Court Claim received from Gladstone on behalf of PACE Recovery

Coupon-mad

Independent Parking Committee ("IPC"),

Wrong name. That's their old name.

And this bit conflates the two DIFFERENT meanings of 'contract' so it's not right:

The sign states that the "site is managed and operated" by the Claimant, however the claimant failed to send a copy of their written contract as per Practice Direction 16 7.3(1) and Practice Direction 7C 1.4(3A). THAT MEANS THE SIGNAGE


THIS MEANS THE LANDOWNER CONTRACT, A DIFFERENT THING:
No indication is given as to the Claimants contractual authority to operate there as required by the Claimants Trade Associations Code of Practice B1.1. 1.1 If you operate parking management activities on land which is not owned by you, you must supply us with written authority from the land owner sufficient to establish you as the Creditor within the meaning of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (where applicable) and in any event to establish you as a person who is able to recover parking charges. There is no prescribed form for such agreement and it need not necessarily be as part of a contract but it must include the express ability for an operator to recover parking charges on the landowners behalf or provide sufficient right to occupy the land in question so that charges can be recovered by the operator directly. This applies whether or not you intend to use the keeper liability provisions. (PROVIDE EXHIBIT EVIDENCE)

And I am not clear here what you are saying about the Cargius case that you have mentioned but not given an Exhibit number, and not explained how it is relevant:

I would like to point out that as this car park does not offer a free parking period the ParkingEye v Beavis and Wardley case does not apply (ParkingEye v Cargius case)

The rest is looking good!

Enrique123

thanks for the feedback, I deleted this part in entirety and completed and posted the WS.

THIS MEANS THE LANDOWNER CONTRACT, A DIFFERENT THING:
No indication is given as to the Claimants contractual authority to operate there as required by the Claimants Trade Associations Code of Practice B1.1. 1.1 If you operate parking management activities on land which is not owned by you, you must supply us with written authority from the land owner sufficient to establish you as the Creditor within the meaning of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (where applicable) and in any event to establish you as a person who is able to recover parking charges. There is no prescribed form for such agreement and it need not necessarily be as part of a contract but it must include the express ability for an operator to recover parking charges on the landowners behalf or provide sufficient right to occupy the land in question so that charges can be recovered by the operator directly. This applies whether or not you intend to use the keeper liability provisions. (PROVIDE EXHIBIT EVIDENCE)

Enrique123

By way of update, I posted my WS and related evidence via special delivery on Wed 21st Nov to the courts and Gladstone.

I have checked the tracking and have noted that the courts received and signed for everything on thurs 21st (so within 14 days of the hearing). I note that Gladstone received and signed for the documents on the 23rd (so not within 14 days) - however as this was sent via special next day delivery and I have kept the receipts, should this be an issue?

Secondly, I called the courts and confirmed that they have received my docs and this was logged on the 23rd (albeit being signed for and received on the 22nd). I did confirm that recorded delivery post is backdated by one day against the date it is logged in, so looks all good here.

Finally, I was also able to confirm that Gladstones doc was received and logged in today by the courts, however I have not received any copies. So second question is, since they have missed the deadline of 14days before the hearing as per the directions, will this evidence be hold and be valid? and also since I've not received any copies, what is the position here?

Enrique123

7. This is not provided for in small claims timetables, but many Defendants choose to file a Case Summary/Skeleton Argument a few days before the hearing. This simply summarises your case, your defence and your factual evidence. The aim of the document is to replace your oral submissions on the day (so you say to the judge that you are relying on what's in your skeleton and ask him if he wants you to add anything, and he may well say no - the only thing you then need to speak about is rebutting any points the Claimant has made on the day, unless these are dealt with in your Skeleton - it is best to point the judge to your strongest arguments and to make sure he understands them). If there's anything you forgot in your original defence, now is the time to put it into the Skeleton, but the court has a discretion to say that you didn't put that in your defence, you can't get it in now through the back door.

So just referring back to the above from LoadsofChildrens post, will start on my skeleton argument. Can I include in this that documentation has not been received from Gladstone (and they also were late sending it to the courts). Or can this not be used as it is not part of my WS.

Also, should I start thinking about adding up any court costs and personal costs (should I win of course)?

KeithP

Enrique123 wrote: »

Also, should I start thinking about adding up any court costs and personal costs (should I win of course)?

Of course. Doesn't it say that in the NEWBIES thread?

Enrique123

So I will use the below for court costs. Need help on the two highlighted points

DEFENDANT'S SCHEDULE OF COSTS


Ordinary Costs


Loss of earnings/leave, incurred through attendance at Court 05/12/2018 £XXX.XX
- How should this be calculated? is there a particular formula to apply here - my inclination was to use my annual gross wages/250 (assumed no. of business days per year)

Return mileage from home address to Court (60 miles x £0.45) £27.00

Parking near Court £5.00

Sub-total £XXX.XX ======


Further costs for Claimant's unreasonable behaviour, pursuant to Civil Procedure Rule 27.14(2)(g)
- What should be noted here (if anything)

Research, preparation and drafting of documents (5 hours at Litigant in Person rate of £19 per hour) £95.00

Stationery, printing, photocopying and postage: £24.60

Sub-total £119.60 ======

Umkomaas

Loss of earnings/leave, incurred through attendance at Court 05/12/2018 £XXX.XX
- How should this be calculated? is there a particular formula to apply here - my inclination was to use my annual gross wages/250 (assumed no. of business days per year)

It's a capped maximum of up to £95 for loss of earnings (or annual leave) for just half a day. Take payslips to justify the claim.

Further costs for Claimant's unreasonable behaviour, pursuant to Civil Procedure Rule 27.14(2)(g)
- What should be noted here (if anything)

'Unreasonable behaviour' is a high bar to get over. You would need to be able to detail all the issues and instances of what happened, when, where, how etc.

I've not read back through the thread, but if you have suffered the standard, usual hassle from a stubborn PPC, I think you're going to have to find a Judge very sympathetic to your case. I've seen very few examples in the context of private parking charges.

Enrique123

Great - thanks for that.

This is an extract from my WS - does this constitute "unreasonable behaviour"? If not will remove.
In the case of the second claim, where my permit has been filled in, but the Claimant had indicated that I have overwritten the date. This is definitely not the case and I did not overwrite the dates. There is a darker mark on the date here as my pen did not mark well the first time and had to make the date clearer, however despite explaining this, this was not accepted by the Claimant's Legal representation, who have inferred that I have been dishonest. In any case, I would consider this at the minimum very predatory behaviour, making an opportunistic claim and at worst a fraudulent claim.

DoaM

CPR = Civil Procedure Rules (in ref. to your hijack post in the NEWBIES thread - please delete it).

Enrique123

Sorry guys, deleted the question from the main thread. It's not a universally used acronym so a simple google search didn't have the answer.