Court Claim Northmapton - Gladstones

Coupon-mad

Bad luck! But you went away from this forum for months and didn't come back at the stage where you were told by the Judge to submit your WS and evidence.

You could have filed the lease, and the Transcript of Jopson v Home Guard, and you would have won, IMHO, based on the facts in this defence:

3. On the material date, the Defendant stopped the vehicle at a place used by traders, on a daytime, close to the entrance of the building, for the purposes of loading and unloading. The Defendant!!!8217;s allocated space at the nearby multi-story residential car park is at the 7th floor which has no lift access. The car park provides merely a stair access for floors 7th and 8th.

4. On any reasonable construction, this action did not constitute 'parking'. In any event, it would be an implied term of the leasehold agreement that leaseholders should be able to park near the entrance temporarily, in order to transfer heavy items from the vehicle to the property and also to safely transfer a toddler in their baby pram.

5. The Leaseholder Agreement is the legal basis upon which the leaseholder occupied the property. On the subject of parking, it states that a leaseholder has a right to load and unload a vehicle given no obstruction is caused for the other parties. The agreement specifies that it's allowed to unload your car under 10 minutes.

A cautionary tale for NEWBIES.

This loss was down to your inaction I'm afraid, as it sound like you fielded a decent defence then sat back till the hearing and missed the important WS & evidence stage pre-hearing.

You even had a clue when the Claimant sent you theirs...if you sent nothing, that's why you lost.

As it says in the sticky thread, do not think that defence is your only job...

beamerguy

pastacolg wrote: »

On the good side I am still going to pay LESS what I was asked before the case (around £50 less) as the judge didn't award the £60 additional costs on top of the £100 parking fee. Total cost for me is £200. Best of all I didn't even have to take a day off or lose my contract day rate as I will just make it up for the hours spent in the court this evening.

Well, Gladstones won on paper but in the £££ pot, they lost but of course I forget, they work on the minimum wage

The £60 which the judge did not allow, what did the judge say about this .... what was the reason.

Be helpful to know to assist scuppering Gladstones on their future fake add-on of £60

pastacolg

I agree, I put a half-decent WS and didn't really prepared counter-points for theirs until 5 minutes before the hearing. The judge was clearly on my side. I guess he just had no leg to stand to save me today.

BTW, the hearing took about 35 minutes. The representative was well prepared, although a 3 minutes late, and actually wrote a witness statement that referenced (and tried to rebunk) every point of my defence. So a lot of work has been made on their side I must admit. But still it's a lose-lose result for both of us. As the whole preparations and the hearing itself surely costed more than £100.

Other things that was worth noting is that the judge wasn't impressed with the number of photos provided for my residential area (around 50 pages of photos with no pagination/footer). He also said to the claimant's side that he's not going to take into consideration case results from Liverpool (citing a case signature from the claimant documents). And one point I would also nearly win the case as the claimant said it would agree for the loading/unloading if the car had had the hazard lights on. Haha! So he nearly admitted I might had have right to park there.

All in all the sentencing was that the judge couldn't agree that I wasn't parking but was loading/unloading as the parking operative had no way to assess this (+ lack of the leaseholder agreement copy) and that if the leasehold agreement said I can load/unload for a reasonable time instead of a clearly specified 10 minutes limit there would be a chance to win.

For others who have more time to prepare I would say go for it because my judge - as well as many others I read about on this forum - was very pro-defendant.

pastacolg

The Gladstone representative when he was finishing his statement asked the judge to pursue only £100 and not the additional £60 + interests.

The judge laughed and said something along the lines. "It doesn't surprise me you don't want to pursue the additional £60 because it's not the first time we met and you already know I wouldn't allow this additional costs to be awarded". So this part didn't need any action from my side. It was pure joy to experience that part of the hearing.

Coupon-mad

It was pure joy to experience that part of the hearing.

Good to hear that.

Sad you dropped the ball of evidence. Sounds like the DJ would have found in your favour. Which court?

pastacolg

Yes, 99% he would have. Basingstoke County Court.

beamerguy

pastacolg wrote: »

The Gladstone representative when he was finishing his statement asked the judge to pursue only £100 and not the additional £60 + interests.

The judge laughed and said something along the lines. "It doesn't surprise me you don't want to pursue the additional £60 because it's not the first time we met and you already know I wouldn't allow this additional costs to be awarded". So this part didn't need any action from my side. It was pure joy to experience that part of the hearing.

The PPC won't get much £££

I wonder which one, Gladstones or the PPC will break the sad news to the debt collector that THEY WILL NOT GET PAID THE SCAM MONEY = £60???

That in itself IS A WIN

pastacolg

beamerguy wrote: »

That in itself IS A WIN

It is a win. Ironically I would be happier if it was a decisive win for Gladstones as I would have no regrets for not bringing that essential piece of evidence.

Anyway I can finally put this case behind me. Thanks again for your help along the way, beamerguy, Coupon-mad, Kirk and others.

P.S. At the end the judge asked "when would you like to pay for this?". I didn't know why is he asking so I replied "Immediately" almost hoping he would get a card terminal for it :rotfl: "Alright! 14 days would be enough time for you then".

I was also surprised no one asked me for an ID or anything. It was just assumed I must be the defendant. It was my first experience in a court and I'm glad it happen in the UK as I did enjoy it.

beamerguy

pastacolg wrote: »

P.S. At the end the judge asked "when would you like to pay for this?". I didn't know why is he asking so I replied "Immediately" almost hoping he would get a card terminal for it :rotfl: "Alright! 14 days would be enough time for you then".

I was also surprised no one asked me for an ID or anything. It was just assumed I must be the defendant. It was my first experience in a court and I'm glad it happen in the UK as I did enjoy it.

Well you are not in prison tonight for this terrible deed:rotfl:

Send them a cheque with a covering letter

"Enjoy my money, I do hope you will be paying the debt collecor who claimed £60 albiet a fake"

pastacolg

Today is my deadline to pay £200.00.

I'm not sure who should I pay it to. I haven't got anything from Gladstones nor Parking & Property Management company.

I have an old account balance of £264.35 on the Gladstones website.

The only way to contact them is via their enquiry form which they reply within 28 days. No way to speak to anyone.

Should I just pay them a custom amount £200.00 or wait for their official reply. I just want to avoid the whole CCJ notice and then proving that they were at fault with no suitable nor confirmed payment options for me, etc.

I guess I could always use Visa charge back if today's payment to Gladstones won't be accepted by P&P Management company but I'd rather avoid that too as it's inevitable is a hassle and that's something I want to avoid.

Edit: reading again beamerguy's reply it sounds like I should just pay Gladstones and forget about it.