Defence against Gladstones

notteco

Dear all

I received the court claim form with amount claimed around 180, court fee 25, and legal cost 50, total around 260. The particular of claim is quite simple, only including date, registration, initial amount (150) and interest. The solicitors is Gladstones solicitors limited.

The driver parked my car in a residential area (flat zone), and the driver was visiting his/her friend for around 20 minutes. The driver parked outside his/her friend's flat's building. The visitor car park is full.

Is the following defence from another thread appropriate for this case?

1 The claimant has provided no explanation whatsoever for the claim and discloses no cause of action
2 If the claimant alleges trespass, it is not the land-owner and may not bring any such claim
3 If the claimant alleges that the claim results from a contract, the defendant denies the existence of any contract
3.1 The defendant has the reasonable belief that the claimant does not have the legal capacity to offer parking
3.2 The defendant did not see any signs that could give rise to a contract. The defendant has since discovered one inconspicuous and unlit sign that could not be seen while driving
3.3 The location does not have any indication that it is a car park and the defendant had no reason to look for signs
3.4 Even if signs had been seen, the defendant would not have agreed to pay the claimant £150
4 If the claimant alleges a breach of contract, the amount demanded cannot possibly represent a genuine pre-estimate of any loss to the defendant and is therefore a penalty
5 The defendant has the reasonable belief that a qualified solicitor would not prepare such a claim that discloses no cause of action and puts the claimant to proof of the fact and that the £50 charge was actually incurred
6 The non-existent detail in the claim does not enable the defendant to provide a detailed defence. The defendant therefore invites the court to strike out the claim as disclosing no cause of action or to order the claimant to provide further and better Particulars of Claim

Any help will be very appreciated.

Johnny

Kind_Of_Irritated

I have a similar claim from the same cowboy outfit. Will be interested as to what the experts on here say. You and I both have to respond to this within 14 days.

pappa_golf

please read https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/5546325 before submitting anything , or a !!!! up with the ciurt papers could cost you dearly

Ralph-y

and .....

read through the last month or so of this blog

http://parking-prankster.blogspot.co.uk/

you will soon see that ' a smart 10 year old' could win ...

good luck

Ralph:cool:

The_Deep

I received the court claim form with amount claimed around 180, court fee 25, and legal cost 50, total around 260.

This is well in excess of the sums allowed in the SCC, and Gladstones know it. They are currently being investigated for this, and other contraventions and you should therefore complain in the strongest of terms to the SRA

http://www.sra.org.uk/consumers/problems/report-solicitor.page

that they are attempting to obtain monies from you which the rules do not allow, fraud.

They can only claim the original amount plus £50 legal costs, court fee, and a few pounds in interest if they win. Even if they won, they would be unlikely to be awarded more than £200, and if they lost, which they often do, tyhey may have to pay your money.

Read some of these

https://www.google.co.uk/search?sourceid=navclient&hl=en-GB&ie=UTF-8&rlz=1T4GUEA_en-GBGB707GB707&q=gladstones+prankster&gws_rd=ssl

MattNorth

Just a pointer. A Defence is simply a reply to the Particulars of Claim. A Particulars of Claim has to set out the Claimant's case (see Rule 16 of CPR). Gladstones have failed to comply with CPR 16 and therefore your Defence should simply state that:


The Particulars of Claim does not comply with CPR Part 16.4(1)(a). State that the Defendant's position has been prejudiced as a result of this (as the Claimant has failed to provide adequate information).
Then simply state that the Defendant denies that the Claimant is due any monies from the Defendant and the Claimant is put to strict proof in relation to this.

DoaM

If you're willing to risk such a brief defence then go for it. However don't be surprised if this gets short shrift from the judge and you then find you have no defence ... you can't add defence points later if they weren't noted in your initial defence.

MattNorth

With reference to Part 16.5 CPR:


(1) In his defence, the defendant must state –
(a) which of the allegations in the particulars of claim he denies;
(b) which allegations he is unable to admit or deny, but which he requires the claimant to prove; and
(c) which allegations he admits.
(2) Where the defendant denies an allegation –
(a) he must state his reasons for doing so; and
(b) if he intends to put forward a different version of events from that given by the claimant, he must state his own version.
(3) A defendant who –
(a) fails to deal with an allegation; but
(b) has set out in his defence the nature of his case in relation to the issue to which that allegation is relevant,
shall be taken to require that allegation to be proved.
(4) Where the claim includes a money claim, a defendant shall be taken to require that any allegation relating to the amount of money claimed be proved unless he expressly admits the allegation.
(5) Subject to paragraphs (3) and (4), a defendant who fails to deal with an allegation shall be taken to admit that allegation.
(6) If the defendant disputes the claimant’s statement of value under rule 16.3 he must –
(a) state why he disputes it; and
(b) if he is able, give his own statement of the value of the claim.


If the Claimant has failed to adequately plead their case (see my previous post) then it is difficult to formulate a reply.

StaffsSW

MattNorth wrote: »

Just a pointer. A Defence is simply a reply to the Particulars of Claim. A Particulars of Claim has to set out the Claimant's case (see Rule 16 of CPR). Gladstones have failed to comply with CPR 16 and therefore your Defence should simply state that:


The Particulars of Claim does not comply with CPR Part 16.4(1)(a). State that the Defendant's position has been prejudiced as a result of this (as the Claimant has failed to provide adequate information).
Then simply state that the Defendant denies that the Claimant is due any monies from the Defendant and the Claimant is put to strict proof in relation to this.

I don't disagree with what you are saying, but it's worth raising as many defence points as possible - throw enough mud, and some will stick.

I've got two Gladstones court claims pending at the moment, and I have 8 or 9 defence points on each. I'm not taking any chances.