Gladstones demanding £800 LBC

Purplekush

Hi all,


This is my first ever post on MSE. Prior to this post I've done what I consider my due diligence and I've read the newbies FAQ and trawled through various related posts.


The situation I'm dealing with currently is; Gladstone's Solicitors are demanding £800 for 5 different PCNs, on behalf of NPE. What's lead me to this post is because the written demand is an LBC, what I've been dreading receiving.


A little backstory...Where I work, the car park is situated behind our building, is owned by the building next door. They offer our staff discount to park, but still require us to go into the reception and pay like any other visitor. I've used the car park five times a week for the past 4+ years, and during that time I've accumulated anywhere between 10-12 PCNs. Pretty bad I know, but I have paid legitimately over a 1000 times if not more, and the majority of the PCNs were between mid 2017 to early 2018. I have to be totally honest and say for the most part they were completely my fault. I was going through some minor financial difficulty between those periods and would occasionally not have enough to pay for parking, but walking is not an option because of distance so I'd just risk not getting a ticket. I, perhaps quite foolishly, wasn't too concerned at this moment in time, as I was under the impression that private parking companies seldom took people to court over unpaid invoices. However, there came a point when I decided that with the amount of PCNs against me it would be too risky to receive anymore in fear of a potential court case, so from that moment I always made sure I paid. In hindsight I'd of found a way to pay for parking every time to avoid all this now but it's too late for that.


After realising I was getting a lot of 'invoices' mounting up for PCNs for the few times I couldn't pay, I started panicking. Around Sept 2018, I received a letter from DRP stating I owed a total of £1700 odd for all the PCNs combined and researched what my plan of action should be. I came across MSE, which I found very intuitive, and I spent hours looking through similar threads, until I came across one particular thread which had a link to a webpage stating that NPE (the creditor concerned in this case), had issued a total of over 130,000 PCNs (number could be wrong, need to check source again for confirmation) yet not taken anyone to court ever. This was pleasant to read and put my mind at ease, as from my research I'd also believed to understood correctly that the only the creditors can actually take you to court, which in this case is NPE, and that Gladstone's and DRP can only threaten. With this belief, I took no action and decided to wait it out.


Then fast forward to a few days before Christmas 2018, and I receive my first real threat, a LBC from Gladstone's, for £800 concerning 5 different PCNs between late 2017 and early 2018. I only have a few days left to reply, and after visiting the forums here again recently I've learned that you should definitely never ignore an LBC, and I am definitely up for going to court if that's what required to get out of paying the ludicrous amount of £800 for 5 tickets. Even if I can argue to pay much less that that it will be worth my while. How they could possibly attribute those costs on an individual basis is beyond me, although I'm sure they'll have an answer for that.


Despite that, I must admit I'm grateful they're not pursuing all of the PCNs, which also confuses me somewhat. The only explanation I can think of, is that because the car park has two methods of issuing tickets (either by the ticket warden who attends a few times a week, or more commonly by the cameras which detects entry and exit time), it's possible that Gladstone's are only pursuing the windowscreen tickets. It's still all NPE though so that really confuses me. I haven't heard anymore from DRP in months and the last PCN I got was around 8 months ago. I've not missed paying a day since.


I'd be really grateful for any help that anyone can give in relation to my case. What should I do first?

onlyfoolsandparking

First thing to do is carry on reading newbies section and read up on rebuttals/replies to LBC,s


With the amount of money being banded around in your case its almost certain that Gallstones will want to pursue this Sharks can smell a drop of blood in water up to a mile away don't you know!


There's a good chance you will pay less if this goes to Court and a good chance you can beat this particular scammer but it will take effort, you say you have done due diligence that's good but there will be much more to do.


I don't know NPE but others on here will know what their MO is, your just one of the hundreds, maybe thousands that are being threatened by Gallstones, you have just gotta play the game back and make sure you get it right, a Judge will sort it all out eventually.

beamerguy

That works out at £160 per ticket.

Gladstones are adding a fake £60 to each ticket.

GLADSTONES ADD ON A FAKE £60 ?
In addition to the 'parking charge', the Claimant's legal representatives, GLADSTONES, have artificially inflated the value of the Claim by adding costs of £60 which has not actually been incurred by the Claimant, and which are artificially invented figures in an attempt to circumvent the Small Claims costs rules using double recovery. >>>> thanks to bargepole

You now need proof of the £60 per ticket add-on

You also need to take pictures of the NPE signs to see what they say.

Assume as it's a LBC, Gladstones has provided 100% proof of the claim, which includes pictures and a breakdown of their charges

Coupon-mad

NPE are likely to have blurry, fairly useless photo evidence IMHO and there is more than one NPE case here right now, so start reading them, to save us repeating ourselves.

Purplekush

THANKS for the responses guys. I was wondering, how risky is it to directly copy another users LBC rebuttal and use it as my own? I’m really struggling to create something original that is robust. Would it be worth me at the very least rewording bits so it’s not a direct lift? I’m worried if I re-word parts I might lower the quality of the response. I’ve found what I consider a relevant, robust LBC response courtesy of litigrand (although I believe he used LoCs and Daniel Sans responses) that goes as follows:

ADDRESS:
DATE:

Dear Sirs,

I am in receipt of your Letter Before Claim of .

Your letter contains insufficient detail of the claim and fails to provide copies of evidence your client places reliance upon and thus is in complete contravention of the Pre-Action Protocol for Debt Claims.

Your client must know that on 01 October 2017 a new protocol is applicable to debt claims. Since proceedings have not yet been issued, the new protocol clearly applies and must be complied with.

Your letter lacks specificity and breaches the requirements of the new Pre-Action Protocol for Debt Claims (paragraphs 3.1(a)-(d), 5.1 and 5.2) as well as the Practice Direction - Pre-Action Conduct (paragraphs 6(a) and 6(c)). Please treat this letter as a formal request for all of the documents / information that the protocol now requires your client to provide. Your client must not issue proceedings without complying with that protocol. I reserve the right to draw any failure of the Claimant to comply with the protocol to the attention of the court and to ask the court to stay the claim and order your client to comply with its pre-action obligations and when costs come to be considered.

As solicitors you must surely be familiar with the requirements of both the Practice Direction and the Pre-Action Protocol for debt claims which applies post-1 October 2017 (and your client, as a serial litigator of debt claims, should likewise be aware of them). As you (and your client) must know, the Practice Direction and Protocol bind all potential litigants, whatever the size or type of the claim. Its express purpose is to assist parties in understanding the claim and their respective positions in relation to it, to enable parties to take stock of their positions and to negotiate a settlement, or at least narrow the issues, without incurring the costs of court proceedings or using up valuable court time. It is astounding that a firm of Solicitors are sending a consumer a vague and unevidenced 'Letter before Claim' in complete ignorance of the pre-existing Practice Direction and the new Pre-Action Protocol.

Nobody, including your client, is immune from the requirements and obligations of the Practice Direction and now the Protocol.

I confirm that, in receipt of a Letter Before Claim that complies with the requirements of para 3.1 (a) of the Pre-Action Protocol, I shall then seek advice and submit a formal response within 30 days, as required by the Protocol. Thus, I require your client to comply with its obligations by sending me the following information/documents:

1. An explanation of the cause of action
2. whether they are pursuing me as driver or keeper
3. whether they are relying on the provisions of Schedule 4 of POFA 2012
4. what the details of the claim are; for how long it is claimed the vehicle was parked, how the monies being claimed arose and have been calculated
5. Is the claim for a contractual breach? If so, what is the date of the agreement? The names of the parties to it and provide to me a copy of that contract.
6. If the claim is for a contractual breach, photographs showing the vehicle was parked in contravention of said contract.
7. Is the claim for trespass? If so, provide details.
8. Provide me a copy of the contract with the landowner under which they assert authority to bring the claim, as required by the IPC code of practice section B, clause 1.1 !!!8216;establishing yourself as the creditor!!!8217;
9. a plan showing where any signs were displayed
10. Photographs of the signs displayed (size of sign, size of font, height at which displayed) at the time of alleged contravention.
11. Provide details of the original charge, and detail any interest and administrative or other charges added
12. Provide a copy of the Information Sheet and the Reply Form

I am clearly entitled to this information under paragraphs 6(a) and 6(c) of the Practice Direction. I also need it in order to comply with my own obligations under paragraph 6(b).
If your client does not provide me with this information then I put you on notice that I will be relying on the cases of Webb Resolutions Ltd v Waller Needham & Green [2012] EWHC 3529 (Ch), Daejan Investments Limited v The Park West Club Limited (Part 20) Buxton Associates [2003] EWHC 2872, Charles Church Developments Ltd v Stent Foundations Limited & Peter Dann Limited [2007] EWHC 855 in asking the court to impose sanctions on your client and to order a stay of the proceedings, pursuant to paragraphs 13 ,15(b) and (c) and 16 of the Practice Direction, as referred to in paragraph 7.2 of the Protocol.

Until your client has complied with its obligations and provided this information, I am unable to respond properly to the alleged claim and to consider my position in relation to it, and it is entirely premature (and a waste of costs and court time) for your client to issue proceedings. Should your client do so, then I will seek an immediate stay pursuant to paragraph 15(b) of the Practice Direction and an order that this information is provided.

Yours faithfully
(Signed)

Coupon-mad

That's a truly ancient template of what looks like waffle, and that's why the NEWBIES thread tells you clearly, not to send a template response to a LBC.

The NEWBIES thread tells people what to do when they get a LBC, and the claim is pretty much inevitable so this is not a stage to bust a gut over.

Purplekush

Thanks for replying Coupon. I thought the response was more up to date then it clearly is based on the fact it references the new protocol established Oct 2017. I’ll have another read of the NEWBIES thread although I have no idea how I can start formulating my own response and can’t see much info over there on starting from scratch.

UPDATE: As of today, I registered on Gladstone’s website to view my debt. This is because I decided I wanted to submit my LBC response online as I have the option too as stated in my LBC letter from Gladstone’s. I know replying to LBCs via post is the recommended method however I’d foolishly left it too late for the response to arrive on time (perhaps after the revelation that my rebuttal is ancient makes that a blessing in disguise). However, upon registering (I definitely used the correct reference number) it loads a page with my number plate on it , that says;

Amount Outstanding: £0
Amount Paid: £0
Balance: £0

I assume this is because the claim hasn’t been issued yet so as soon proceedings commence it will display correctly what I owe?

I feel like it was a mistake registering on the website (I didn’t have to give anymore details than they already have) as it’s not standard procedure I know but I can’t honestly think how it might put me at a disadvantage. I had to register in order to submit the LBC rebuttal. However, strangely enough where the box says ‘Reply to LBC letter’ where I would expect I could click, it says underneath ‘No references Eligible’. I have 100% used the right reference. I was considering calling these crooks to try find out why I can’t submit my LBC response online (although I need to obviously rewrite the LBC quickly first) as today is day 30 since the LBC was sent.

I know Gladrags won’t care about my busy personal life but I only struggled with the deadline because I’ve been completely focused on caring for my 3 week old newborn that things did get left to the last minute.

I’d really appreciate anyone’s advice.

Coupon-mad

Take some screenshots and email Gs and state that:

Re all NPE PCNs relating to VRN xxxxxxxxx

I received a Letter of Claim from Gladstones with the reference xxxxxxxx.

I have captured website evidence (attached) that suggests to me that you/NPE must have cancelled the PCNs. Clearly the charge is showing as £0, so no sum is outstanding. I registered in order to submit an LBC response, in good faith. However, where the box says 'Reply to LBC letter' it says underneath 'No references Eligible'.

In the alternative, this must mean that:

- your systems are broken, or
- you are choosing to put obstacles in the way of consumers wishing to reply to a LBC, or
- someone else has been using Gladstones' headed notepaper to send what was called a Letter before Claim. This has misled me, and Gladstones are liable for this unfair conduct.

Explain your position and confirm that the charges are indeed cancelled.

If all PCNs are not cancelled, you must now inform your client that I require a SAR, to find every piece of data about every PCN, all photos and letters (front & back). This is a formal request for the attention of your client's Data Protection officer, so please pass it to that person immediately.

In addition to the data request to NPE, I require Gladstones to contact your client for evidence photos of the sign on site on the material dates. I am aware that this is not 'personal data' so I am asking Gladstones to supply this information/photo evidence of the signs on all occasions that resulted in a PCN to this vehicle.

Failure to supply a copy of the contract on signage relating to ALL material dates (all PCNs), will be a breach of the PAP for Debt Claims and will be used as evidence of your/your client's wholly unreasonable conduct when it comes to the matter of costs.

I attach a copy of my logbook V5C as proof that I am the Defendant/data subject.