Letter Before Claim - Gladstones [Residential Parking]

otterpanda

I've found two Beavis defence points written by bargepole and Johnersh but I'm not too sure which one I should use - is it just a case of picking one and going with it? If I've mentioned the distinctions with the Beavis case and a residential case in the defence - am I right in thinking it would allow me to elaborate further if needed?

(I'm positive I'm over thinking this now, I'm so sorry - I don't mean to be the person that needs their hand holding all along the way!!)

Alternative Defence - Failure to set out clearly parking terms
8. In the alternative, the Defendant relies upon ParkingEye Ltd v Barry Beavis (2015) UKSC 67 insofar as the Court were willing to consider the imposition of a penalty in the context of a site of commercial value and where the signage regarding the penalties imposed for any breach of parking terms were clear - both upon entry to the site and throughout.
8.1. The Defendant avers that the parking signage in this matter was, without prejudice to his/her primary defence above, inadequate.
8.1.1. At the time of the material events the signage was deficient in number, distribution, wording and lighting to reasonably convey a contractual obligation;
8.1.2. The signage did not comply with the requirements of the Code of Practice of the Independent Parking Committee’s ("IPC") Accredited Operators Scheme, an organisation to which the Claimant was a signatory; and
8.1.3. The signage contained particularly onerous terms not sufficiently drawn to the attention of the visitor as set out in the leading judgment of Denning MR in J Spurling v Bradshaw [1956] EWCA Civ 3
8.2. The Defendant avers that the residential site that is the subject of these proceedings is not a site where there is a commercial value to be protected. The Claimant has not suffered loss or pecuniary disadvantage. The penalty charge is, accordingly, unconscionable in this context, with ParkingEye distinguished.

9. The Claimant may rely on the case of ParkingEye v Beavis [2015] UKSC 67 as a binding precedent on the lower court. However, that only assists the Claimant if the facts of the case are the same, or broadly the same. In Beavis, it was common ground between the parties that the terms of a contract had been breached, whereas it is the Defendant's position that no such breach occurred in this case, because there was no valid contract, and also because the 'legitimate interest' in enforcing parking rules for retailers and shoppers in Beavis does not apply to these circumstances. Therefore, this case can be distinguished from Beavis on the facts and circumstances.

Coupon-mad

Second one for conciseness.

otterpanda

So I've had the DQ through and I just wanted to check a couple of things:

1. Am I correct in thinking a lay representative doesn't need to be declared on the DQ, though should I be listing their availability?
2. Is it OK for me to write 'please see attached' and provide a separate list of dates I am unavailable? I actually need some advice regarding this but I don't really want to post it on this thread - would anybody be open to me asking in a PM?
3. The box at the top of the DQ and the signature box at the end, do I just circle defendant (not 1st/2nd/3rd)?

Thank you in advance.

[Deleted User]

1. Yes.
2. You need to provide dates to avoid as clearly as possible. Generally, it is helpful to provide 3 months worth of dates. I tend to use the month as a sub heading or to clearly mark the month, then list the dates individually and in blocks if you have holiday

Eg.
August: 1,3,4, 7-14th, 23
September: 2, 8, 12
October: 1,2,5, 11, 24-31st

3. Unless there is more than one defendant, the numbers are irrelevant. Cross through the words claimant, representative and the numbers 1/2/3

otterpanda

Thank you.

After re-reading the DQ, as I know in advance I will have a lay representative, should I be writing 2 in the D3 box regarding witnesses?

KeithP

otterpanda wrote: »

After re-reading the DQ, as I know in advance I will have a lay representative, should I be writing 2 in the D3 box regarding witnesses?

No .

waamo

otterpanda wrote: »

Thank you.

After re-reading the DQ, as I know in advance I will have a lay representative, should I be writing 2 in the D3 box regarding witnesses?

Are they witnesses as well as lay representatives? If not then you don't.

otterpanda

Sorry, one last question regarding the DQ - I've gone over Gladstone's DQ that was sent to me and looking at their availability on D4 they must have emailed it to CCBC as they have put 'see covering email' which was not attached to my copy.

Does that mean that I'm not obligated to include my attachment of availability when I send them a copy?

otterpanda

Hi all,

A date for court has come through in the last couple of weeks but unfortunately I am not available on that date (this was mentioned on my DQ). I have been doing some research and read that in some circumstances the judge will allow a lay representative to attend in your absence. Is there a specific procedure I need to follow to request this or do I need to write a letter with an explanation as to why I cannot attend? I don't know if they would consider bringing the date forward?

Thank you in advance for any help.

Umkomaas

I have been doing some research and read that in some circumstances the judge will allow a lay representative to attend in your absence.

Show us that research finding, because that doesn't look right to me.

I don't know if they would consider bringing the date forward?

You won't know until/unless you ask. Call the court.