ES Parking Enforcement - Gladstones LBC

beamerguy

ryou4me said:

and is the email in TELEPHONE HEARINGS thread ok to copy and email along with my documents to the manchester email address?
link here https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6130456/telephone-hearings-re-parking-firm-claims-can-we-all-discuss-strategy-and-outcomes-here/p3 

Of course it's OK, copy away and adapt to your own circumstances. You are dealing with the idiotic Gladstones here

Coupon-mad

I would truly love to see a DJ Iyer written judgment re the scam site at Spinningfields.

ryou4me

hi
who to contact if i want to find out if the 7th july 2020 date still stands?

should i call manchester civic justice centre?
thanks

Redx

yes contact the court

ryou4me

so after 1 and a half hours of waiting on the phone, i did get through to someone who confirmed that ES Parking paid the £25 court fee on the last date of the deadline and the date of 7th July still stands. 

however, she also mentioned that they may consider a telephone or Skype hearing!! and i will be advised nearer the time!

nosferatu1001

Yep, that shouldnt be a shock
Have you read the telephone hearings thread? You MUST do. 

Coupon-mad

ryou4me said:

so after 1 and a half hours of waiting on the phone, i did get through to someone who confirmed that ES Parking paid the £25 court fee on the last date of the deadline and the date of 7th July still stands. 

however, she also mentioned that they may consider a telephone or Skype hearing!! and i will be advised nearer the time!

Why the exclamation marks?  Obviously that was going to happen. 

Have you been away from the forum for months and missed the TELEPHONE HEARINGS thread? 
I replied on it again only the other day so it's very much a 'living thread' and easy to find.  This is the norm right now.

ryou4me

i have read the telephone hearings thread but not the recent developments.

would i be right in sending the below (and can i email both gladstone and the court?)

ryou4me

Claim Number: Gxxxxxxxx 

Hearing Date: xx July 2020 at xxpm

Dear District Judge xxxxxxx, 

Re: Important Preliminary matter and service of the Witness statement and evidence from the Defendant

I am the Defendant.  The appended witness statement and evidence bundle, as well as this covering email, has also been sent to the Claimant's litigation team.  In the event of directions for a future hearing in person at this court, hard copies will be provided when I have access to a printer.

Preliminary matter
I am aware that there is more than sufficient information available in this case to activate the court's duty, as set out in s71 of the Consumer Rights Act 2015 ('the CRA').  

The CRA imposes a duty upon courts in all consumer contract cases, to apply the test of fairness in s71 of the CRA and I draw specific attention to more than one breach of CRA Schedule 2, as explained in my witness statement.   Due to this, and to remove an unnecessary burden on the court, I invite the Judge who may at this stage be considering an Order for a Telephone Hearing or adjournment, to instead exercise the court's case management powers pursuant to CPR 3.4, to strike this claim out without a hearing in any format.   

This has already occurred in multiple parking claims in recent months, with duplicate reasons used by Judges sitting at courts as widely spread as Southampton, Warwick, IOW, Caernarfon, Luton and Skipton.  Failed applications with hearings attended by two barristers acting on behalf of parking firms have taken place at Skipton (February 2020, before District Judge Faye Wright) as well as at Southampton, before District Judge Grand.  I refer to my exhibit transcript of the Approved Judgment in Britannia Parking Ltd v Crosby and Anor (11/11/2019) which pays regard to the Supreme Court binding case law and the duty on the courts to invoke s71 of the CRA.

This parking charge claim has been deliberately exaggerated to reach a global sum of £140 despite the Claimant and their legal advisers being well aware by now, that such a sum is unrecoverable in parking charge cases because it is an attempt to go behind case law and statute law, and taints the entire claim.  As such, the Defendant draws attention to the Claimant's continued 'forum shopping' and their clear intention of finding victims who will pay in full without defending, or a less than competent court to allow them to claim a sum far higher than they can lawfully recover. 

Further, there has been no serious attempt to comply with the CPRs and the Claimant's incoherent, stylised particulars do not constitute compliance.  These cases unnecessarily delay and clutter court listings and represent a contemptuous and significant abuse of process.

To assist with the efficient disposal of the case, I attach an editable (Word Document) Draft Order.

For the avoidance of doubt, should the court decide against striking the claim out, I am not in agreement with the case being heard 'on the papers' because:

(a)  this claim is following the usual oppressive parking robo-claim path, with a very sparse statement of case, later followed by a case made by way of ambush.  The Claimant has produced and sent in the past few days, a pile of paperwork including several errors which make it clear this was not written by the 'witness' whose facsimile signature appears at the bottom of the document.

(b) the case of JD Wetherspoon Plc v Harris and others [2013] EWHC 1088 (Ch.) is an example of the Court using its power to limit the evidence by striking out large parts of a witness statement for abuse, because it was written by a person with no personal knowledge who recited facts based on the documents he had read.  The Claimant's witness statement contains template legal argument, misleading reliance upon ParkingEye v Beavis and even more irrelevant case law such as Elliott v Loake, and a misleading quote from the losing respondents in Vine v Waltham Forest not from the rationale of Roch LJ.  I am advised and find from my research (and Worthing Court may also recognise) this is an error seen time and again in template witness statements written not by the witness but actually by Gladstones' freelance statement writers.  The statement is littered with errors that cannot be the honest belief of the putative signatory and it is more designed to stand in terrorem of defendants  than to assist the Court in determining the substantive issues.  

(c)  In my case, I strongly believe that I must be afforded a fair opportunity to rebut the inaccuracies in the 'evidence' re the car park location/event and highlight the failure to demonstrate a prominent/legible contract, or liability, or legitimate interest.  I am the only local witness, in the true sense that I was in the car park and admit to being the driver, and I believe that, if the claim is to be heard, a decision cannot be fairly made without a hearing in my presence. 

If the claim is not struck out, I would prefer a hearing in person once the pandemic lockdown is lifted.  However, I understand that to formally ask for an adjournment would be at a disproportionate cost which is not an option for me, so I await the court's Order and Directions.  

ryou4me

got the above from another thread posted by coupon mad

intending to email to court, wanted to know if i need to send a copy to gladstones?