Current (TODAY!) Court Defence: PCM / Gladstones

mric2000

Noted. Thanks nosferatu1001

System

How did it go?

mric2000

So......I won!!

I actually turned up (30 mins early) at the wrong court!
I went to Gloucester, which is where I had been instructed to file all documents (which were all hand delivered), so I made the natural assumption....
The case was in fact being held 30 minutes away in Cheltenham! :doh:

The Security staff assured me they would phone ahead to let them know I was en route and I can only pray I didn't get any speeding tickets on the dash over to Cheltenham! I arrived approximately 10 minutes late (after frantically trying to find and pay for my parking....naturally) and ran to the Court (passing a lady who was casually strolling along, who I later found out was the Claimant's representative!). I went to the designated area, got chatting to the warden (I assume) in the waiting area who didn't seem too impressed with the frequency and unprofessional nature of "these parking companies" and informed me the other party had not actually turned up. The Claimant's representative, who I had earlier ran past, strolled in approximately 10 minutes later
We chatted and it was all very amicable. She is a self employed solicitor who gets sent cases by an agency who are responsible for distributing Gladstone cases out to many different representatives. She had been sent the details late last night and then had to drive from Cardiff to Gloucester this morning for the hearing (it took her 2.5 hours due to traffic and bad weather!). This was music to my ears...
She tried to discuss the case with me and work out my summary, but I politely suggested that there are many issues that we need to address and we'll cover them in the hearing.

So we finally went in and both made our apologies to the judge who didn't seem too bothered. I know she had plenty of time this morning as the following hearing was originally my other case that Gladstones eventually Discontinued, due to them having my name incorrect.

The judge started off by explaining that a good place to start would be the question of whether or not the Claimant had the right to pursue me as the driver/keeper. She explained that unless we could answer that question, there would be no point in going through any of the other details. From here on, it seemed like the Claimant was on trial as the judge interrogated the representative, so I just sat and kept quiet.
In their WS they had quoted to POFA as the basis for pursuing me. The Judge emphasised Section 13 which is specific to Hired vehicles.

Paragraph 13 - 2 (c) states that the Claimant should have obtained the following documents from the Keeper (Hire company):
(a) a statement signed by or on behalf of the vehicle-hire firm to the effect that at the material time the vehicle was hired to a named person under a hire agreement (they had this albeit, not signed)
(b) a copy of the hire agreement; and
(c) a copy of a statement of liability signed by the hirer under that hire agreement.

Consequently, in order to legitimately pursue me as the Hirer, they need to provide me with copied of these documents as stated in Paragraph 14 (1) and (2a). They hadn't done this, despite my request for them to do so after receiving their LBC. I had included my letter requesting this within my Bundle.
As such, they had not adhered to POFA - on which they were relying.

The question was also raised regarding the actual issuing of the PCN. Gladstones had not provided evidence of the actual PCN being issued - it was not visible in the photographic evidence of my vehicle at the location, it had not been supplied when I requested it and it was not made available during the hearing (in the bundle).
Another exhibition of spectacular incompetence from Gladstones.

The judge also threw in a bonus dig at the fact that the signage in the area was insufficient from what she could gather. While there was ample signage scattered around the place, the Claimant had not provided any evidence of signage on the entrance to or exit from the location and there was no proof of the lettering meeting the requirements for a minimum font size etc. This just seemed to be a cheeky little dig and was not discussed in any great detail.

Thankfully, in light of the first two factors (POFA failure and no evidence of the PCN being issued), she dismissed the case almost immediately. The judge seemed rather fed-up with cases of this nature and the poor representation made by the parking companies. The Claimants representative had one other case later in the day and the judge was quick to point out that it is for a similar offence in the exact same place and told the representative....."that doesn't bode well for you"...

I have been awarded minimal costs for mileage and parking, but my hourly earnings etc were not permissable as I am self employed and it is difficult to prove this income as a definite.

Thank you to you all for your support and advice :A You are all officially in the "Legend" category!
If anyone wants more information to use for future reference, to help others in this situation, please PM me and I will gladly help.

System

A judge up to speed on the intricacies of POFA. She must have been really !!!!ed off with the Gladstones cases.

Nice win. Nice report.

mric2000

Thanks IamEmanresu.

Ironically, with us both being late, the Judge decided to take the time to read up on the case and do additional research
She was actually reading the key POFA points off her iphone! :rotfl:

beamerguy

mric2000

WELL DONE :beer::beer:
What a story !

Hahaha, Gladstones up to their standard of rubbish
that we come to expect now.

To a degree one must feel sorry for the "hired gun"
lady who was trashed by the incompetent and
rubbish Gladstones:rotfl::rotfl:

This is a story for the Parking Prankster so we can
point others to the famous incompetent Gladstones

mric2000

I definitely felt sorry for their representative.
I know how much brain strain there is approaching something like this when I have had weeks/months to prepare. To be given the details late last night is so unprofessional and unfair on her, unless they had a watertight case, which they clearly didnt!

Happy to share with Parking Prankster, if that is the best source for this info to be kept?

beamerguy

mric2000 wrote: »

I definitely felt sorry for their representative.
I know how much brain strain there is approaching something like this when I have had weeks/months to prepare. To be given the details late last night is so unprofessional and unfair on her, unless they had a watertight case, which they clearly didnt!

Happy to share with Parking Prankster, if that is the best source for this info to be kept?

The Parking Prankster ..... Alex Shipp
prankster@parking-prankster.com

The Gladstones joke continues

Umkomaas

IamEmanresu wrote: »

A judge up to speed on the intricacies of POFA. She must have been really !!!!ed off with the Gladstones cases.

Nice win. Nice report.

Agree, especially on Sections 13/14 which don’t crop up often enough for them to trip off the tongue.

Good win @mric2000 :T

Coupon-mad

Very well done, great to read about your success!! You can dine out on this story now.