Going to court for parking in my own spot

MrDramatique

Thank you. I have another question though. Is it to be simply expected that the claimant must serve fresh particulars to me as it only specifies the court and their solictors?

I thought it was normal practise to issue it to the court of which then will be forwarded onto me by the courts?

KeithP

2) The Claimant must by 4pm on the 6th Sep file and serve fresh Particulars of Claim,

'file and serve' is shorthand for 'file with the court and serve on other parties'.

In other words, they must send the Defendant a copy too - to be received before next Friday.

[Deleted User]

Post #55 is not ambiguous.

. (i.e. this must be sent to the court and to you

.

MrDramatique

Sorry Johnersh, it was just a clarification on the judge's order specifically but going through it again, I've realised that I have tripped myself up.

MrDramatique

Hi all,

Received the updated particulars from Gladstones today, which by any account is late so I have asked for a certificate of service. They sent this non recorded if that has any relevance.

Would love everyone's opinions and advice.

It reads:

Particulars of Claim

1. The claimant is a Parking Operator managing the land at ######## ("the Land").
2. The claimant installed signs (i.e. the "Contract") on the Land that set out its terms of parking. A copy of the contract is attached to these Particulars of Claim marked 'Document 1'.

PCN Number
#######

Date of Charge
########

Location
#######

Description
No Permit

4. Through the act of parkling as described above, pursuant to the contract, the driver accepted the Claimant's terms and was issued with a Parking Charge Notice for the sum set out in the Contract (#the Relvant Charge').

5. The driver failed to pay the Relevant Charge within 28 days ('the Relevant Period') or indeed at all.The Relevant Charge now forms the substantive element of this claim.

6. In addition to the Relevant Charge the Claimant claims £60.00 in general damages as a pre-determined and nominal contribution to its actual losses suffered !!! a result of the Relevant Charge not being paid within the Relevant Period.

The Driver

7. Pursuant to Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (the 'Act'), the Claimant has the right to recover any unpaid parking charges from the keeper of the vehicle and the 'keeper' of the Vehicle is presumed to be the Registered Keeper, unless the contrary is proven.

8. Not withstanding the above, the Registered Keeper is, pursuant to the Act, able to nominate who was driving. The Registered Keeper nominated the Defendant in these proceedings and as such transferred liability for the Relevant Charge.

Claim for Interest

9. The Claimant claims interest under S.69 of the County Courts Act 1984 at a rate of 8% from the date of 28 days after the charge until the date of issue of this claim (07 May 2019) and continuing at a rate of £0.04 per day until judgement or earlier payment or alternatively at such rate that the Court thinks fit.

Claim for Costs

10. The Claimant claims costs on contractual (imdenity) basis, pursuant to CPR 44.5, as the contract contains an expressed indemnity clause permitting them to do so.

And the claimant claims:

1) The Relevant Charge as a debt;
2) Damages for the Defendant's breach of contract in the sum of £60.00, as set out above;
3) Staturtoyt interest, as set out above: and
4) Costs on a contractual (indemnity) basis pursuant to CPR 44.5, together with the fixed fees and costs of issuing

Statement of Truth

Blah Blah Blah

Umkomaas

8. Not withstanding the above, the Registered Keeper is, pursuant to the Act, able to nominate who was driving. The Registered Keeper nominated the Defendant in these proceedings and as such transferred liability for the Relevant Charge.

I've not chased back through 80-odd posts to check this out - but is this assertion correct?

Fruitcake

Umkomaas wrote: »

I've not chased back through 80-odd posts to check this out - but is this assertion correct?

The OP admitted to being the driver, but that is not a bad thing where an "own space" case is concerned.

Fruitcake

MrDramatique wrote: »

Hi all,

Received the updated particulars from Gladstones today, which by any account is late so I have asked for a certificate of service. They sent this non recorded if that has any relevance.

Would love everyone's opinions and advice.

It reads:

The Interpretation Act assumes that an item is received two working days after posting. They must therefore provide a proof of posting to show they met the timescales required by the courts.

Meanwhile, you should contact the MA and tell them to instruct their clients to cancel forthwith. If they do not, then you require them to supply the contact details of their representatives that will be attending this court claim as you will require them to attend in accordance with PART 33 - MISCELLANEOUS RULES ABOUT EVIDENCE of the Civil Courts Rules and Practice Directions (and your counterclaim if you have mentioned it).

Go in hard.

Complain to the court about their point 6 where they add on a fake £60 charge. Quote the statements made by judges in beamerguy's Abuse of Process thread and request that your case be struck out.

The scammers refer to their contract as being the signs, but you need a copy of your contact with the landowner/MA (AST) to show you have primacy of contract.

Also state that there is no consideration offered by the scammers. You have not been offered anything that you do not already have. You have the right to park as per your AST, and the scammers are offering you nothing new.

Have a look at post 93 of this thread.

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/76166245#Comment_76166245

It would be worth sending a pm to JesterShoe to see if they can give you the case number.

Complain to your MP about this unregulated scam.

MrDramatique

Umkomaas wrote: »

I've not chased back through 80-odd posts to check this out - but is this assertion correct?

It's correct that I gave my details early on in the process. Was under pressure from the director of the company I work for to ensure that liability was with me and not them.

MrDramatique

Fruitcake wrote: »

Meanwhile, you should contact the MA and tell them to instruct their clients to cancel forthwith. If they do not, then you require them to supply the contact details of their representatives that will be attending this court claim as you will require them to attend in accordance with PART 33 - MISCELLANEOUS RULES ABOUT EVIDENCE of the Civil Courts Rules and Practice Directions (and your counterclaim if you have mentioned it).

Not sure what MA stands for but I assume we're referring to the their solictors / Gladstones? I don't have the slightest clue about the significance of this request but would be interested to find out more? Would email be suffice?

Don't have any form of counterclaim at this stage.

Fruitcake wrote: »

Go in hard.

Complain to the court about their point 6 where they add on a fake £60 charge. Quote the statements made by judges in beamerguy's Abuse of Process thread and request that your case be struck out.

The scammers refer to their contract as being the signs, but you need a copy of your contact with the landowner/MA (AST) to show you have primacy of contract.

Also state that there is no consideration offered by the scammers. You have not been offered anything that you do not already have. You have the right to park as per your AST, and the scammers are offering you nothing new.

Have a look at post 93 of this thread.

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/76166245#Comment_76166245

It would be worth sending a pm to JesterShoe to see if they can give you the case number.

Complain to your MP about this unregulated scam.

I assume these points are things I should address in my defence? I'll take a look tomorrow but think I have addressed most of these already.