HX Car Park Management, Gladstones Letter Before Claim

Birdo26

Need to ring the courts tomorrow morning and find out whats happened. In the mean time I have this as a witness statement. Obviously need to attach photos ect. Please let me know what you think. Thanks


In this Witness statement, the facts and matters stated are true and within my own knowledge, except where indicated otherwise.

1. The defendant has received no information from the Claimant stating facts around exactly what the alleged 'overstay' or underpayment was.

2. The Claimant has not complied with the pre-court protocol, as the claimant has not provided any Particulars of Claim or initial information containing the facts to the defendant, so the defendant has no basis to file a full defence. In particular, the full details of the contract that it is alleged was broken have not been provided.

3. I'd refer the court to Para 4 on non-compliance and sanction, and I'd also point out
that there can be no reasonable excuse for the Claimant's failure to follow the Pre-
action Conduct process, especially bearing in mind that the Claim in being handled by Gladstones who are a firm of solicitors.

4. As Gladstones are a firm of solicitors whose Directors also run the IPC Trade
Body and deal with private parking issues every single day of the week there can
be no excuse for these omissions.

5. The defendant emailed the claimant on 11/07/2017 (Exhibit 1 – letter asking for details).

The claimant did not respond.

6. Whilst I was the Registered Keeper of the vehicle concerned, there is no evidence of the driver and as this is a shared vehicle it is impossible to recall who might have been driving therefore puts HX to strict proof that any contract can exist between the Claimant and themselves.

7. I rely upon the words of barrister and parking expert Lead Adjudicator for PATAS and
POPLA, Henry Michael Greenslade, where he clarified in the POPLA Annual Report
2015 in a heading: 'Understanding Keeper Liability') that a private parking operator must never presume that a keeper is the driver. (Exhibit 2 – Popla report).

8. The signage was inadequate to form a contract with the motorist because it is barely
legible, making it difficult to read. You would need to bend down right in front of it to able to read it. Part E, Schedule 1 of the Code of Practice of the Independent Parking Committee (of which HX is a member), clearly states that “Text should be of such a size and in a font that can be easily read by a motorist having regard to the likely position of the motorist in relation to the sign.” As can be seen from the attached photographic evidence (Exhibit 3) this is not the case. Please refer to (Exhibit 4) a copy of the clear and distinct signage used in Beavis v Parking Eye.

9. The warning signs above and next to the ticket machine are so high up that only a person of above average height would be able to read and they are not visible as you enter into the carpark as they are obstructed by a large bush If you park in the area in the photo evidence you would not see the machine upon driving into the carpark.. (Exhibit 5 & 6 – photograph of machine and unclear signage)

10. The small sign is not visible to anyone entering the carpark as it is obstructed by a large barrier (Exhibit 7).
11. There are no warning signs upon entering the first carpark to state that such terms apply. A motorist could very easily be led to believe the whole car park is under same rules. (Exhibit 8)
12. The defendant was a patron of MFA Fantasy bowl during the time of the alleged incident. (Exhibit 9).

13. The Defendant denies that the driver would have agreed to pay the original demand of £100 to agree to the alleged contract had the terms and conditions of the contract been properly displayed and accessible.

14. On the 20th September 2016 another relevant poorly pleaded private parking
charge claim by Gladstones was struck out by District Judge Cross of St Albans
County Court without a hearing due to their ‘roboclaim’ particulars being
incoherent, failing to comply with CPR. 16.4 and ‘providing no facts that could give
rise to any apparent claim in law.’

15. The Claimants are known to be serial issuers of generic claims similar to this one. HM Courts Service have identified over 1000 similar sparse claims. I believe the term for such behaviour is roboclaims and as such is against the public interest.

Practice Direction 3A which references Civil Procedure Rule 3.4 illustrates this point:

7.5 “Where a claim is based upon an agreement by conduct, the particulars of claim must specify the conduct relied on and state by whom, when and where the acts constituting the conduct were done.”

16. The claimant described the charge of £50 as ‘legal fees’ not ‘contractual costs’ CPR
.14 does not permit these to be recoverable in the Small Claims Court

17. The Protection of Freedom Act Para 4(5) states that the maximum sum that may be
recovered from the keeper is the charge stated on the Notice to Keeper.

18. HX Car Park Management are not the lawful occupier of the land. I have the
reasonable belief that they do not have the authority to issue charges on this land in
their own name and that they have no rights to bring this case.

I believe that the facts stated in this Witness Statement are true.

Birdo26

Bumping this up as its fallen down overnight. Made some changes so will edit with a new one.

Birdo26

Spoke to the courts who said it can only be done by a formal application which costs £255 if I remember correctly.

Birdo26

Sending this off at middday. If anyone can look before then it would be much appreciated . Thanks

Birdo26

Ok so got 2 days off work. It says I need to send any written comments on the other sides evidence. Cant find anything. Not sure what I should be writing or how to lay this out? Thanks

nosferatu1001

"IT" says? What exactly is "it"?
Youre looking for a skeleton argument

Birdo26

Yeah it was a letter I got with the court paperwork. It has the deadlines of what I need to do and when. I have Sent off a witness statement and this is the next bit.

nosferatu1001

It is unusla - did yu get their WS first then?
Strictly with the CPRs there is no need to "rebut" their evidence as such, in advance. thats what the hearing is for.

Birdo26

Yeah I have a copy of their witness statements. I have a hearing but its on papers which is why i need to do it this way.

[Deleted User]

Treat it like a skeleton argument. These are the points you'd make if you were attending court.

So, numbered points, court headings etc. Then take apart the witness evidence. Restate your case and refer to any helpful court authority (name and citation). Stuff like Beavis doesn't need to be sent in, if referred to properly. County court decisions are not so easily obtainable, so if you can get them, supply them.