Gladstones Letter Before Claim

Coupon-mad

Obviously not working days, no idea why people even wonder but you are not the first! They have the same deadline as you, so wait a bit!

Block their phone number; don't let them call you or text.

ts6789

Ah brilliant - that gives me more time, thank you! So I should wait for their WS before sending mine?

Do you think the sections I've got in red are okay? Any comments?

KeithP

ts6789 wrote: »

So I should wait for their WS before sending mine?

Not necessarily.

Do not miss the deadline for filing and serving your Witness Statement, evidence and Costs Schedule.

Coupon-mad

Wait as long as you comfortably can, and there is no need for us to tell people this.
Common sense to wait a bit, and hope you see their drivel first.

ts6789

Thank you both - bit overwhelmed by this whole process!

With regards to my witness statement, do you think that the fact that I wasn't parked in a marked bay will be an issue and potentially weaken my argument/strengthen theirs? I'm hoping the sign and it's positioning in front of another parking sign from another company will be strong enough.

Coupon-mad

With regards to my witness statement, do you think that the fact that I wasn't parked in a marked bay will be an issue and potentially weaken my argument/strengthen theirs?

Their rep will try that, yes. Was your PCN for not being parked in a marked bay?!

ts6789

Their rep will try that, yes. Was your PCN for not being parked in a marked bay?!

No it was for not displaying a valid parking permit. I had on display an expired permit from the old parking company that was contracted out by a different housing association in that area (there are two who have contracted out two different companies). My HA advised residents to continue displaying their old permits whilst they were sorting out contracts with the new parking company - Countrywide Parking. I've mentioned this in my WS (para. 13).

Coupon-mad

OK, so if the rep goes on about where you parked, turn it around at the hearing and say you were:

''told by the HA to rely on the rules flowing from their old permits, and display them, whilst they were sorting out contracts with the Claimant. And that parking in that place was never a contravention of any terms of the established permit scheme and even if it was, your contract was with the HA not the new parking firm, at that stage''.

They will not be able to prove that the old terms required cars not to be parked there, and the HA's advice is an 'alternative contract'. You can prove it in evidence, I hope, so the alternative contract is the one that prevails = ''what the HA said''.

ts6789

That's helpful but just to clarify - my HA did not contract out UK CMP. UK CMP was contracted out by another HA which owns property in the same street (there are two HAs and therefore two parking companies operating in that street).

My HA was in the process of changing parking companies when the parking charge was issued and had issued advice to display the expired permits from the old parking company whilst contracts with the new company (countrywide parking) was being sorted out.

I hope this makes sense (it's a very confusing situation!)

Coupon-mad

UKCPM was contracted out by another HA which owns property in the same street (there are two HAs and therefore two parking companies operating in that street).

(it's a very confusing situation!)

Certainly is, and I think the Judge will agree. Are the boundaries clear about who patrols which part? Any grey area or ambiguity MUST (under the Consumer Rights Act 2015) be interpreted in the way that most favours you, the consumer.

Remember that fact. It's the doctrine of contra proferentem, and it is in the CRA 2015 only the Act is in plainer English and doesn't call it that.