Parking & Property Management / Gladstones

muleskinner

Hi,

I am currently disputing (on behalf of my wife) a PCN issued by 'Parking & Property Management Ltd'. This has reached the stage where I am getting threatening letters from Gladstones which I'm not sure constitute a valid final notice before court or not.

I probably haven't been as 'on it' as I should have up to this point but I have read through an awful lot of the info here and elsewhere. If anyone has the time to scan through the reply I'm intending to send to Gladstones to make sure I'm not dropping any clangers or missing any obvious points of contention it would be appreciated.

I'd include an image of the Gladstone's letter here if I could but the site won't allow me to include image links as a new user.

I will send a similar letter to PPM also requesting the landowner's details and write to the landowner if I ever receive this. I realise I should have done this earlier but there we go...

Proposed reply...

====

John Davies
Gladstones Solicitors
The Terrace
High Leigh Park Golf Club
Warrington Road
Knutsford
Cheshire

RE: xxxxxxxx

Dear Sir,

I am in receipt of your letter dated 19.04.2017. There was no point of contact given on this letter so am obliged to address this to the company Director.

I am disputing the parking charge referenced in said letter for the following reasons:

1. I was unaware I was parking on private land and therefore cannot be presumed to have entered in any kind of ‘contract’ with your client. The area in question is an unmarked lay-by at the side of a public highway, ostensibly under the same ownership and parking restrictions as the public highway. Up until shortly before this charge was issued it was permissible to park in this spot and local residents were not made aware of the change. There is no signage at the entrance to the bay and the signage that does exist is on a pole approximately seven feet high and not clearly visible to someone of my height.

2. The notice I received states the reason for the charge as being ‘unauthorised parking’. Clearly if your client did not ‘authorise’ my parking then I cannot be deemed to have had any contractual arrangement with them and this issue is a matter of trespass instead. As a matter of trespass I am only liable for damages and your client has potentially breached the data protection act by unlawfully requesting my details from the DVLA to resolve a matter of trespass on land in which they have no proprietary interest.

I made an appeal against this charge on 19.01.17 and heard nothing further from your client until 22.02.17 when I received a ‘reminder notice’ in the post.

I emailed your client on 27.02.17 questioning the validity of this letter and asking what had happened to my appeal. On 28.02.17 your client responded claiming I had been sent a response to my appeal via email (which I never received) and attaching a copy of same.

I then attempted to make an appeal via the Independent Appeals Service (IAS) but was unable to submit one online as more than 28 days had passed since my original appeal to your client.

According to the IAS website one may make a ‘non-standard appeal’ outside of the 28 day limit and should contact the parking operator in order to do this. I followed these instructions, emailing your client on 01.03.17 and asking for advice as to how to initiate an appeal with the IAS outside of the 28 day limit. The response I received was simply ‘you where responded to be email’ (sic).

Again I emailed your client on 06.03.17 asking for clarification on how to make an appeal to the IAS outside of the 28 day limit (note that my only reason for delaying was the fact that I had not received your client’s response to my original appeal). Your client’s response was as follows ‘It is too late for you to go to the IAS you had 28 Days from the appeal response’.

This advice completely contradicts what is stated on the IAS website which says I should be able to make a ‘non-standard appeal’ outside of the 28 day limit as long as it is within twelve months of the alleged ‘offence’. Simply put, your client is lying to me.

At this point there was very little I could do as your client was refusing to give me the advice I needed in order to resolve this dispute via the proper channels. The next communication I received on the matter was your letter dated 19.04.17.

I am politely requesting that your client drops this vexatious claim against me. Not only is it unfounded in the first place but your client appears to have wilfully misled me and obstructed my attempts to resolve the matter via an ADR service. Should you persist in wasting the Court’s time by pursuing these ridiculous charges I will be forced to make a counter-claim for my time spent refuting them which will be charged at the rate of £50 per hour.

If, on the other hand, your client wants to enter into a reasonable dialogue to resolve this dispute I would suggest that we progress via an ADR service that meets the current regulatory requirements (as I’m sure you know, the IAS is currently being investigated by both the DVLA and CTSI). One such body is the Consumer Ombudsman available at this website (link removed)

I propose we use this body. Please note that practice directions state the court may impose sanctions if you unreasonably refuse to use a form of ADR, or fail to respond at all to an invitation to do so.

Yours Sincerely