Gladstones claim form

Lpppparker

OK- Is this because I only filed my AoS a couple of days ago?


Thanks

KeithP

Lpppparker wrote: »

OK- Is this because I only filed my AoS a couple of days ago?


Thanks

No. the date of doing the AoS is irrelevant - as long as it is done in time, and yours was.

Please re-read post #11 above.

Lpppparker

Hi all,


I have tried my hardest to obtain a lease agreement from the flats in question and I've had no luck. I'm now at a standstill with my defence as I'm not sure what else to add in.


I'm assuming I should delete the lease agreement point due to not having access to one?


Is there anything else you'd think I should add in,


I have read a few others but the various defences has got me a little confused with my own.


TIA

MothballsWallet

Who did you ask for the flats' lease agreement?

It might be worth going back to them and (politely) explaining that you now have a court claim from the PPC and their solicitors and that they're facing being summoned as a defence witness when this goes to court.

I'd do this in writing so you've got a paper trail that you can show later.

One of the other regulars will be able to advise you better about whether to remove or leave that point in your defence because I'm not sure.

Lpppparker

I asked 4 tenants/ owners and wasn't able to get anything from them, I then asked who their Property management/ estate agents company name and they either didn't want to answer or didn't know.


I have googled it a few times and cannot seem to get a definite answer.


When you say go back to them, do you mean my ex partner?

MothballsWallet

If no one you spoke to will help you, I'd try the Land Registry - that will hold ownership details, it will cost you a few quid, but you could add it to your costs schedule as a legitimate expense.

When I said "go back to them", I meant go back and speak to who you originally asked - I was (wrongly as it turns out) assuming you were talking to a letting agent or management company.

If this is a housing estate, the local Council should know who the developers were because they would have to get planning permission, and planning applications are public records - that could give you another avenue of enquiry.

Coupon-mad

Your defence is NOT at a standstill. You don't need lease/agreement info yet.

All you need to do is what everyone else does on every defence thread. People every day manage to use bargepole's concise defence and add some words about the facts.

Show us your draft.

Lpppparker

It was my previous one- Do you think I should take out about the leasing agreement then?


Also, when you say use bargepoles concise defence, I've had a look on the newbies thread; is it on there?


Defence draft is below


In The County Court


Claim No: XXXXXXX


Between


UK CAR PARK MANAGEMENT (Claimant)

-and-

XXXXXXX (Defendant)

____________
DEFENCE
____________

1. The Defendant was the registered keeper and driver of vehicle registration number XXXXXXX on the material date. The Defendant denies that the Claimant is entitled to relief in the sum claimed, or at all.

2. The facts of the matter are that the Defendant is a visitor of XXXXXXX. The ‘land’ which forms the basis of the current claim consists of a relatively small number of poorly marked ‘private land’ parking spaces located. Given this lack of clarity and the fact there was no sufficient lighting to see these signs at night time when the Defendant arrived and parked, no contract can be construed from the Claimant's signage, under the contra proferentem principle.

3. Accordingly, it is denied that the Defendant breached any of the Claimant's purported contractual terms, whether express, implied, or by conduct.

4. The Claimant is put to strict proof that it has sufficient interest in the land or that there are specific terms in its contract to bring an action on its own behalf. As a third party agent, the Claimant may not pursue any charge, unless specifically authorised by the principal. The Defendant has the reasonable belief that the Claimant does not have the authority to issue charges on this land in their own name, and that they have no right to bring any action regarding this claim.

5. 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

5. The Defendant was authorised by a resident of the flat with a lease agreement, therefore was not unauthorised. The defendant in this case had no reason to conclude or agree that a parking charge applied to such a visitor.

6. The Defendant has the reasonable belief that the Claimant has not incurred £60 costs to pursue an alleged £160 debt. The Protection of Freedoms Act 2012, in Schedule 4, Para 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 £100.

7. The Defendant questions that the Claimant has authority to bring this claim. The proper
Claimant is the landowner. Strict proof is required that there is a chain of contracts
leading from the landowner to Vehicle Control Services Limited and that Vehicle Control
Services Limited have the locus standi to bring this matter to court.

6. In summary, the Claimant's particulars disclose no legal basis for the sum claimed, and the Court is invited to dismiss the claim in its entirety.

Statement of Truth:

I believe that the facts stated in this Defence are true.

Name
Signature

Coupon-mad

Also, when you say use bargepoles concise defence, I've had a look on the newbies thread; is it on there?

Yep, but you seem to have used a decent version of it.

Your defence looks fine; why would you remove stuff about the fact you were visiting a tenant with a lase/primacy of contract? It's worth saying to show you were not 'unauthorised' and so not in contravention of any legible sign.

You have plenty of time after defending, before you need to file & serve evidence in a couple of months, so you will have ample time to try to establish the rights in a resident's lease - if you think they have relevance to a visitor. They might not.

To add a little more to the defence, you should read PACE v Lengyel from the Parking Prankster's case law pages, like I told this person, who was a visitor, too:

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.php?p=75631043#post75631043

So you might be able to add points about trespass like they did, and 'predatory ticketing' and no grace period allowed, if the photos were taken over a couple of minutes only.

Lpppparker

OK great, the reason I was thinking of deleting is because I didn't have the evidence to back it up. But now I know I have a few months I will keep at it trying to get hold of a lease.


I'm struggling to find Parking pranksters law case law's page, is anyone able to link this for me please?


Unfortunately grace period would not stand with me as there is no time on the letters stating when I had received a ticket, only a date- And I woke up in the morning with a ticket on my car (Time was not noted down and I threw it away)