Gladstones / Millennium claim form

Loadsofchildren123

wi3347 wrote: »

ive also added in

11. The signage also states “Non-payment will result in additional charges which the driver will be liable for on an indemnity basis.” This is only mentioned in small, cluttered lettering at the bottom of the sign. The wording is too vague to have constituted a contractual term.

I'd put that in. It's legal argument, but it's only a few lines and I'd leave it there tbh.

wi3347

I've put it in. I'm going to feel like I'm winging it on the day anyway lol, this is far from my profession but I shall try my best!

Now to print everything out x 3 and out it all in order. Shall I do some kind of filing page between the statement? Like the following are exhibits xx1-6 etc and have them in order or do I need to physically write on them in pen xx1 etc

nosferatu1001

Also they only claim the driver is liable. Never anyone else. As you were not the driver you cannot be liable for these costs.

Loadsofchildren123

Ahhh, looking at the last post - does the Claim Form and PoC say they are suing you as driver or as driver and/or keeper?


If there's no mention of keeper, perhaps just leave it as you were not driving and say nothing about keeper (but keep that up your sleeve for the hearing in case they start spouting POFA).


If they start spouting POFA at the hearing, you say it hasn't been pleaded so it's irrelevant. if the judge allows the argument, then you use your POFA/keeper arguments above.


They may of course introduce the keeper stuff in their WS, in which case you argue it on the day and put it in a skeleton argument (that it's not pleaded, and that you're not liable as keeper either).

Loadsofchildren123

Millennium normally invite an EvL/AJH films finding that you were driving, but say that in the alternative you are keeper.


This is what the WS in my case said:


The Defendant avers that they were not driver of the vehicle at the time the parking charge was incurred. The Criminal Case of Elliott v Loake 1983 Crim LR 36 held that the Registered Keeper of a vehicle may be presumed to have been the driver unless they sufficiently rebut this presumption. To date the Registered Keeper has been invited on numerous occasions to identify the driver, yet has failed to do so. The Court is therefore invited to conclude it more likely than not that the Registered Keeper (i.e. the Defendant) was the driver.


5. In the alternative, if the Court is not able to infer that the Defendant was, in fact, the driver then the Defendant is pursued as the Registered Keeper of the vehicle pursuant to Schedule 4 (4)(1) of
the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (‘the Act’) which states:


“The creditor has the right to recover any unpaid parking charges from the keeper of the vehicle.”


6. The relevant Notice was/were sent to the Defendant in accordance with the Act and the Registered Keeper (the Defendant) failed to nominate who was driving the vehicle prior to these proceedings (which is required under the Act (paragraph 5(2)).


7. The Protection of Freedoms Act 2012, Sched 4 (para 2) states that; the “keeper” means the
person by whom the vehicle is kept at the time the vehicle was parked, which in the case of a registered vehicle is to be presumed, unless the contrary is proved, to be the registered keeper.

Loadsofchildren123

wi3347 wrote: »

I've put it in. I'm going to feel like I'm winging it on the day anyway lol, this is far from my profession but I shall try my best!

Now to print everything out x 3 and out it all in order. Shall I do some kind of filing page between the statement? Like the following are exhibits xx1-6 etc and have them in order or do I need to physically write on them in pen xx1 etc

It's not as scary as you think. Have a look at the court report on claxtome's two carparks thread (not his fluttering ticket thread).


As for printing/filing:
As a lawyer, I would always put a page at the start of each exhibit, with the court heading and in the tramlines the name of the exhibit, and then underneath "this is exhibit xx1 referred to in the Statement of xxxxx dated xxxx".
However, as a LiP you don't really need to do that, as long as each exhibit is clearly labelled - if you do that I'd write the name of the exhibit on the top right, and the page number in the middle of the bottom of each page.

wi3347

So the WS from gladstones has turned up on Saturday (16th) the deadline was the 11th, made sure mine would arrive by then. Surely that's grounds to request it's struck out? They have had months to get it to me and served it almost a full week late?

Haven't had chance to go through it properly yet but isn't that grounds to request it's thrown out?

Coupon-mad

Read this:

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/5696361

So much easier to read other relevant current threads, to save us repeating ourselves.

wi3347

Ok I've read the other thread. They are different as that person applied to the court before they received the WS from gladstones. I have received mine over a week late. Dated the 15th when it was supposed to be with me by the 11th. They make direct mention of my evidence so have clearly Waited until they received my WS and only then written their defence. In fact that is proved at in their lad registry mad it states the application was made on the 12th of December. Surely the court should should not been seen to support them waiting for my WS and only then starting to build a defence and it clearly puts me at a disadvantage.

Interestingly I've received 2 witness statements from 2 different people. They are identical. Same paragraphs same photos and appendices. But from 2 different people with no explanation?

It also misquots pofa claiming it says that "the creditor has the right to claim any unpaid parking charges from the RK" which is not true is actually says you can claim only the amount on the original ntk from the keeper.

It also states that I was "offered to use the land and park for free or in breach agree to pay £100. The rules just so happen that to park they need to display a valid mps permit" the signs were prohibitory and did not offer me the option of applying for a permit.

Loadsofchildren123

You could complain but the court is likely to ignore 5 days late. The lateness really has to disadvantage you. Eg if it was served 2 days before the hearing.
The only advantage they've tried to get is to answer your WS which they shouldn't have. But you aren't denied the opportunity to answer it, you do that in a Skeleton and/or on the day in court.
The duplicate statement is just an internal error (and shows the template/robe laid culture).
This forum is full of people who are late with service and we always advise that just a few days late isn't fatal.
You could have a go at complaining, but don't expect a result.