyclaim.gov.uk so assume have 14 days from today to sort a defence... thanks for the reply.

Coupon-mad

then I get a letter from Gladstones who have slapped another £50 on top and a LBCCC, ignored this and sent it back to them "return to sender, person not recognised"

That was very silly - we have NEVER given advice to ignore a LBCCC - and is likely to be why they have chanced their arm with a claim as they think you are an ostrich with your head in the sand. They were hoping to get a default CCJ from someone who would not defend.

The point is the car park doesn't have any pay and display machines so I don't see how the landlord has suffered any loss, I was visiting my friend who does have a visitor permit although he couldn't find it, they never gave me a chance to appeal by taking the PCN off my car after they took photos

Sadly, ''the point isn't!'' because none of those are valid points of defence, nothing about 'loss' will wash.

You should read other defences on here, search 'defence statement of truth' and search 'prohibitive sign' and 'Gladstones claim' on here as a search term, as well. Read lots of results from 2016 only, from those 3 separate searches.

Show us what you put together after reading several defences here.

Oh, and DO NOT reply to any private message from any poster 'offering to help' because they would have a vested interest and you can tell by the lack of post count (under 1000 posts and they are not a regular here).

digitalfield

Thanks for the replies, yeah think the driver was looking at old posts where the ignore trick use to work! learnt by my mistake now. still don't see how they can say the landlord suffered any loss when there is no pay and display machines and my friend lives there, permit or not?

Coupon-mad

They haven't - and they will not try to argue 'loss'. They no longer have to because in November in the ParkingEye v Beavis case at the Supreme Court, the UK's top Judges decided in their infinite wisdom, that this sort of business model can have the green light, loss or no loss. Who cares if it's a 'penalty', contrary to trite law and the Consumer Rights Act, never mind the rights of a consumer not to be ripped off...the Supreme Court moved the goalposts for ParkingEye. The Judges appeared to lap up ParkingEye's 'evidence' of a 'commercially justified penalty'.

And, as predicted by those who know that was a truly shocking and TERRIBLE DECISION for drivers and retailers alike, all sorts of motley crew have jumped on the bandwagon to sue people and pretend the Beavis decision applies to their 'charge' too.

:mad:


So you can't argue that issue about 'no loss' because that's been quashed. That's why I told you the search terms to find what you CAN argue.

beamerguy

digitalfield wrote: »

I have already acknowledged the claim online at moneyclaim.gov.uk so I assume I have 14 days from today to sort a defence... thanks for the reply.

You now need to build your defence
Gladstones, who run the IPC/IAS are not as clever as they think

READ THIS
http://parking-prankster.blogspot.co.uk/search?q=GLADSTONES

How the SRA (Solicitors Regulation Authority) continue to support Gladstones really does beggars belief

digitalfield

Thank you very much for your quick replies its most apprecaited. Driver will have a search for the terms you suggested. Driver has also been given this advice to use in defence on another forum.

The Consumer Contracts (Information, Cancellation and Additional Charges) Regulations 2013
state that to legally form a contract you need the geographical address of the business (as detailed in Schedule 1(b)). This wouldn't apply if it was a pay and display car park (as it would be deemed to be 'automated'), but if it is a permit car park without a machine then you should quote this legislation as Armtrac are notorious for not only hiding behind a PO Box number but one with an unrecognisable postcode.

The relevant section is 9 which states:

Information to be provided before making an on-premises contract

9.—(1) Before the consumer is bound by an on-premises contract, the trader must give or make available to the consumer the information described in Schedule 1 in a clear and comprehensible manner, if that information is not already apparent from the context.


Schedule 1(b) states that you need to be provided with:-

the identity of the trader (such as the trader’s trading name), the geographical address at which the trader is established and the trader’s telephone number;

Coupon-mad

Yes that's one point - but not a very strong one IMHO. No judge has ever had to look at that aspect, as regards a private parking ticket and I would debate as to whether this is an 'on-premises' contract because there is no face to face contact.

digitalfield

What do you think would be their strongest points of defence from the information provided?

Coupon-mad

You will know when you do the 3 searches!