Claim form- PCM & Gladstones

Elicia90

Hi, I have a similar issue. Received the claim form today. Where is the Nevwbie thread? 8 have no idea how to work forums and can't find this anywhere? Thanks

Elicia90

Hi. How do I find the newbie thread. Ive recieved the claim form from county court from Gladstone and I'm trying to find the newbie thread and don't know where to look? Pls help me find it.

Coupon-mad

Elicia90 wrote: »

Hi. How do I find the newbie thread. Ive recieved the claim form from county court from Gladstone and I'm trying to find the newbie thread and don't know where to look? Pls help me find it.

You go back a step to the parking forum itself. It's near the top.

spaceman8

Hi

just an update. I've received a letter form my local court with a date. need some help in preparing my defence. the hiring isn't until 27 jan 2017. but i need to send in all my documents to the courts and gladstone before 14 days of the hearing. any help would be greatly appreciated and thank you for all your help so far!

Quentin

Put up your defence here (anonymously - ie replace any identifying bits with ****) for comment.

Coupon-mad

spaceman8 wrote: »

Hi

just an update. I've received a letter form my local court with a date. need some help in preparing my defence. the hiring isn't until 27 jan 2017. but i need to send in all my documents to the courts and gladstone before 14 days of the hearing. any help would be greatly appreciated and thank you for all your help so far!

It's your Witness statement and exhibits you need to put together. See this extract from the NEWBIES thread and the links shown:

IMPORTANT - KNOW WHAT YOU MUST DO AND BY WHEN!

Here's a summary from bargepole of what happens when, what you MUST do in time, re the paperwork & deadlines:

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/5546325

Here is his advice about how to set out your defence, which bargepole recommends is best posted:

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/71228944#Comment_71228944

Do not think putting in the defence is your only job. Once allocated to your local court, you will be given a clear date by which YOU MUST file the evidence ('exhibits') and any Witness Statement (i.e. yours, as bargepole says in the above link!).

Here is a witness statement written from a registered keeper who was not driving and you can see it is paragraph-numbered throughout and it references numbered exhibits, creating an organised argument with illustrations/evidence:

http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showtopic=106959&st=40&p=1225247&#entry1 225247

And here is a current thread talking about how to set out a WS and/or skeleton argument and exhibits for your court bundle:

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/71675929#Comment_71675929

HTH

spaceman8

Hi

I'm at stage 5 of what bargepole said.
so this is what i submitted for my defence (not witness statement):

Please note, a part 18 request has been made, asking for simple and easily obtainable information, however it has been refused as they claim, it would cost too much. A ridiculous reason for a refusal to comply with a part 18 request as all information should already be available to them or obtained by a simple email. Therefore, due to the non compliance, it is difficult to properly defend against claims to which clarification is required.

I *********** as the Defendant deny any liability whatsoever to the Claimant for all of the following reasons:

(1) The claimant has not complied with a part 18 requests. A few points are shown below. The claimant:
• Refused to provide particulars of the claim
• Refused to explain how alleged additional indemnity costs arose, when they were added to the charge and prove that the sum of £50 was paid by their client, to whom and for what service
• Refused to provide legal identity of the landowner of the car park

The pleadings ought to be struck out on the basis that it does not conform to CPR PD 16. This is because there is insufficient information to support the operator’s claim.

(2) Wording on the sign and size of the sign is so small that it can only be assumed that it is intentionally made to be difficult to read. It can not be read from inside the vehicle. A driver cannot possibly know that stopping is forbidden unless he stops(!), exits the vehicle and uses a ladder. This explicitly violates the IPC code of conduct (the governing body of the claimant, PCM, are signed up to).

IPC code of conduct:
Part E- Schedule 1 (p24)
“be clearly legible and placed in such a position such that a driver of a vehicle is able to see them clearly upon entering the site or parking a vehicle within the site"


(3) The position and size of sign is inappropriate. The sign is of approximate dimensions 60 cm x 43 cm. The sign is attached to the wall of the building, over 3.36m from the loading bay kerb a further 3.53m from the kerb to the road, and approximately another 1.5m to the Driver, totaling a shortest distance of 8.39m from the driver to the notice. This is all clear from the pictures provided by PCM. I have requested information about the signage and it’s size and distance from representatives of the PCM but it has been refused.

IPC code of conduct:
Part E- Schedule 1 (p24)
“contain text appropriate to the position of the sign and the relative position of the person who it is aimed at”

(4) The wording regarding a £100 charge is printed in lettering amongst the smallest in size on the notice (uppercase, contrary to the driving signage guidance from the Department of Transport). It is unreadable from almost any distance. The font used is not clear and easy to read. It is not legible from the car. This again goes against the IPC code of conduct.

(5) A driver must be allowed sufficient time to read the signs (which means exiting the vehicle), understand them, and decide whether to accept the terms. If sufficient time is not allowed to read and understand the signs then no contract is entered into. The operator's own photographs show an elapsed period of just 2 minutes and 14 seconds between the first and the last. The car was promptly moved. Thus clearly not accepting the terms of parking.

(6) Furthermore, photographs provided by the operator will clearly show the lack of any attempt to provide any grace period whatsoever. The pictures show the engine still running, as the headlights and break lights are still visible. This again goes against the IPC code of conduct:

Part B- operational requirements applicable to all operators
15.Grace periods
“Drivers should be allowed a sufficient amount of time to park and read any signs so they make an informed decision as to whether or not to remain on the site.

Similarly as per clause 13.1 of the BPA Code of Practice:
"[the organisation] must allow a driver who enters your car park but decides not to park, to leave the car park within a reasonable period without having their vehicle issued with a parking charge notice”.

The Operator was not interested in giving any sort of grace period as they started photographing immediately as the driver had pulled into the bay, let alone get out and read the sign! No contract can be formed as it requires the individual to be able to read the terms of contract and decide if he/she wish to agree to them. As no grace period given, there can therefore be no contract.


(7) The operator's photographs show how close the photographers were to the vehicle occupants. Why did they not simply direct the driver to move on? The driver did try to speak to the operator, but was ignored. An attempt was made to ask if it suitable to park here for the purposes of unloading into the flats outside of which the car was. Clearly this is not a genuine attempt to mitigate any loss, prevent or deter a breach of contract, but is entrapment for profit.


(8) The charge stated on the (virtually unreadable) signs is £100. The claimant is claiming additional "indemnity costs" with no explanation of what those costs are, how (if at all) they have been incurred, and why the defendant should be liable for them. It is suggested that this is nothing but a means of artificially inflating the value of the claim. Also due to reasons stated above, as no contract was formed, I cannot be subject to any fictional damages or loss incurred.

(9) The claimant is not the lawful occupier of the land and it is disputed that the claimant has authority to operate on this land and issue charges in its own name. At best the claimant is merely the agent of the lawful occupier and is therefore the wrong claimant. If the claimant believes otherwise then he must produce his full, un-redacted contract with the lawful occupier, which authorizes him to so operate in his own name. If the operator is unable to prove ownership and confirm the legal identity of the landowner as PCM, this claim has no legal standing.


As a result of the aforementioned, the defendant argues that the claimant is not entitled to the relief sought or any relief at all.
Further, the court is asked to strike out the claimant's claim.
The defendant also argues that if the court is minded to strike out this claim or in the event that the defendant proves it case, the defendant should be entitled to recover costs outside the general rules in light of the claimant unreasonable stance in pursuing this matter.

spaceman8

allot of this is just what you guys have given me and stuff i found from links that were submitted.

im not quite sure what to do with the witness statement. I've got photos that I've extracted from the initial appeal that sure the "offence". i wanted to submit them as my headlights are still on in 4/5 pics.

i wanted to get my brother to appear as well on the day. is this a good idea. i did mark it on the n180 that i had a witness. does he have to make a witness form as well.

thank you

Coupon-mad

Yes your brother should supply a witness statement as well as your own Witness statement, so you will file two. Plus your evidence exhibits. You can supply photos as part of your exhibits, referred to in your witness statement by exhibit numbers, so things are all organised and easy to find for the Judge.

Your brother's tenancy agreement or lease must be one of your first exhibits, to demonstrate primacy of contract and to argue that to operate a predatory regime that seeks to 'fine' residents for moving in activity allowed under any easement or 'right to pass and re-pass' appears to be a case of 'derogation from grant' which a landholder or managing agent cannot do.

Read this thoroughly to understand what you are able to say, with your brother the resident backing your account up:

http://parking-prankster.blogspot.co.uk/2016/11/residential-parking.html

You MUST use the 'Jopson v Home Guard' appeal case to support your contention that the car didn't park and indeed that the residents and their visitors have rights of way and easements that certainly would allow them to unload furniture and belongings to move in. That case at appeal is very useful to you and very similar. It actually defines 'parking' (or not) from a Senior Circuit Judge this year. It is persuasive on lower courts. Use it, download it here:

https://bmpa.zendesk.com/hc/en-us/articles/213077149-Milton-Keynes-woman-secures-landmark-victory-for-flat-tenants-in-parking-dispute

You need to state this clearly in your WS:

i was helping my brother move into his new flat in london.
i followed and parked up behind the movie van outside his flat.
just after i pulled in (it did say "loading bay") the PCM operator started taking photos of my car. i came out, tried to ask if it was ok to park here. (got no response), read the sign on the wall and promptly moved.

When is a loading bay not a loading bay? When it's in a PCM car park and they make up the rules! Honestly, show the Judge how ridiculous this is that a new tenant/leaseholder cannot rely on being able to unload and move in. Clearly life would be unworkable if that were so!

Your main appeal is in fact saying that the signs are of no consequence because your brother has primacy of contract and modern leases imply a right to 'peaceful enjoyment' of property even if it is not expressly stated. You can also cover in your WS the fact that you lost on appeal means nothing as regards any IPC firm because the same two 'controlling minds' run the IPC, the IAS and Gladstones as well so it is in their interests to refuse (and they aim to refuse) some 80% of consumer appeals.

Read this court report below for several reasons. Be aware that Gladstone might miss the filing deadline, if so, write to the Judge:

http://parking-prankster.blogspot.co.uk/2016/12/court-report-oxford-another-gladstones.html

That case also mentions the 'controlling minds' behind the IPC, the IAS and Gladstones, issue as being a conflict of interest and a reason to discount any appeal rejection as not independent/doomed to fail all along. That linked case from today also aimed to cover the grace periods/predatory immediate ticketing issue but didn't need to because Gladstones dropped the ball on their own!

I don't think you will need it but as a 'Plan B', as an alternative argument, you will also need in your exhibits, a copy of the IPC code of practice and highlight any rule that supports your defence regarding signs and grace periods before any 'enforcement'.

e.g. pappa golf mentioned this in post #11 but you will need to find those words and the stuff the IPC say about signs. Just in case the Judge is not persuaded that your brother's tenancy or lease agreement creates primacy of contract through an easement/rights of way to pass and re-pass, including loading/unloading of a residents' property when moving in.

Re signs, also use the information I gave you in post #32, as exhibits about what makes a sign high up 10 feet up a wall harder to read (small print!). And in your case it's above a door, really unremarkable and not the slightest bit obvious to a driver sitting in a car. And print a copy of the very clear and large lettering, simple terms 'Beavis sign' as a comparison, as an exhibit. Just in case the Judge wants to run through everything, including the signs and how unreadable and unremarkable they are to simeone unfamiliar with the location, moving in for the first time.

I take it you are defending this as 'the driver' in an honest account of what happened, seeing as you didn't say anything about 'no keeper liability or the POFA. That's fine, you will mainly be arguing your defence using the Jopson case and your brother's lease/agreement. When you read the Approved Judgment you will realise how VERY similar that case is to your own (depending on your brother's tenancy or lease wording) and it is an appeal case, so it has weight and a Judge will have to take that case into account.

spaceman8

hey people. I'm struggling with my witness statement. ill show you what I've got so far. not much but its basically what you've told me plus a few bits cut and pasted from one of the links.

I've still not managed to get my brothers lease so I've not been able to confirm if he has that clause in it about parking. also gladstone still haven't sent me their witness statement so i can't really

please help.

Witness statement

The facts in this statement come from my personal knowledge. Where they are not within my own knowledge there are true to the best of my information and belief

A short summary of what took place:

i was helping my brother move into his new flat in london.
i followed and parked up behind the movie van outside his flat.
just after i pulled in (it did say "loading bay") the PCM operator started taking photos of my car. i came out, tried to ask if it was ok to park here. (got no response), read the sign on the wall and promptly moved.

1. 2. I am not liable to the Claimant for the sum claimed, or any amount at all and this is my Witness Statement in support of my defense as already filed.

2. I assert that no fine could have been issued due to primacy of contract. As both myself and my brother were at the new flat for the purpose of loading and unloading into said flat, the lease contract allows for such eventuality. (exhibit lease contract).

3. It was shown by the case Jopson v Home Guard- (exhibit Jopson v Home Guard) that tenancy contract takes precedent over any supposed operator contract in the case of loading and unloading.

4. Furthermore, the case also showed that in the instance of stopping for short temporary unloading, it cannot be claimed that this is parking but only stopping and therefore not subject to any of the supposed fines imposed. (Exhibit- PCM sign)

5. The claimant has based it claim upon the following supporting evidence ( exhibits –pcm photos, and singnage).

6. The claim is not acceptable, as it does not comply with many of its own code of conduct. The signage is very small, 10 feet up, above a door and pavement and not on the drivers side. This cannot be read when driving in, let alone agreeing to a £100 charge. The sign does not comply with the IPC code of conduct on 2 points (exhibit IPC- positioning & sizing).

7. A clear marked sign is shown by the beavis sign (exhibit IPC sign, Beavis Sign.

8. In addition, (exhibit PCM sign) shows that “if unsure please seek further advice”. As this was done, by my attempts to speak with the operators agent, due to the fact that I was ignored, clearly shows an attempt to aggressively fine and entrap drivers.

9. As mentioned in my defense. Another failing and example of the aggressive issuing of fines by the operator is shown by the lack of grace period. This is another breach of IPC code of conduct (exibit IPC code of conduct). This was a key point in many cases such as: (*****cases).

10. I did not respond to the brightly-colored alarmist Notices sent to me because I believed they were spam (this sort of scam had been exposed on Watchdog). Also, as these were not offences or fines from an Authority like a Council, there was no reason or obligation upon a registered keeper to ‘appeal’ to what appeared to be junk mail. I have since researched this, hence my knowledge that these are non-POFA PCNs, incapable of holding me liable anyway.

11. The claimant may argue that due to the fact that my appeal was rejected by IAS that at this point I should have paid a fee. (exhibit- The Adjudicator) the response was lacking in any knowledge of law and contradicts itself.

12. (Exhibit - C1GF00T3 PCM (UK) v Alan Johnson). There is a conflict of interest as it is the same controlling minds behind IPC, Gladstones and IAS and therefore any appeal rejection holds no weight as it is inherently meant to be rejected.

13. (Exhibit – particulars of claim)Particulars of claim inadequate and don’t show any explanation of claim of any sort. No explanation of how increased costs have been incurred. A similarly poorly pleaded and evidenced ‘private parking ticket’ claim was struck out by District Judge Cross of St Albans County Court on 20/09/16 without a hearing, due to a the law firm’s template particulars being held to be ‘incoherent’, failing to comply with CPR 16.4, and ''providing no facts that could give rise to any apparent claim in law''.

14. The Court is invited to dismiss this Claim, and to allow my wasted costs which will be submitted separately and in a timely manner, depending upon whether a hearing takes place. I firmly believe that to pursue me as registered keeper when the Claimant admits they have no such right, and to submit such incoherent particulars and lacking ‘evidence’ is wholly unreasonable and vexatious.

I believe the facts stated in this Defence Statement are true.