Gladstones - Letter Before Claim (PCM)

subzero1988

Hello,

I've received an LBC from Gladstones, on behalf of PCM (The site wont let me post the image to the letter)

From what I can remember, the fine came from parking in residential flats but I really can't remember.

Anyhow I've been reading up on the newbie threat and various other threads regarding Gladstone LBC's and I've come across this particular thread that has a template letter to send -

Dear Sirs,

Thank you for your letter of x.

When your client's debt collectors first started contacting me, I asked them for details of the basis upon which money was being claimed, including all photographs taken of the vehicle at the relevant time. Extraordinarily, I was told (in blunt terms) by [name of debt collectors] that no such evidence would be provided "until this gets to court" [try and reproduce the exact words used].


You have now sent a Letter Before Claim. However, your letter contains insufficient detail of the claim and, again, fails to provide the photographic evidence which I requested as long ago as [date - if you don't know exact date, put the month and year]. It does not even say what the cause of action is. Nor does it contain any mention of what evidence your client intends to rely on, or enclose copies of such evidence.


This action on the part of your client is a clear breach of its pre-action obligations set out in the Practice Direction - Pre-Action Conduct, with which as solicitors you must surely be familiar (and with which your client, a serial litigator of small claims, must also be familiar). As you (and your client) must know, the Practice Direction binds all potential litigants, whatever the size or type of the claim. Its express purpose is to assist parties in understanding the claim and their respective positions in relation to it, to enable parties to take stock of their positions and to negotiate a settlement, or at least narrow the issues, without incurring the costs of court proceedings or using up valuable court time.


Nobody, including your client, is immune from the requirements and obligations of the Practice Direction. Your client cannot simply refuse to provide the relevant information "until this gets to court" [or whatever they said].

I require your client to comply with its obligations by sending me the following information/documents:

1. an explanation of the cause of action
2. whether they are pursuing me as driver or keeper
3. whether they are relying on the provisions of Schedule 4 of POFA 2012
4. what the details of the claim are (where it is claimed the car was parked, for how long, how the monies being claimed arose and have been calculated, what contractual breach (if any) is being claimed)
5. a copy of the contract with the landowner under which they assert authority to bring the claim
6. a copy of any alleged contract with the driver
7. a plan showing where any signs were displayed
8. details of the signs displayed (size of sign, size of font, height at which displayed)
9. If they have added anything on to the original charge, what that represents and how it has been calculated.

I am clearly entitled to this information under paragraphs 6(a) and 6(c) of the Practice Direction. I also need it in order to comply with my own obligations under paragraph 6(b).

If your client does not provide me with this information then I put you on notice that I will be relying on the cases of Webb Resolutions Ltd v Waller Needham & Green [2012] EWHC 3529 (Ch), Daejan Investments Limited v The Park West Club Limited (Part 20) !!!8211; Buxton Associates [2003] EWHC 2872, Charles Church Developments Ltd v Stent Foundations Limited & Peter Dann Limited [2007] EWHC 855 in asking the court to impose sanctions on your client and to order a stay of the proceedings, pursuant to paragraphs 13 ,15(b) and (c) and 16. I will draw to the court the fact that I have expressly requested this information since as early as [date or month/year of first request] yet your client has refused to provide it, saying that it will not do so until this matter reaches the court.


Until your client has complied with its obligations and provided this information, I am unable to respond properly to the alleged claim and to consider my position in relation to it, and it is entirely premature (and a waste of costs and court time) for your client to issue proceedings. Should your client do so, then I will seek an immediate stay pursuant to paragraph 15(b) of the Practice Direction and an order that this information is provided.

Yours faithfully etc.

Is this still the most up-to-date method/best letter to send to them after receiving the LBC? And I'm guessing to not just copy and paste the exact letter, i'll write it in my own words but use it as a template to go by?

Any help is much appreciated, thanks

subzero1988

Can I mention as well - I actually am not sure where it was this PCN was from, I have an idea but im 80% sure. This doesn't really help my case as when I need to build a defence for the court case, I wont have anything to go off.

And by the looks of it, Gladstones seem to send back a template letter saying that they have supplied sufficient information in the original LBC - So I have no way of finding out how I actually incurred the fine.

subzero1988

Just realised it says on the letter, someone else has posted a thread regarding this specific parking space - if you search PCM UK (Great West Quarter, Brentford) you’ll find it. I can’t post links

KeithP

Here's the link to that other thread:

PCM UK (Great West Quarter, Brentford)

Take note that in October 2017 a new Pre-Action Protocol for Debt Claims came into effect, so if you are planning to use the LBC response letter from that other thread then it will need some adjustment.

There are sample LBC responses linked from post #2 of the NEWBIES FAQ sticky thread, so with a bit of thought it should be possible to pick the best of both.

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 another 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 lose most of them, and have been reported to the regulatory authority by an M.P. for unprofessional conduct

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 they will be out of business by Christmas.

subzero1988

OK I've used the template used and put it into my own words, and also re-arranged the structure of it to make it my own. Is this sufficient enough? Thanks in advance

Gladstones Solicitors
The Terrace
High Leigh Park Golf Club
Warrington
Cheshire
WA16 6AA

[Date]

Your Ref: [Ref]

Dear Sirs,

I am in receipt of your Letter Before Claim of [Date].

The letter that I received does not provide me with sufficient detail of the claim, nor does it provide any evidence that you stated in your letter that your client is relying on. Your client must come to understand that on 1st October 2017, a new protocol came into action regarding debt claims. Since the claim proceedings are taking place after this date, the new protocol must be adhered to.

The letter that I received from yourselves does not meet the requirements of the previously valid Practice Direction – Pre-Action Conduct (paragraphs 6(a) and 6(c)) and the new Pre-Action Protocol for Debt Claims (paragraphs 3.1(a)-(d)), 5.1 and 5.2. As you and your client should be well aware, the previously used Practice Direction and the Protocol, which is applicable from 1st October 2017, are legally binding to all parties of any sized debt claim. It is in place so that prior to court proceedings, all parties understand the claim and their particular positions in relation to it, ensure that parties can take stock of their positions and also negotiate a settlement before the claim goes to court as to mitigate court costs and also valuable court time.

I am requesting all the documents/information that the new protocol state that your client has to produce. As a result of not providing this information from letter before claim, your client should not issue any proceedings without complying with the protocol requirements. I must also state that I reserve the right to bring to light any failure of the Claimant to obey with the protocol to the attention of the court, and to ask the court to stay the claim and order your client to comply with its pre-action obligations, and when any costs come to be considered.

I require your client to comply with its obligations by sending me the following information/documents:

1. An explanation of the cause of action
2. Whether they are pursuing me as driver or keeper
3. Whether they are relying on the provisions of Schedule 4 of POFA 2012
4. 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
5. 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.
6. Is the claim for trespass? If so, provide details.
7. 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.
8. A plan showing where any signs were displayed
9. Details of the signs displayed (size of sign, size of font, height at which displayed)
10. Provide details of the original charge and detail any interest and administrative or other charges added
11. Provide a copy of the Information Sheet and the Reply Form

If your client does not provide me with this information then I put you on notice that I will be relying on the cases of Webb Resolutions Ltd v Waller Needham & Green [2012] EWHC 3529 (Ch), Daejan Investments Limited v The Park West Club Limited (Part 20) Buxton Associates [2003] EWHC 2872, Charles Church Developments Ltd v Stent Foundations Limited & Peter Dann Limited [2007] EWHC 855 in asking the court to impose sanctions on your client and to order a stay of the proceedings, pursuant to paragraphs 13 ,15(b) and (c) and 16 of the Practice Direction, as referred to in paragraph 7.2 of the Protocol.

Lastly, I cannot properly respond to this claim filed against me, I am also unable to understand my position in relation to it until your client has fulfilled their responsibilities as the Claimant, by providing me with the sufficient information that is required of them to go forth with any court proceedings. If your client still proceeds without this information provided, I will seek immediate stay pursuant to paragraph 15(b) of the Practise Direction, and an order that this information is provided.


Yours faithfully

subzero1988

Also - Thank you everyone for the replies

beamerguy

subzero1988 wrote: »

Also - Thank you everyone for the replies

You must understand that dealing with the infamous
Gladstones is a complete joke. They are a disgrace to
the legal community.

I trust you have read all about this incompetent bunch

http://parking-prankster.blogspot.com/search?q=gladstones

subzero1988

Yes I have been doing a lot of reading up on this waste of a company! And espeically on parking prankster.

Just wondering - I've found the PCN information on PCM's website, it was pitch black when the ticket was issued, the sign is next to the car but doesn't look sufficent enough. They even got the colour of my car wrong (its purple, they put black), does anything like this help my case at all?

Coupon-mad

Car colour - no.

Pitch blank, unlit sign - YES of course! But at court defence/hearing stage. Right now Gladstones are in conveyor belt 'robo-claim' mode so nothing you say now will stop that.

subzero1988

Coupon-mad wrote: »

Car colour - no.

Pitch blank, unlit sign - YES of course! But at court defence/hearing stage. Right now Gladstones are in conveyor belt 'robo-claim' mode so nothing you say now will stop that.

Brilliant, thank you.

I'll send off my reply to the LBC this weekend and go from there