SIP & Gladstone County court

fluckyducky

Just found this forum and am kicking myself I didn't find it sooner. I'm due in court in 7 days after using a "these charges are clearly excessive" defence which (having read some threads on here) isn't gonna stack up. Anything I can do at this stage or should I just pay up £250 and save myself a wasted afternoon?

The witness statement from Gladstones is below
They include pics of the signs and my car which I'm having trouble posting but will do so if I work it out



IN THE MANCHESTER COUNTY COURT
CLAIM NO: DXXXXXXX
SIP PARKING LTD
(CLAIMANT)
-
AND
-
MR XXXXXXXX

(DEFENDANT)
____________________________________
WITNESS STATEMENT
OF XXXXXXXX
____________________________________
I,
XXXXXXXer,
O
F SIP Parking Limited, Peter House, M1 5AN
WILL SAY AS FOLLOWS:
1.
I am the Employee of the Claimant Company (!!!8216;my Company!!!8217;) and I am duly authorised to make
this statement on its behalf. The facts and matters set out in this statement are within my own
knowledge unless otherwise stated and I believe them to be true. Where I refer to information
supplied by others, the source
of the information is identified; facts and matters derived from
other sources are true to the best of my knowledge and belief.
2.
Exhibited to this Witness Statement at !!!8216;GSL1!!!8217; are the following documents which my Company
wishes to rely upon;
i)
The Agreement authorising my Company to manage parking on the relevant land (as
described therein and hereinafter referred to as;the Relevant Land;
);ii) The Sign (!!!8216;the Contract!!!8217;);
iii)The Site Plan and Photographs;iv) PayByPhone Records for vehicle registration !!!8216;XXXXXXXXT!!!8217;;

v) Notice to Driver;
vi) Screenshots from my Company!!!8217;s case management system confirming no appeal was received;
vii) Registered Keeper data obtained from the DVLA;
viii) Notice to Keeper, Payment Overdue, Final Reminder and Notice of Impending Legal Action;
ix) Photographs of the
contravention
;x) Redacted Email Search;
xi) Letter Before Claim.
3.
The Defendant is liable for a parking charge relating to the parking of a
vehicle on the Relevant
Land in a manner so as to incur the same pursuant to the Contract (i.e. the Sign). Set out in the
Schedule below are details of the parking charge;
1
The Defence
The Contract
4.
My Company relies on the case of Parking Eye -v-Beavis [2015], in which it was accepted as an
established principle that a valid contract can be made by an offer in the form of
the terms and
conditions set out on the sign
and accepted by the driver!!!8217;s actions as prescribed therein.
5.
The terms of the contract are clear and unambiguous. It is stated that parking is permitted for
vehicles !!!8216;fully displaying a valid pay and display ticket in the windscreen!!!8217; !!!8216;or with an electronic
ticket purchased by phone in advance of the vehicle being left unattended, remaining valid for
the duration of the vehicles stay!!!8217;. The photographs of the charge confirm that a physical pay and
display ticket was not displayed in the windscreen of the vehicle, nor was a parking session
purchased electronically through PayByPhone
.
6.
The exhibited photographs of the Relevant Land confirm that there is
sufficient signage on the Relevant Land, which is clearly visible
and the information on the signage informs the driver of
the parking conditions at the location.
The location, size, content and font
of the contract (!!!8216;sign!!!8217;)
has been audited and approved by the International Parking Community (!!!8220;the IPC!!!8221;). It is the driver!!!8217;s responsibility, to check for signage, check the legality and obtain any authorisation for
parking before leaving their vehicle.
Appeal/ Correspondence
7.
The Defendant did not appeal the charge or correspond with my Company by any method of
communication, which is confirmed in the screenshots taken from my Company!!!8217;s case
management system and general email account
, based on the email the Defendant has stated on
their defence. T
herefore, my Company are at a loss as to why the Defendant has defended the
claim other than their purported belief that the charge is excessive.
Charge is excessive
8.
The Defendant
, when filing their defence has admitted the sum of £50.00 but has alleged that the sum sought is excessive.
This admission was rejected by my instructed legal representatives,
Gladstones Solicitors Limited as the opportunity to pay a reduced sum had expired and further
costs had been incurred at this point to pursue the debt through the County Court.
9.
On the notice to driver, which was affixed to the
windscreen of the Defendants vehicle, which is
confirmed in the exhibited photographs of the charge, the Defendant was provided with
discretionary discount on the contractually agreed sum of £100.00 for prompt payment; £35.00
if paid within 24 hours, £50.0
0 within 7 days and £60.00 within 14 days
.
10.
The charge sought is industry standard and is set at a rate so as to suitably satisfy my Company!!!8217;s
legitimate interest. In the case of Parking Eye-v-Beavis [2015] it was held that an £85.00 charge was neither extravagant nor unconscionable. The IPC of which my Company is an accredited PCN Number
Date of Charge
Location
Description
68046528
09/04/2017
Abingdon
Street
Manchester
No Ticket Displayed
2
trade member of, states
a maximum charge of £100. My Company!!!8217;s charges are within this
level; therefore, the charge is therefore not excessive.
11.
Should the Defendant have disagreed with the contractually agreed sum, alternative parking
should have been sought.
The Current Debt
12.
In view of the Defendant not paying the charge within the 28 days allowed they are in breach of
the contract. Breach of contract entitles the innocent par
ty to damages as of right in addition to the parking charge incurred.
13.
My Company is an Accredited Operator of the International Parking Community (IPC) who
prescribes a maximum charge of £100. The Code of Practice states:
"Parking charges must not excee
d £100 unless agreed in advance with the IPC. Where there is a prospect of additional charges, reference should be made to this where
appropriate on the signage and/ or other documentation.
Where a parking charge becomes overdue a reasonable sum may be a
dded. This sum
must not exceed £60 (inclusive of VAT where applicable) unless Court Proceedings have
been initiated."
14.
In view of the Defendant not paying the charge within the initial 28 days allowed or the further
28 days allowed after the Notice to Keeper has been sent, the parking charge has become
overdue and a reasonable sum of £60 has been added.
15.
The Sign states the prescribed charge for failing to comply with the terms is £100, however it
also specifies
"Failure to pay the Charge may result in the vehicle's keeper details being
obtained
from DVLA
. Enforcement action may incur additional costs that will
be added to the value of the
parking charge and for which the driver will be liable.!!!8221;
Further the Letter Before Claim also made it clear the debt may increase in respect of costs and interest if a claim had to be issued. Due to
the Defendant not paying the charge the matter was passed to my Company's legal
representatives, Gladstones Solicitors Ltd, who were instructed to commence legal proceedings.
The potential additional costs mentioned above are now sought.
16.
The debt has, as a result of this referral risen as my Company!!!8217;s staff have spent time and
material in facilitating the recovery of this debt. This time could have been better spent on other
elements of my Company!!!8217;s business. My Company believes the costs associated with such time
spent were incurred naturally as a direct result of the Defendant!!!8217;s breach and as such asks that
this element of the claim be awarded as a damage. The costs claimed
are a pre-determined and
nominal contribution to the actual losses. Alternatively, my Company does have a right to costs
pursuant to the sign (i.e. the contract).

Redx

post the original defence so we can see what legal points you have raised (or failed to raise) - you cannot raise a new defence so your WS is going to need some careful consideration and tweaking , even if it manages to reute legal points made by the claimant in their claim and WS


SOMETIMES THESE CLAIMS CAN BE RESCUED WITH A WELL WORDED WS AND EVIDENCE etc


usual legal points are


NO LANDOWNER CONTRACT (NO STANDING)
POFA2012 FAILURES
IPC CoP failures
POOR AND INADEQUATE SIGNAGE

etc


use tinypic or similar to host pics and add a dead url linking them in your reply (change http to hxxp)

Coupon-mad

I'm due in court in 7 days after using a "these charges are clearly excessive" defence which (having read some threads on here) isn't gonna stack up. Anything I can do at this stage or should I just pay up £250 and save myself a wasted afternoon?

You clearly MUST file a Witness Statement to try to rescue a terrible defence. Seriously you didn't just put the charge is excessive, did you?

What words did you use exactly, you surely kept a copy?

And you must file that WS and evidence tomorrow, to Gladstones (by several emails, including your evidence) and the local Court in person.

If your court is Manchester you have a chance but must file evidence. For example the claim says 'no ticket displayed'. So, go and take photos of the signs first thing tomorrow morning...do they actually state a contravention of not displaying? Is the £100 in HUGE letters on the sign? Take photos.

How long was the car there for, can you shove in 'grace periods' as an argument (search the forum).

Or was there a ticket purchased but it fell down? Search 'fluttering ticket' on this forum.

At the very least also attack the added costs as an abuse of process!

fluckyducky

The sign:

hxxps://imgur.com/a/IZMyT3h


I'm embarrassed to admit I cannot find a copy of my defence.
It pretty much was 2 sentences saying the charges were "unreasonable". Kicking myself.


I must admit I had no ticket. I chanced it for 10 mins as it was past 10pm and i though i'd get away with it. I wouldn't hold it against you if you told me to !!!!!! off.

I'll take some more snaps tomorrow
Is there anything I could put in a WS considering the circumstances?

System

Have a look at some of the other WS - or search for the car park in the threads here. It is likely to have come up before.

SIP's contracts usually have holes as do the signs.

Why not post up their WS which you should have and we'll see what we can spot.

The_Deep

£250 for a single breach of contract is excessive. Even if you lost the judge is unlikely to order you to pay more than £175 -£200.


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 House of Commons recently

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

and complain in the most robust terms to your MP. With a fair wind they will be out of business by Christmas.

Thorsson

Link to the sign: https://imgur.com/a/IZMyT3h

That's a very clear picture of the T&Cs. What you can't tell from that pic is the size of the sign, where it is in the car park, whether it's the only one, whether it can be seen from the entrance, etc. which might help your defence.

System

If that is the sign then the "penalty" element is so buried in the text to make the offer questionable. You have to attack the signs and whether any reasonable person would be aware of the £60 or any other cost. SIP have lost on those signs many times before - not to mention the contract.

nosferatu1001

Was the sign lit at 10PM? Yes or No
Was it really, exactly 10 minutes? If so they HAVE to give a grace period to find the signs. If those signs arent lit, then you cant be expected to find them. This is clearly de minimis

fluckyducky

Thanks for all the advice so far

hxxps://goo.gl/maps/tYzwuwHC2k82


Here is a google map pic of the car park (it's the 9 car one, not the big NCP one you see in the background)I parked where the red car is. There are two sign attached to that post in the foregound.
The one facing is the tariffs, the one not facing you is the one I posted earlier. There is no lighting.

The witness statement claims the "contract" sign is 650mm x 450 mm, which I'll check



Gladstones WS is shown in my rather lengthy OP. Minus a view pics of the car park.

nosferatu1001

https://goo.gl/maps/tYzwuwHC2k82

I doubt that if the signs arent lit that Gladstones will admit that. Oh, and reading the WS doesnt seem to show the duration either. So please, just answer the asked questions!