At Small Claims stage - PCM and Gladstones

RM_2007

KeithP wrote: »

Yes you do need to send them to Gladstones too.

This post may help:
http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showpost.php?p=73894406&postcount=61

Thanks Keith. Sent by first class post with proof of postage.

KeithP

RM_2007 wrote: »

Thanks Keith. Sent by first class post with proof of postage.

As your hearing is on Friday, I would also send it by email too.

It would be too easy for Gladstones to say "sorry, we haven't seen this".

Send it to all three of those email addresses this evening and also print proof of sending to take with you on Friday.

RM_2007

KeithP wrote: »

As your hearing is on Friday, I would also send it by email too.

It would be too easy for Gladstones to say "sorry, we haven't seen this".

Send it to all three of those email addresses this evening and also print proof of sending to take with you on Friday.

Just sent. Printed out emails to show time sent.

Thanks KeithP

RM_2007

Coupon-mad wrote: »

- asking them for their name and who they work for, before you get in there (it will not be Gladstones. And if it's not the Claimant PPC, and is perhaps a hired rep from ELMS LEGAL or similar, you can hand the usher a 'Preliminary Matters' set of papers including the Law Gazette and case law that argues that the rep lacks Rights of Audience and should not be heard, and the Claimant should be treated as though no-one has turned up...

Search the forum for 'Gazette' and change the default to SHOW POSTS not threads.

Downloaded the following

http://www.barcouncil.org.uk/media/404046/solicitor_s_agents.pdf

http://live.barcouncil.netxtra.net/media/515978/mcshane_v_lincoln_judgment_rights_of_audience1.pdf

http://live.barcouncil.netxtra.net/media/515975/hmc24928_ellisvlarson_approvedjudgment1_20092016.pdf

https://www.lawgazette.co.uk/legal-updates/rights-of-audience-rules/5060342.article

https://www.lawgazette.co.uk/law/right-of-audience/57199.article

Coupon-mad

Great stuff!

RM_2007

It was a late night last night, so best get some rest and do some final prep tomorrow after work.

RM_2007

In Court later this morning so wish me luck...

I think I have everything I need... must remember to take laptop to play video!

1. ROA papers (2 Copies)

a. http://www.barcouncil.org.uk/media/404046/solicitor_s_agents.pdf
b. http://live.barcouncil.netxtra.net/media/515978/mcshane_v_lincoln_judgment_rights_of_audience1.pdf
c. http://live.barcouncil.netxtra.net/media/515975/hmc24928_ellisvlarson_approvedjudgment1_20092016.p df
d. https://www.lawgazette.co.uk/legal-updates/rights-of-audience-rules/5060342.article
e. https://www.lawgazette.co.uk/law/right-of-audience/57199.article

2. Gladstone WS and evidence
3. Claim Form
4. My SA and Costs

a. Proof of Postage
b. Copy of Email
c. Receipts
d. Feb Pay Slip

5. My Defence Statement
6. My WS and Evidence

a. Proof of Postage, Emails delivery reports and failure reports (at Gladstone end)
b. NTK's
c. Correspondence with proof of postage
d. PCM vs Bull
e. IPC CoP
f. Beavis sign
g. POPLA annual report 2015 extract
h. Photos and video
i. J Spurling vs Bradshaw

7. POFA (2 copies)
8. POPLA annual report 2015 (Full)
9. All original docs

Plan of action at court:

1. Business attire
2. Get there 30 mins early min
3. Find out from Usher who the claimant has sent
4. DON!!!8217;T accept any docs from claimants rep outside the court room
5. Find out if rep is from PCM or Gladstones, if not challenge RoA

a. Tell Usher that I want to challenge RoA as preliminary matters and hand RoA set of papers

6. In Courtroom

a. Challenge Late WS
b. Challenge PCM's WS points
c. Address the judge as Sir/Madam
d. Only address remarks to the judge and not the other side (be polite at all times)

7. If I win, ask about matter of my costs
8. If I lose, make sure to pay within 14 days to avoid anything appearing in credit file

Umkomaas

8. If I lose, make sure to pay within 14 days to avoid anything appearing in credit file

It's normally within 1 month. But hopefully you won't be going there!

Good luck for later today, please come back and update us on the outcome.

RM_2007

Sorry guys, Judge found in favour of the PPC

Will do a more detailed write-up later - need to catchup on a days work.

RM_2007

Afternoon guys, as promised a more details on what happend...

TL;DR version - I messed up, flustered it. I could have done much better - first time in court, nerves and also up against what seemed like an experienced barrister didn't help.
Question: I have another one in court (on that occasion, car wasn't parked - it was waiting) and another LBC for the same estate. How much of a disadvantage does it put me by losing this case?

On the day...

Hearing was at 10am, left early, got stuck in roadworks but still managed to make it in time. But didnt help the nerves.

Asked the usher about the claimants rep, was told she was a solicitors agent, so requested to discuss RoA with Judge as a preliminary matter. Usher was insistent that the the rep was a solicitors agent and that it was fine etc - pushed her to take the RoA documents which she reluctantly did. It was obvious that the rep was a regular and was on very friendly terms with the court staff.

The rep then came over and introduced herself, a nice lady on a personal level, asked if I knew the process and explained how to address the judge, advised that it would be just a judge and us etc. She accepted that I had challenged RoA and made a light comment about whether she would be heard.

It took a while before we went in from of the judge. The judge asked about the RoA, wasn't sure what I was trying to do by raising the RoA - at which point the claimants rep clarified that i was challenging her RoA. The judge asked the rep about her status, the rep stated that she was a barrister, listed some qualifications and said something was still in progress [ I looked her up when I got back - and she is on the Barrister's register]. The judge asked if I could point her to any particular point in the articles that would support my objection to RoA - I couldn't, so
The judge dismissed my request and said the rep had RoA.

The judge mentioned something about not having dealt with many parking cases, at which point the rep offered to help guide if required as she had done "hundreds"

The Judge then raised the point about when the claimants WS was submitted - the rep apologies and said it was a bit late - judge calculated it was within 10 days, didn't look too pleased but said that since we were all here, we could carry on.

So far, no joy from first to points of issue

The judge also stated that this would take more than 30 mins, she would hear some of the quicker cases first, so got sent out and to the back of the queue.

Next session (some of these may have been in the first session...cant recall now)

The Rep then started putting her case forward - started talking about POFA section 8... then my first of many mistakes...nerves took over and I interrupted and asked if I could say something...

The judge explained that the rep was entitled to put her points across without interruption...then asked the rep if it would be better to go through my skeleton and give me opportunity to discuss my points - the rep agreed.

I think nerves got worse..

Went through the points..

One observation, post the event, the judge looked at the quotes from other cases in the claimants WS, I didn't make the point of directing her to my WS for the counter arguments - made them orally which didn't have the same effect

Anyway..points of issue

Failure to set out clear terms:

They claimed signage was adequate, produced a site plan with lots of green crosses and photo of signs around the site. They couldn't point out where the car was located, so I had to mark it for the judge. I mentioned that the green crosses were not accurate, there were no signs adjacent to the car and one which claimed to be around the corner did not exist [ obviously didn't drum that home].

They mentioned Vines v Waltham forest to which I pointed out that in that case, the appeal courts found in favour of the motorist

I pointed out that signs were too small, didn't meet the their IPC guidelines etc.

Judge looked at the photos, theirs and mine, and was siding with the claimant - said that there were signs saying it was a private road which a motorist ought to have seen and that you cant expect to have signs everywhere for aesthetic reasons

They mentioned Beavis, I mentioned that the signs were too small and that it wasn't same as Beavis - Mistake here was to assume the judge had gone through my WS pack and seen the Beavis sign, and not showed it to the judge again.

Judge accepted that Yellow lies are not enforceable on a private road.

My mistake: overlooked my video evidence

Not POFA compliant:
The claimed the NTK was compliant. The judge wasn't familiar with the schedule so had to be walked through it by the rep.

I argued it wasn't as it didn't mention the time and that the two NTK's had different timings.

Judge disagreed, stated as it was a permit holders only parking, a duration wasn't necessary, unlike when you pay to park etc.

As for the different timings, rep claimed that one was when the photograph was taken and one was when the info was recorded in their system - or something like that..judge didn't seem to have an issue with that..

I also pointed out that under POFA, the max the PPC can claim is what is on the NTK and not the £160 the PPC were claiming - mistake here was not taking the judge through the point in the schedule wording...

The judge did agree that I did not have to name the driver as this was was a civil matter and an offence had not occurred.

No Standing:

They produced the agreement with L&Q.
I argued that it was dated 2013 and didn't prove that it was in effect in 2016, mention that according to the tenants association meeting minutes, tenants were displeased with PCM and had voted to reject PCM policies and another management company (Haus) may be in the process of taking over some of the blocks. Also stated that the managment company were not the landowners etc.

The judge asked if I had any documentation to show the landonwer had not given permission and If I had any documents to show that the agreement with PCM was not in effect in 2016.

As I had neither, then she would have to accept that the agreement was in place.

Vexatious claim:

She said she would only look at this case and this case alone and could not discuss the conduct of Gladstones in other cases [Or something to that effect]

Got sent out again as it was lunch time, we would be called back after lunch at which point the she would give her judgement.

After lunch, her judgement was:

1: There was adequate signage - one wasn't directly adjacent to the car but there was one around the corner [I didnt know if I could correct her at this point and didn't] and there were plenty around the site..
2: It was reasonable to assume a motorist should have seen the signs or got out and checked
3: It was capable of forming a contract
4: The NTK was compliant with POFA
5: the PPC did have an agreement to issue tickets

Then asked the Rep about amounts - rep asked about amount of interest the judge would allow [3%] and then added up the costs. The judge allowed then the £60 - again didn't know if she understood POFA and allowed it anyway or if I should have objected at is point.

Judge allowed 21 days to pay.

Rep told me outside that sometimes the paperwork from Gladstones takes two weeks so best to email them and ask where to pay, that way if they dont send the details, I have evidence that I tried and also avoid any risk of CCJ.

Summary - I could have done much better - first time in court, nerves and also up against what seemed like an experienced barrister didn't help.