Letter Before Claim - Gladstones

Coupon-mad

I would remove this:

(driver recalls approx 3-4 minutes)

And remove this as it has no legs:

4. Consumer Rights

4.1 The signage at the site does not carry the information required by the The Consumer Contracts (Information, Cancellation and Additional Charges) Regulations 2013 (exhibit 13), specifically on the right to cancel required by paragraph (l) of Schedule 2.

Shall i state the length of time the car was parked?

No.

There is no time in/out, just 1 minute and 8 seconds worth of timestamped photo's.

Is there a good argument there worth making/expanding on?

Predatory enforcement, like in any Heath Parade PCM defence, here's one they recently discontinued, have a look at Heath Parade threads and plagiarise their defence wording too (you may have to pm the thread starter):

http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.php?t=5578291

georgia_00

Coupon-Mad, many thanks. Have edited a few bits, and added a bit (section 5 penalty charges)


____________________________________



1. Introduction

1.1. This claim refers to a parking incident in an unmarked lay-by outside the Barham Park housing Estate, in Wembley. For all intents and purposes this !!!8216;bay!!!8217; appears to be part of the public highway.

1.2. On the 29th October 2016 the vehicle was in said unmarked lay-by.

1.3. Within a period of 1 minute and 8 seconds, going by the photographic evidence provided by PCM, a parking charge notice was applied to the vehicle.

1.4. The Particulars of Claim states that the charge is for breaching the terms of parking on the land.

1.5. The claimant refused to provide any evidence of landowner authority for issuing parking charges, citing client confidentiality.

2. No Contract Exists

2.1 I understand from correspondence with the Claimant that the Claimants case relies upon the signage at the site constituting a contract between myself and the Claimant. The breach of terms on the Particulars of Claim presumably refers to the supposed contract formed by this signage.

2.2 There is no offer made by the signage in this case, and no conceivable way I could have benefitted from this alleged contract, without breaching its terms. The sign states 'No parking for any other vehicles at any time'.

2.3 The very act of entering into this alleged contract (parking) constitutes a breach of its terms, therefore making it impossible to perform. How was the sum of £100 'agreed', given that PCM's sign is prohibitive - unable in this case to be deemed to be offering a contract? It is submitted that if these notices are attempting to make a contractual offer, then as they are forbidding as they do not fulfil the basic requirement of a contract, which is that each party to the contract must offer valuable consideration to the other party, on clear terms capable of acceptance. In this case neither the Claimant, nor their principal the landowner, is offering anything to motorists

2.4 The signage at the site is also very similar to the signage in the cases of Horizon Parking v Mr J. Guildford, and PCMUK vs Bull et al, in which it was ruled that, if any contractual arrangement could be implied by such signage, then it only applied to vehicles which were authorised to park and therefore charges could not be made on a contractual basis for vehicles that were not authorised to park. I cannot have entered into a contract for something I was not authorised to do.

3. Inadequate Signage/Predatory enforcement

3.1 The IPC guidelines state that signage at the entrance to the site should make it clear that the motorist is entering onto private land. There is no signage at the entrance to the site in question and one can see from the photographs that I would not have passed any signage indicating I was entering private land.

3.2 The IPC guidelines (1.15) state Drivers should be allowed a sufficient amount of time to park, approach, and read any signs so as to make an informed decision as to whether or not to remain on the site. No specific time is given, although (15.2) specifies a minimum period of ten minutes for leaving the site. I do not consider the time given was adequate time for the driver to read and assess the signage on site. This grace period was not observed and therefore the operator is in breach of the industry code of practice. Additionally no contract can be in place by conduct until a reasonable period elapses. Time is required to read and understand the signs.

3.3 The writing is so small that any terms and conditions cannot be clearly read from a vehicle, even stopped adjacent to the sign. If it was held that the signage was contractually valid, it would be impossible for a motorist to have read the terms and conditions contained therein from a moving or stopped vehicle, and if the vehicle is stopped, the !!!8216;contravention!!!8217; according to the Claimant is already committed.

4. Landowner Authority

4.1 Despite being asked, the Claimant has not provided any evidence that they are authorised by the freeholder to issue parking charges and carry out court proceedings on their behalf. The Claimant is put to strict proof that they have such authority, in the form of an unredacted and contemporaneous contract, or chain of authority, from the landowner to the Claimant.
5.
5.1 The charge of £100 is a penalty and unfair consumer charge. The leading case on this matter is ParkingEye v Beavis [2015] UKSC 67. In that case it was ruled that the penalties rule was engaged but the charge was not unfair because the motorist had the bargain of 2 hours of valuable free parking in exchange for the risk of paying £100 for overstaying. The risk was clearly brought to the attention of the consumer in a huge font. Here, there is no valuable consideration on offer and no bargain for the consumer, and the charge is hidden in small print. It is submitted that no motorist would agree to pay £100 instantly on stopping and this is therefore and unfair consumer term in breach of the Consumer Rights Act 2015.
6. Additional Costs

6.1 The Particulars of Claim include £60 over and above the original parking charge. I have no idea what these charges refer to as there appears to be no contractual basis for them, even if one were to take the Claimants somewhat far-fetched view as to what constitutes a contract into account. The Claimant is put to strict proof that these additional charges are justified.

6.2 The Particulars of Claim include £50 for solicitor's costs, yet all I have received from the Claimants solicitors are automated letters. The Claimant is put to strict proof that these costs are justified. Proof that the sum of £50 was paid by their client, to whom, and for what service.


_______________________________


I'm pretty happy to submit this now and would like to thank everyone.



Coupon-Mad, i'd like to make a donation to a cause of your choice, I can't PM you, please let me know. Appreciate your guidance regardless of outcome.

Thanks

Georgia

Umkomaas

You need to put in a header for your new section 5, to fit with the headers of other sections.

georgia_00

[FONT=&quot]Just an update - have recieved the expected below email from Gladstones
[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]We act for the Claimant and have notified the Court of our Clients intention to proceed with the claim. [/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]Please find attached a copy of our Clients completed Directions Questionnaire, which will be filed with the court upon their request. You will note we intend to request a special direction that the case be dealt with on the papers and without the need for an oral hearing[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]This request is sought simply because the matter is in our Clients opinion relatively straightforward and the costs incurred by both parties for attending an oral hearing would be disproportionate.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]You will note our Client has elected not to mediate. Its decision is not meant to be in any way obstructive and is based purely on experience, as mediation has rarely proven beneficial in these types of cases. Notwithstanding this, our Client would be happy to listen to any genuine payment proposals that you wish to put forward.[/FONT]

nosferatu1001

And you know to fill out N180 with a covering letter

Keep on keeping on!

Coupon-mad

georgia_00 wrote: »

[FONT=&quot]Just an update - have recieved the expected below email from Gladstones
[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]We act for the Claimant and have notified the Court of our Clients intention to proceed with the claim. [/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]Please find attached a copy of our Clients completed Directions Questionnaire, which will be filed with the court upon their request. You will note we intend to request a special direction that the case be dealt with on the papers and without the need for an oral hearing[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]This request is sought simply because the matter is in our Clients opinion relatively straightforward and the costs incurred by both parties for attending an oral hearing would be disproportionate.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]You will note our Client has elected not to mediate. Its decision is not meant to be in any way obstructive and is based purely on experience, as mediation has rarely proven beneficial in these types of cases. Notwithstanding this, our Client would be happy to listen to any genuine payment proposals that you wish to put forward.[/FONT]

You must have a hearing date by now, so you need to come back and show us your Witness Statement and evidence, well before the date set in the local court letter, telling you about the hearing.

georgia_00

Coupon-Mad, I received a hearing date, but did not get around to submitting my witness statement and evidence.



I recieved an email and letter stating that they are discontinuing their claim.



A big 'thank you' to yourself, KeithP, Umkomaas, and Nosferatu for taking the time to read my posts and offer your guidance.



Can any of you let me know a charity of your choice as I would like to make a donation on your behalf as a thank you.

nosferatu1001

Phew, you dodged that there!
For me it would be the Terrence Higgins Trust, but see what others say - I didnt give as much help as the others, they should have first request

Umkomaas

I'll leave it to Coupon-mad to nominate.

PS - the B&HA Player Transfer Fund is not a Charity!

Coupon-mad

Great news - well done - another one bites the dust!

Cancer Research UK is my vote, but you could split a donation.