Gladstones Defence required Urgent

monkeynuts45

Hi All, looking for some help with regards the drafting of a defence which needs submitting by Tuesday.

On receipt of the claim form i did the usual and read the newbies threads, tried to inwardly digest as much and as many of the other defences as possible. Then decided to use "Private Parking Appeals Ltd" service to ensure i had a defence that was more tailored to my situation. Unfortunately i have not had any correspondence from them after some follow up emails and I tried to ring but to no avail. And so i now find myself trying to rush a defence, I know I have no one else to blame but me!

The details of my case slightly differ in the fact that i was parked across 2 bays to allow us to get our children out, as at the time of the alleged offence there were no spare parent and child spaces, and a standard bay you cannot get the doors open.


This is a free car park btw, and once my children were safely in the shopping centre the vehicle was moved.

The signage at the time of the alleged offence was printed on a reflective material and IS impossible to read, I have pictures of this.

I only received the final notice for payment of £100 to which i replied with a standard letter downloaded from here, noting the items above with pictures etc.

The operators have since added more parent and child spaces.
Again the signs are still there but they have added non reflective ones too.

Then I received the Gladstones Letter Before Claims, to which i did nothing (bad advice from another local forum, as it is a local shopping centre and apparently lots of people have been receiving these) , and on the 7th May i received the claim form from County Court Business Centre.

I have filled in the acknowledgement of service as per one of the guide, but now only have until Tuesday to file.

On the Particulars of the claim the Claimant also states that i have agreed to pay the PCN withing 28 days, i am assuming that this is what is in the apparent contract that I have not entered into knowingly

Sorry if this post is a bit all over the place but i just spent the last 4 hours trying to read anything and everything on here, and cannot see a defence that really suits.

I will flesh out my defence and post before filing but I would be overjoyed for some guidance if anything from the norm stands out in my situation.

Thanks

Coupon-mad

on the 7th May i received the claim form from County Court Business Centre.

Do you mean that was the N1 issued date?

Then decided to use "Private Parking Appeals Ltd" service to ensure i had a defence that was more tailored to my situation. Unfortunately i have not had any correspondence from them after some follow up emails and I tried to ring but to no avail.

Oh dear. Did you forget to check them out on Trustpilot??

Have you got your money back yet? Please look at their Trustpilot reviews...

monkeynuts45

Yes I believe its the N1SDT on the bottom

And No I didn't check them out on trust pilot, but have since, i know i'm !!!!!!ed. Will try for a refund.

Coupon-mad

No, I was asking you for the ISSUE DATE...

KeithP

I'm going to assume the Issue Date on your Claim Form is 7th May and you did the Acknowledgement of Service by 27th May. Please confirm.

You are mistaken with your target date.

With a Claim Issue Date of 7th May, and having done the Acknowledgement of Service in a timely manner, you have until 4pm on Monday 10th June 2019 to file your Defence.

That's a whole week away - a few more days than you thought. Loads of time to produce a Defence, but don't leave it to the last minute.


When you are happy with the content, your Defence should be filed via email as suggested here:

Print your Defence.
1. Sign it and date it.
   
2. Scan the signed document back in and save it as a pdf.
   
3. Send that pdf as an email attachment to CCBCAQ@Justice.gov.uk
   
4. Just put the claim number and the word Defence in the email title, and in the body of the email something like 'Please find my Defence attached'.
   
5. Log into MCOL after a few days to see if the Claim is marked "defence received". If not chase the CCBC until it is.
   
6. Do not be surprised to receive an early copy of the Claimant's Directions Questionnaire, they are just trying to keep you under pressure.
   
7. Wait for your DQ from the CCBC, or download one from the internet, and then re-read post #2 of the NEWBIES FAQ sticky thread to find out exactly what to do with it.

monkeynuts45

Yes the 7th may issue date, i filed acknowledgement within the 14 day period.

Struggling to undrstand the dates though, as just looking through the form it mentions date of service but is that not the same as date of issue.

I know i have seen this somewhere on the newbies page but can get my head round the difference.

KeithP

monkeynuts45 wrote: »

Yes the 7th may issue date, i filed acknowledgement within the 14 day period.

Then, as said:

...you have until 4pm on Monday 10th June 2019 to file your Defence.

Coupon-mad

Good luck with that refund.

It's not just the reviews on Trustpilot that are bad, but the aggressive replies threatening to sue people. And they have sued people, we are aware.

No idea why the heck anyone uses them since 2015 when...(nuff said).

KeithP

monkeynuts45 wrote: »

Struggling to understand the dates though, as just looking through the form it mentions date of service but is that not the same as date of issue.

I know i have seen this somewhere on the newbies page but can get my head round the difference.

Have a look at the Money Claim Online (MCOL) - User Guide.

On page 14 of that document it says:

How long does the defendant have to respond to my claim?

The court will send out a claim pack to each defendant once the claim has been issued and allows 5 calendar days from the date of issue for the service of the claim. Therefore the 'date of service' is the 5th calendar day after issue.

The defendant has 14 calendar days from the 'date of service' to file a response. If the last day for filing the response falls on a day that the court is not open (i.e. a weekend or public holiday), the court will allow the next full working day for a response. The defendant can extend the time to respond to 28 calendar days by filing an acknowledgment of service (AOS).

The_Deep

How does the scammer know that you parked across two bays, was the car park patrolled by a Parking Weasel? If so, why did nor he/she ask you to park elsewhere? Claimants are expected wherever possible to mitigate their losses and this sort of behaviour is frowned upon by judges.

Nine times out of ten these tickets are scams so complain to your MP.

Parliament is well aware of the MO of these private parking companies, and on 15th March 2019 a Bill was enacted to curb the excesses of these shysters. Codes of Practice are being drawn up, an independent appeals service will be set up, and access to the DVLA's date base more rigorously policed, persistent offenders denied access to the DVLA database and unable to operate.

Hopefully life will become impossible for the worst of these scammers, but until this is done you should still complain to your MP, citing the new legislation.

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2019/8/contents/enacted

Just as the clampers were finally closed down, so hopefully will many of these Private Parking Companies.

monkeynuts45

Right i have reviewed the draft defences and modified one, not 100% on some of the more technical statements in it but it seems to fit:

1. The Defendant denies that the Claimant is entitled to relief in the sum claimed, or at all.

2. The particulars of the claim state that “the driver of the vehicle agreed to pay the PCN within 28 days of issue yet failed to do so”. No agreement was entered into.

3. The facts are that the vehicle, registration XXXX, of which the Defendant is the registered keeper, was parked on the material date across 2 bays due to the lack of parent and child spaces. The standard space provided is unsuitable to allow safe exit of vehicles with children.

3. The Particulars of Claim state that the Defendant was the registered keeper and/or the driver of the vehicle(s). These assertions indicate that the Claimant has failed to identify a Cause of Action, and is simply offering a menu of choices. As such, the Claim fails to comply with Civil Procedure Rule 16.4, or with Civil Practice Direction 16, paras. 7.3 to 7.5. Further, the particulars of the claim do not meet the requirements of Practice Direction 16 7.5 as there is nothing which specifies how the terms were breached.

4. Due to the sparseness of the particulars, it is unclear as to what legal basis the claim is brought, whether for breach of contract, contractual liability, or trespass. However, it is denied that the Defendant, or any driver of the vehicle, entered into any contractual agreement with the Claimant, whether express, implied, or by conduct.

5. Further and in the alternative, it is denied that the claimant's signage sets out the terms in a sufficiently clear manner which would be capable of binding any reasonable person reading them. They merely state that vehicles must be parked correctly within their allocated parking bay, giving no definition of the term 'correctly parked', nor indicating which bays are allocated to whom.

6. The terms on the Claimant's signage are also displayed in a font which is too small to be read from a passing vehicle, and is in such a position that anyone attempting to read the tiny font would be unable to do so easily. Additionally at the reflective background renders any print illegible. It is, therefore, denied that the Claimant's signage is capable of creating a legally binding contract.

7. The Claimant is put to strict proof that it has sufficient proprietary interest in the land, or that it has the necessary authorisation from the landowner to issue parking charge notices, and to pursue payment by means of litigation.

8. The Protection of Freedoms Act 2012, Schedule 4, at Section 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. The claim includes an additional £60, for which no calculation or explanation is given, and which appears to be an attempt at double recovery.

9. In summary, it is the Defendant's position that the claim discloses no cause of action, is without merit, and has no real prospect of success. Accordingly, the Court is invited to strike out the claim of its own initiative, using its case management powers pursuant to CPR 3.4.


There is also a potential breach of council contract which i am also looking to explore found on "thebridgelifeinthemix es parking"


I'm sure this is only the first of many drafts for the defence but i had to start somewhere, please critique. Thanks all!