County Court defence v Gladstones claim

Peabo

PPC Gemini Parking Solutions have just placed a new sign where previously there was none.
Talk about sneaky, this new sign enables them to argue their position in court, luckily I have a before and after photo supported with meta-data.

The before photos show no signage past entrance to parking area, and is the basis of my case.

No sinage, no contract.. :j

Coupon-mad

What would be great is, if the claimant tries to mislead the Judge at the hearing with false 'here's a sign' photo evidence, that you can call out, then sit back and watch the shhht hit the fan...court stylee!

nosferatu1001

Indeed
At that point you ask if the rep is incompetent or is deliberately attempting to mislead the court...

Peabo

Hi folks,
I am asking for some help with proof reading items 2 and 6 the text I have highlighted in blue.
Many thanks in anticipation


________________________________________
DEFENCE
________________________________________

1. The Defendant denies that the Claimant is entitled to relief in the sum claimed, or at all.

2. The facts are that the vehicle, registration XXXX XXX, of which the Defendant is the registered keeper, was parked on the material date at Mile end Park Leisure Centre. Additionally, the defendant was mentally unwell, and had been signed off work since 10.02.18 with acute stress, anxiety and at the material time was suffering from panic disorder.

3. The Particulars of Claim state that the Defendant xxxxxxx xxxxxx was the registered keeper and/or the driver of the vehicle xxxx xxx. These assertions indicate that the Claimant has failed to identify a Cause of Action, and is simply offering a menu of choices. As such, the Claim fails to comply with Civil Procedure Rule 16.4, or with Civil Practice Direction 16, paras. 7.3 to 7.5. Further, the particulars of the claim do not meet the requirements of Practice Direction 16 7.5 as there is nothing which specifies how the terms were breached.

4. Due to the sparseness of the particulars, it is unclear as to what legal basis the claim is brought, whether for breach of contract, contractual liability, or trespass. However, it is denied that the Defendant, or any driver of the vehicle, entered into any contractual agreement with the Claimant, whether express, implied, or by conduct.

5. Further and in the alternative, it is denied that the claimant Gemini Parking Solutions London Limited signage sets out the terms in a sufficiently clear manner which would be capable of binding any reasonable person reading them.

6. The terms on the Claimant's signage are also displayed in a font which is too small to be read from a passing vehicle, and in such a position at the entrance to the park as to be obscured by the parks own signage being twice the area / size.
Interestingly a second sign has recently been displayed (after 11.08.2018), prior to which there was no signage from the carpark entrance to parking bays. So, it is clear from photographic evidence (supported by meta data) that a driver could enter the site, park and not see any signage. It is, therefore, denied that the Claimant's signage is capable of creating a legally binding contract.

7. The Claimant is put to strict proof that it has sufficient proprietary interest in the land, or that it has the necessary authorisation from the landowner to issue parking charge notices, and to pursue payment by means of litigation.

8. The Protection of Freedoms Act 2012, Schedule 4, at Section 4(5) states that the maximum sum that may be recovered from the keeper is the charge stated on the Notice to Keeper, in this case £60. The claim includes an additional £100, for which no calculation or explanation is given, and which appears to be an attempt at double recovery.

9. In summary, it is the Defendant's position that the claim discloses no cause of action, is without merit, and has no real prospect of success. Accordingly, the Court is invited to strike out the claim of its own initiative, using its case management powers pursuant to CPR 3.4.

I believe the facts contained in this Defence are true.

Name
Signature
Date

Coupon-mad

2. The facts are that the vehicle, registration XXXX XXX, of which the Defendant is the registered keeper, was parked on the material date at Mile end Park Leisure Centre. Additionally, the defendant was mentally unwell, and had been signed off work since 10.02.18 with acute stress, anxiety and at the material time was suffering from panic disorder.

By saying the above, you are telling them you were the driver.

Are you happy to defend that way, in which case you can't really criticise them for saying you were either the keeper or driver. See what I mean?

Would you rather say,

Additionally, the driver was mentally unwell,

So as not to have to identify yourself as the driver?

Peabo

I couldn’t see the wood for the trees..I will make the necessary changes, thank you Coupon-mad

Peabo

I have the questionnaire, could you point me to the latest thread re how to complete please?

Also I had a letter from the claimant kindly providing me an example of how to complete it, in particular suggesting it best for me not to attend court. Suggestions I will be ignoring.

Couple of other things:
* After I send the questionnaire, what is the next stage?
* On average, how many weeks / months are there between questionnaire submission and the hearing?

Many thanks

nosferatu1001

The same thread you were directed to before - newbies thread, post 2.

It actually gives you a different form - N159 - not the n180 you need to use.

Newbies thread, post 2. EVERY question you have on process is here, pretty much g'teed.
No averages exist. Months is the best you will get

Peabo

What are the risks of submitting a recording, with transcript of PPA staff admitting signage problems into evidence?

And has anyone been successful at the hearing if they have done so?

Coupon-mad

Peabo wrote: »

What are the risks of submitting a recording, with transcript of PPA staff admitting signage problems into evidence?

And has anyone been successful at the hearing if they have done so?

What do you mean, this lot?

How do you mean 'admitting signage problems'? They are not the PPC. How will it help?

...February 2017, during which time I paid for a private company to handle the Gladstones letters when they arrived, regrettably the company took the money and provided no support, leaving me to get on with it.

Did you tell them you were recording the call?

Did they tell you they were recording the call?

Have they contacted you since? Watch out for new posters sending you a pm...or if you get a threatogram email or letter from them, tell us.