PCM & Gladstones - Statement of Defence

Kas22

Coupon-mad wrote: »

It sounds like those emails will assist your side as it paints a picture of confusion and miscommunication to residents. I would show them.

I am not an expert at all in this but FWIW, I think it may have application if you pay ground rent/service charges for the site? Makes you a tenant of L&Q with freehold ownership of your house, and a rights & easements over the land leading to it.

Sorry I meant the 'cases' that support a residential defence case - like:

Saeed v Plustrade
PACE v Noor
Link v Parkinson
Jopson v Homeguard (this one was on appeal, decided by a higher level Judge)

All the above are easy to Google & find in the Parking Prankster's case law pages, and of course you will need to sit down & read them to see how and if they support your case.

Here is a really concise WS example by bargepole showing the headings/ending:

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/74683179#Comment_74683179

HTH

Thank you C-M.


I have now included the letter from the local MP, response via email from L&Q stating that they are not responsible for managing the land (even though they signed the contract with PCM (UK) Ltd. and identifying themsleves as the Freeholder), and also a previous letter from them confirming they manage the land (in response to the MPs letter)!
To add to that I've also attached service charge receipts which are over £250 per annum which confirms that residents should have been consulted (as per the schedule)

I also added a previous case as per your suggestion which should support my rights.


It is a bit confusing but hopefully the judge will make sense of it all.

Coupon-mad

OK and you can talk the Judge through it all and expose the fact PCM won't have turned up.

Kas22

Right, I had my court case this morning, and it was struck out as the Claimant didn't show up (Under CPR 39.3. if I heard correctly). Win win for me.


Managed to claim for expenses too.


Win by default, but I'll take it.

Le_Kirk

Well done.