Gladstones court claim - your advice please?

jessielicious

Hi all, I'd appreciate your advice on my situation please. I received a PCN last August for 'Parking in No Parking Area'. This was at a private block of flats. The driver's (vague) recollection of the signs was that they said 'no unauthorised parking'. They assumed that as they were there at the invitation of a resident in order to collect an item the resident had sold the driver, they were authorised. The car was in the space for 9 minutes before the ticket was issued and when the driver returned to the car they were told by bystanders that they had 'just missed' the ticket agent.

Obviously without knowing what the signs said I can't even begin to form a defence. The court claim is being brought by Gladstones, and I wrote to them in November requesting the usual further details, which they have failed to provide.

Presumably if they provide the info and the signs do say 'no parking', then I have no further defence? But in the meantime is the following an acceptable defence to submit?

I am XXX, Defendant in this case

1. It is admitted that the Defendant was the authorised registered keeper of the vehicle in question at the time of the alleged incident.
2. The Claimant has not provided enough details in the particulars of claim to file a full defence.
3. I wrote to the Claimant's Solicitor on 09/11/2017 requesting they provide the following information, as required under the Pre-Action Protocol for Debt Claims:
- An explanation of the cause of action
- Whether they are pursuing me as driver or keeper
- Whether they are relying on the provisions of Schedule 4 of POFA 2012
- What the details of the claim are; where it is claimed the vehicle was parked, for how long, how the monies being claimed arose and have been calculated
- Is the claim for a contractual breach? If so, what is the date of the agreement? The names of the parties to it and provide to me a copy of that contract.
- Is the claim for trespass? If so, provide details.
- Provide me a copy of the contract with the landowner under which they assert authority to bring the claim, as required by the IPC code of practice section B, clause 1.1 'establishing yourself as the creditor'
- A plan showing where any signs were displayed
- Details of the signs displayed (size of sign, size of font, height at which displayed)
- Provide details of the original charge, and detail any interest and administrative or other charges added
- Provide a copy of the Information Sheet and the Reply Form

To date I have received no response to my request. The Defendant asks that the court orders Further and Better Particulars of Claim and asks leave to amend the Defence.

Coupon-mad

Obviously without knowing what the signs said I can't even begin to form a defence

Not true.

But in the meantime is the following an acceptable defence to submit?

Noooooo. STOP. STOP!!

You appear to have missed the example defences in the second post of the NEWBIES FAQs thread. There is even one written by Johnersh, a solicitor, especially for cases of parking in a residential car park to collect something or drop off, where Jopson is a case that assists.

So go and read post #2 of the sticky thread, do the AOS online as shown there, and come back here and show us a DECENT defence draft. How long have you got, date of claim?

The_Deep

This is an entirely unregulated industry which is scamming the public with inflated claims for minor breaches of contracts for alleged parking offences, aided and abetted by a handful of low-rent solicitors..

Parking Eye, CPM, Smart, and a smaller company have already been named and shamed, as has Gladstones Solicitors, and BW Legal, (these two law firms take hundreds of these cases to court each year). They nearly always lose) and have been reported to the regulatory authority by an M.P.

Hospital car parks and residential complex tickets have been especially mentioned.

The problem has become so rampant that MPs have agreed to enact a Bill to regulate these scammers. Watch the video of the Second Reading in the HofC recently.

http://parliamentlive.tv/event/index/2f0384f2-eba5-4fff-ab07-cf24b6a22918?in=12:49:41

and complain in the most robust terms to your MP. With a fair wind most of these companies may well be put out of business by Christmas.

jessielicious

Coupon-mad wrote: »

Not true.

Noooooo. STOP. STOP!!

You appear to have missed the example defences in the second post of the NEWBIES FAQs thread. There is even one written by Johnersh, a solicitor, especially for cases of parking in a residential car park to collect something or drop off, where Jopson is a case that assists.

SO go and read post #2 of the sticky thread, do the AOS online as shown there, and come back here and show us a DECENT defence draft. How long have you got, date of claim?

Thanks Coupon-mad, yes I had missed that one. Very helpful. I Acknowledged the service on 8/3/18. How's this defence:

I am XXX, Defendant in this case
1. It is admitted that the Defendant was the authorised registered keeper of the vehicle in question at the time of the alleged incident.
2. The defendant has no liability as they are the Keeper of the vehicle, and the Private Parking Company has failed to comply with the strict provisions of PoFA 2012 to hold anyone other than the driver liable for the charge.
2(i) the driver has not been evidenced on any occasion.
2(ii) There is no presumption in law that the keeper was the driver and nor is a keeper obliged to name the driver to a private parking firm. This was confirmed in the POPLA Annual Report 2015 by the POPLA Lead Adjudicator and barrister, Henry Greenslade, when explaining the POFA 2012 principles of 'keeper liability' as set out in Schedule 4.
3. It is denied that the Claimant has authority to bring this claim. The proper Claimant is the landowner. Strict proof is required that there is a chain of contracts leading from the landowner to Parking & Property Management Ltd and that they have a right to unilaterally remove or interfere with the overriding rights enjoyed by the lessee and extended to permitted drivers who were expressly allowed on site.
4. The driver of the car was at the location with the permission of a leaseholder tenant, in order to load an item that had been sold by that tenant to the driver. The car was at the location for 9 minutes for this express purpose. The Claimant has not provided details of the sign wording and whether it makes reference to loading or unloading.
5. The driver was allowed the right to load/unload by a leasehold resident. This permission created the prevailing and overriding contract - the only contract - and the business was concluded as agreed, at no cost or penalty.
6. Loading or unloading with the permission of the landholder is not 'parking' and signs cannot override existing rights enjoyed by landowners and their visitors, as was found in the Appeal case decided by His Honour Judge Harris QC at Oxford County Court, in case number B9GF0A9E: 'JOPSON V HOME GUARD SERVICES’.
7. In the Jopson appeal it was also held as a finding of fact, that stopping to unload was not 'parking'. I would argue that this must also apply to loading.
8. The reason for this parking company's presence on this site can only be for the sole purpose of deterring parking by uninvited persons, for the benefit of drivers authorised by the leaseholder businesses and residents. Instead, contrary to various consumer laws, this Claimant carries out a predatory operation on those very people whose interests they are purportedly there to uphold.
9. The Claimant has not complied with the Pre-Action Protocol for Debt Claims. The Defendant wrote to the Claimant’s Solicitor on 09/11/2017 requesting further details of the claim. Gladstones Solicitors did not respond to this request and in fact are known to be a serial issuer of generic claims similar to this one, with no due diligence, no scrutiny of details nor even checking for a true cause of action. I believe the term for such conduct is ‘robo-claims’; which is against the public interest, demonstrates a disregard for the dignity of the court and is unfair on unrepresented consumers.


I confirm that the contents of this statement are true to the best of my knowledge and belief.

nosferatu1001

What is the date of issue
The date you acnowledged isnt important, the date of issue IS.

KeithP

No. Date of Issue of the Claim Form.

jessielicious

6th March 2018

KeithP

Then you have until 4pm on Monday 9th April to deliver your Defence.

Probably best to aim for Friday 6 April.

nosferatu1001

So you have 33 days from that issue date.

jessielicious

KeithP wrote: »

Then you have until 4pm on Monday 9th April to deliver your Defence.

Probably best to aim for Friday 6 April.

Ok. Is that to make things inconvenient for Gladstones? And does my draft defence look ok?

KeithP

No, it's to point out that you have until that date to hone your defence to perfection.