Claim Form Received

Coupon-mad

DEFENCE STATEMENT

No, just:

DEFENCE

Can I be clear in my case the VRN on the printed ticket was for a different car (not a typo - a different car). Of course I was the keeper of BOTH cars on the day hence the mix up.

Same as the one I told you about, where the wife put in her own car VRN.

Please go and find it, search for wife defence VRN, that should find the case. It had some specific words.

gibboian

Please go and find it, search for wife defence VRN, that should find the case. It had some specific words.

Coupon-Mad I did as you suggested (again) and found 7 threads (one of which is this one), they are

TG1 - his wife got a letter ...
Sparkyhx - he was ill and didn't respond
Quentin - a taxi driver who visits Asda
The Newbies thread - I've reads this thread (and the links) many times but I cant find the case you mention. The word "wife " appears once but it relates to using his wife to support his case
ADCMan - changing flats and he had a permit issue
cts_casemod - address mix up

So you can see Im doing my research but I can't find the case of the wife entering her own VRN. Any chance of a link?

Coupon-mad

NEVER search for 'threads'. Always use advanced search & change to SHOW RESULTS AS POSTS.

Hmmmm...I think I was thinking of this one but in fact it isn't at defence stage yet:

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/74760849#Comment_74760849

Shows you the law about the right to rectification of inaccurate data though, but that would only be useful if you had known about it and appealed and expected them to rectify the issue.

Maybe a red herring for you at this stage then, sorry.

So about your defence:

- you do not append stuff to a defence! Read bargepole's post about what happens when (NEWBIES thread).

And here I think you need to change it:

13 No terms were seen because of the small size and legibility of the signs so the elements of a contract and agreement on any (unknown) charge are absent.

You can't say no terms were seen because clearly some terms were, because you used a PDT machine and paid in cash? So better to say:

13 No terms communicating £100 'parking charge' were seen because the PDT machine does not mention this at all on the screen, nor on the tariff sign which was the sign consulted when putting the money into the machine. So the elements of a contract and agreement on an additional 'penalty' charge are absent, and the authority for this is Thornton v Shoe Lane Parking where it was held that only those terms prominently displayed when the money entered the PDT machine could bind the driver at the point of sale and not any terms on signs elsewhere in the car park that were not visible or could only be seen too late.

gibboian

Thanks Coupon-mad, I have read Bargepole's post and I will use create separate "exhibits" to include the photographs and document scans supporting my case.

This will be issued at the appropriate point in the process

I will remove references to the exhibits from my defence.

I have inserted the replacement section as you recommend. Is this ready to be submitted now? the deadline is this weekend.

Coupon-mad

I would add to this:

16. It is submitted that the Claimant is merely an agent acting ‘on behalf of’ the landowner who would be the only proper claimant. Strict proof is required of a chain of contracts leading from the landowner to this Claimant, to allow them the right to form contracts and to sue in their name. It is contended that any contract merely gives the Claimant a bare licence to put signs up and issue letters on behalf of the landowner, and that there is no 'relevant obligation' upon patrons and no 'relevant contract' between ES Parking and a driver beyond paying a tariff, which was done in good faith.

And I didn't see the usual ending, you haven't objected to the made up added 'indemnity costs' like in this person's point #10:

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/74954310#Comment_74954310

HTH

gibboian

Im returning my Directions Questionnaire today.

As expected Gladstones have requested that this is heard on he papers
I have requested my local court.

Who do I serve copies to? Gladstones? ES parking? or both?

KeithP

The address for serving documents is marked as such on your Claim Form.

gibboian

Thanks KeithP I wasn't 100% sure (its Gladstones).

gibboian

Things have moved on since my last post ...

The claim has progressed and I've been issued a court date towards the end of March.

I filed my witness statement and exhibits ahead of the deadline and today I received the witness statement from Gladstones, this is dated 25/1/19 (before I filed my witness statement). They seek to address points raised in my defence.

Their case is that I didn't purchase a "valid" ticket due to an incorrect VRN. Of course they also quote their own interpretation of POFA and ParkingEye etc. They haven't shown anything that says that the VRN is a term or condition of the contract, They have included a copy of the sign with this wording

"

Terms and Conditions

PAY AND DISPLAY

A VALID TICKET MUST BE PURCHASED TO PARK ON THIS SITE AND BE DISPLAYED CLEARLY IN YOUR FRONT WINDSCREEN.

YOUR VEHICLE MUST BE PARKED WHOLLY WITHIN THE CONFINES IF A MARKED PARKING BAY

Would it be helpful if i was to scan and share a copy of their witness statement?

Any advice ahead of court would be helpful, my defence is multi faceted however it states that the ticket was valid as it couldn't have been transferred (the VRN was my other car that was in the garage for servicing ).

Coupon-mad

Would it be helpful if i was to scan and share a copy of their witness statement?

Yes that is useful, and we can help you pick holes in it.