Gladstones Claim Form

pokerish

DEFENCE
Background
1. It is admitted that at all material times the Defendant is the registered keeper of vehicle registration mark xxxxxxx which is the subject of these proceedings. The vehicle is insured with Admiral with 2 of named drivers permitted to use it.

2. It is admitted that on [date] the Defendant's vehicle was parked at the car park in question with a valid permit displayed in the windscreen at the specified time

3. It is accepted that the Defendant was the driver of the vehicle
No Breach of Contract
4. No breach of contract has occurred as a valid permit was displayed in the windscreen.
Authority to Park and Primacy of Contract
5. It is denied that the Defendant or lawful users of the vehicle were in breach of any parking conditions or were not permitted to park in circumstances where an express permission to park had been granted to the Defendant permitting the above mentioned vehicle to be parked by the current occupier and leaseholder of xxxx, whose tenancy agreement permits the parking of a vehicle on land. The Defendant avers that there was an absolute entitlement to park deriving from the terms of the lease, which cannot be fettered by any alleged parking terms. The lease terms provide the right to park a vehicle in the relevant allocated bay, without limitation as to type of vehicle, ownership of vehicle or the user of the vehicle.

5. The Defendant avers that the operator signs cannot (i) override the existing rights enjoyed by residents and their visitors and (ii) that parking easements cannot retrospectively and unilaterally be restricted where provided for within the lease. The Defendant will rely upon the judgments on appeal of HHJ Harris QC in Jopson v Homeguard Services Ltd (2016) and of Sir Christopher Slade in K-Sultana Saeed v Plustrade Ltd [2001] EWCA Civ 2011. The Court will be referred to further similar fact cases in the event that this matter proceeds to trial.
6. This Claimant has unilaterally attempted to foist upon residents a change of rules, in complete disregard to any existing rights and grants; the Claimant being a stranger to the various residents' Agreements. No variation of residents' Agreements has taken place and any such variation would be solely a matter between the landowner and the resident, in any case.
7. The Defendant denies any separate contract with the Claimant in respect of parking arrangements. The Claimant has offered nothing by way of consideration, given the primacy of contract enjoyed by residents who already have rights of way, and have been parking in that space for many months and have a reasonable expectation to continue to do so, free of harassment, predatory conduct and 'parking charges'.
8. It is denied that there was any breach of contract or of any relevant parking terms, or that there is a lawful basis to pursue a claim for loss. The Claimant's claim is wholly misconceived.

9. It is admitted that interest may be applicable, subject to the discretion of the Court on any sum (if awarded), but it is denied that interest is applicable on the total sums claimed by the Claimant.

10. The amount claimed for the parking charge is explicitly at odds with POFA. The Claimant has at no time provided an explanation as to how the ‘parking charge’ has been calculated or how the amount has escalated from £100 in the NTK to £166.46. This appears to be an added cost with apparently no qualification and an attempt at double recovery, which POFA Schedule 4 paragraph 4(6) specifically disallows. POFA Para 4(5) states that the maximum sum that may be recovered from the keeper is the charge stated on the Notice to Keeper - which was £100.
11. The Claimant has not incurred, nor can charge for legal representative's costs. The Defendant has the reasonable belief that the Claimant has not incurred £50 costs to pursue an alleged £100 debt. Notwithstanding the Defendant's belief, the costs are in any case not recoverable. The Claimant described the charge of £50.00 "legal representative’s costs" not "contractual costs". CPR 27.14 does not permit these to be recovered in the Small Claims Court.
The claim is unreasonable, vexatious and has no real prospect of success
12. As such, the Defendant is keeping careful note of all wasted time/costs in dealing with this matter and should the case continue to trial (or in the event of the Claimant filing a Notice of Discontinuance) the Defendant will seek further costs, pursuant to Civil Procedure Rule 27.14(2)(g).
13. The Claimant's solicitors 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. HMCS have identified thousands of similar poorly pleaded claims.
14. The Court is invited to take Judicial Notice of the fact that the Claimant's solicitors, Gladstones, is engaged in a course of conduct which involves issuing tens of thousands of meritless Claims, which are routinely dismissed by District Judges sitting in this Court, and other County Court hearing centres in all parts of England & Wales. The Court is therefore invited to refer the matter to the Designated Civil Judge, for consideration of the issuing an Extended Civil Restraint Order against the Claimant, pursuant to CPR Practice Direction 3.1(3).
15. The Defendant respectfully suggests that parking companies using the small claims track as a form of aggressive, automated monetary demands against motorists, for parking where they are lawfully entitled to (with valid permits displayed) is not something the Courts should be seen to support.
On the basis of the above, the defendant requests the court strike out the claim.
In the alternative the defendant requests the court to give a summary judgement against the claimant because the claim has no real prospect of succeeding given the prima facie injustice of the claim.

STATEMENT OF TRUTH
I confirm that the contents of this Defence are true.

Signed

Dated

pokerish

Thanks for your reply.

Should I submit evidence of my permit also?

I am also three days over the deadline now, I actually forgot I needed to do this. Will this be much of a problem?

Thanks

KeithP

pokerish wrote: »

I am also three days over the deadline now, I actually forgot I needed to do this. Will this be much of a problem?

Quite likely.

After 4th July the Claimant is free to ask the court for a Judgment by Default.

Nothing will happen over the weekend, so spend some time honing your Defence and email it before Monday as described in post #6 above.

Evidence comes later.

Re-read post #2 of the NEWBIES FAQ sticky thread.

Coupon-mad

The vehicle is insured with Admiral with 2 of named drivers permitted to use it.

Remove that, as you are the admitted driver in the defence.

You MUST email this to the CCBC by Sunday. You may even be too late but do it anyway.

You worry me, if you forgot this stage how the heck are you going to keep up at DQ stage, then Witness Statement and evidence stage?

pokerish

Hello,

I received Gladstone Solicitors copy of clients directions questionnaire where they ask for the case to be dealt on papers. The letter also says they will be happy to listen to genuine payment proposals.

On a thread it says to respond saying no, how do I do this?
I haven't received a directions questionnaire myself yet.

Also, would it be easier to respond with a payment proposal of £60?

KeithP

So you are no longer following the guidance offered in post #2 of the NEWBIES FAQ sticky thread?

In particular, this bit:

Note: Gladstones are currently including a 'request for special directions' asking the Court to hear the case on the papers only, without an oral hearing. You should oppose this, and include the following text in D1: "The Defendant opposes the Claimant's request for special directions, and requests that the case be listed for an oral hearing at the defendant's home court, pursuant to CPR 26.2A(3)".

It really is quicker to check the NEWBIES thread than ask the question.

I'll leave you to research your other query.

Coupon-mad

Also, would it be easier to respond with a payment proposal of £60?

Errrmmm...let me think about that for a nano second...NO!

If you search the forum for these keywords from that letter:

Gladstones straightforward

you will find what to put in a covering note with your DQ when you get it.

pokerish

Hi,

I am now at the witness statement stage.

Below is a witness statement I have drafted:

In the County Court at XXXXX
Claim No. XXXXXXXX
Between
Parking Eye Ltd (Claimant)
and
xxx (Defendant)

---

Witness Statement

---

1. I am xxx, of [Address], [Postcode], the Defendant in this matter. I will say as follows:

2. I was a resident of XXXXX [Address], and attach evidence of tenancy agreement as Exhibit A.

3. On [DATE] I parked my vehicle registration no, XXXXX in the car park.

4. My tenancy agreement granted me a parking permit and my own parking space. Evidence of this is contained in my parking permit, dated XXXXX, a picture of it attached as Exhibit B.

5. Upon receipt of a parking charge notice from the Claimant, I supplied them with this evidence, however they have elected to pursue this matter via litigation.

6. It is my position that, under the doctrine of promissory estoppel, the Claimant has no standing, or cause of action, to litigate in this matter.

7. I invite the Court to dismiss this claim in its entirety, and to award my costs of attendance at the hearing, such as are allowable pursuant to CPR 27.14.

Statement of Truth

I believe that the facts stated in this Witness Statement are true.

Signature
Date



Should I also include evidence about the small print signage?

I must submit it by 1st January.

Please could someone review it and let me know if it is suitable to send.
Thanks

pokerish

Hi please could someone have a look at my previous post thanks

nosferatu1001

What does 6) have to do with this case? Were you promised something? If not, then promissory estoppel would not apply

Why have you not mentioned that the permit WAS in the windscreen? given part of your defence relies upon it!

You havent reference where in your tenancy your absolute right to park was given. You havent shown us, either, as a lot of people randomly copy and paste stuff like this. You dont just attach the agreement, you refer to a specific clause in the agreement and, if necessary, reproduce it in the WS.

Why have you left this 2 weeks?

What does parking eye have to do with this? Are they using Gladstones to file claims now? Who are the PPC, becauwse im betting a tenner it is NOT Parking Eye?