UPDATE - CASE WON Preparing for court - Witness Statement queries

helencooke01

Hi all, here is my court report.

I arrived at 1:30 for a 2:00 hearing. The Usher signed me in and advised that Gladstones reps normally arrive an hour before the hearing so he thought they wouldn’t show. At 1:55 the Gladstones rep arrived, he had driven down from Manchester. My heart sank when he appeared as I was hoping for a hearing with just myself and the Judge.

We were called in to the Judge’s Chamber and the Usher showed us where to sit.
The judge immediately opened by asking about POFA and checking with the GS rep if he felt it had been complied with. GS rep replied that PCM had sent the NTD and NTK within the required time frames and so from their perspective they had complied with POFA. The Judge asked me if I had anything to say. I stated that the first communication I had received was from Trace Debt Recovery and that I had not received either the NTD or the NTK. The Judge asked if I could prove that I hadn’t received the letter. I replied that it is difficult to prove a negative but that PCM could not even prove they had sent the letter. They could only prove they had printed the letter which is not the same thing. I pointed out that in response to my SAR, PCM had sent a Recorded Delivery letter. The Judge picked up on this immediately and said he thought it was interesting that PCM had sent me 2 letters, that I alleged to have not received, by normal post, and another letter by Recorded Delivery. He pointed out the inconsistency in treatment and that it seemed strange. He said that because I could not prove non-delivery we would ‘park’ the issue for now, but that he felt my argument was compelling and honest.

He then asked the GS rep to discuss their WS and evidence. The GS rep was clearly not conversant with the paperwork and spent a while fumbling from page to page. The Judge became irritated and pointed out that the GS WS was printed in black and white, no reference, no page numbers. He said that was not acceptable and that GS need to improve in this area. The GS rep commented on the signage that my husband parked closest to, said it was clear, and any reasonable motorist would have known not to park there.
The Judge invited me to respond and I started off by saying that I was very surprised that GS, with all their experience and knowledge of Court directions, were unable to comply with the Judge’s order and did not submit their Evidence until 18th June, when the Judge had asked for it by 30th May. I pointed out that by this point I had already submitted by WS and Evidence, as per the Judge’s instructions, and was therefore unable to respond to the contents of their pack. I then pointed out that GS had either deliberately or negligently falsified an image to make it appear that a sign was in place at the time of the contravention, when in fact it was not. I asked the Judge if I could approach and supplied him with 2 photos of the same location, one showing a ‘Private Land’ sign with a prominent ‘P’ and one showing no sign was in place. I also gave a copy to the GS rep. The Judge spent about 10 minutes questioning the GS rep on this issue and said ‘the Court has been mislead’. The GS rep tried to argue that the sign was outside of the PCM site boundary, to which I replied that was irrelevant. He was really scraping the barrel. After this the Judge questioned everything the GS rep stated and really started to take my side. He gave me the opportunity to respond to everything the GS rep said and gave him quite short shrift.
We discussed the fact that other signs had been amended, and that the signs in place were misleading, difficult to read and that one of the photos of my car had been taken using a tele-photo lens which made it appear that the sign was right next to the car (it was in fact about 50 yards away). The Judge didn’t think much of this.
Finally, I managed to get in a point about it not being clear where there were parking bays and where there were not, the GS rep had no response to this. I also pointed out that the area was used regularly as parking and that no reasonable motorist would park there if they knew they were going to incur a £60, £100 or £160 charge. The GS rep did not really have any response to this either. He did not know the area in question and so couldn’t really respond.

Before I knew what was happening the Judge was summing up.
He stated that he was concerned about the fact that PCM had displayed inconsistency of behaviour by sending letters using 2 different methods and that did not make sense. He commented on the falsified evidence in the GS pack and that it was not clear that the land was Private when my husband parked there. He then stated that the signage was not clear and he did not feel there was enough evidence for GS to pursue the claim. Case dismissed.

I was so overwhelmed that I did not ask for Costs to be granted. I was just pleased to have won and be able to put this behind me.

I have, however, since emailed the Court with the costs schedule to see if the Judge will consider it. I doubt it but it’s worth a try.

I just want to say a HUGE thankyou to everyone who has helped with this and for the support – I don’t think I would have made it this far without you.

Helen

Umkomaas

Excellent report and super victory. Thank you for your feedback.

Very well done. :T

BrownTrout

Very well done.

beamerguy

Helen, you did very well, congrats :beer::beer:

It still amazes me that the incompetent Gladstones send rookies to court with such an appalling lack of Knowledge. You have witnessed gross incompetence first hand, and so did the judge.

Hope you stick around on this forum to help others and do please let as many people as you can that help to zap these down and outs is freely available.

With such appalling representation by Gladstones, which PPC would even bother using them ? The Gladstones joke strikes again

Mrs44474

So happy to read this!! Thank you for posting! Hoping for a dismissal too! Obviously ��

dataprotectionbreach

Really pleased for you

One thing confuses me though. If they knew the name and address of the driver why was the case against the keeper even considered at court?

Apologies if I missed the reason somewhere in the thread.

helencooke01

Thanks all. Really appreciate it.

I didn't receive either the Notice to Driver or the Notice to Keeper so GS pursued me as the Keeper. I did inform them my husband was driving but it was months after their alleged letters.

Helen

waamo

helencooke01 wrote: »

Thanks all. Really appreciate it.

I didn't receive either the Notice to Driver or the Notice to Keeper so GS pursued me as the Keeper. I did inform them my husband was driving but it was months after their alleged letters.

Helen

If it was before court papers were issued then they still were chasing the wrong person.

In saying that it's a bit academic now. You won. Congratulations

Snakes_Belly

Well done Helen. What seems to be coming out of these cases is that the PPC's representatives have failed to prepare. Someone should tell them the old adage, "Fail to prepare. Prepare to fail".

Umkomaas

Snakes_Belly wrote: »

Well done Helen. What seems to be coming out of these cases is that the PPC's representatives have failed to prepare. Someone should tell them the old adage, "Fail to prepare. Prepare to fail".

The same adage applies to Defendants too. Fortunately Helen prepared exceptionally well, but we do have 'fails' as a result of less than adequate prep.