Parking fine gladstone solicitors

Dan_Barns

I have ignored a parking ticket from a private parking firm called horizon parking limited for over a year. The parking was for a block of flats. Gladstone solicitors have sent me multiple letters asking for payment each time increasing the amount I have to pay. This time the letter has come from county court business center in Northampton and feel like I should probably reply to this. They are now claiming over £400 which includes court fee and legal representatives cost.

The main question is really wether to pay or defend it. After reading different threads I think a defence is possible due to the signs not being very clear at all. First of all when entering the private road, there are no signs at all upon entrance stating that it is private or anything. There are then some small signs with very small writing upon entrance to the underground parking. However I was not parked in the underground parking section just on the road outside of it.

Another thing is that one of the letters they randomly included 2 PCN’s indicating that they have charged me for 2 PCN’s (I think I may have left it overnight) but it is my understanding you can’t get another ticket before 24 hours? I was defiantly not there for 24 hours

Do you think I have a case or does it not help that I have ignored it for so long. Personally I want to defend it as I’m hearing a lot of the time they buckle when you say you will go to court. However they are trying to claim for court fee’s already which makes me think they are ready to go to court.

Le_Kirk

Do not ignore letters from Northampton CCBC, this is a formal claim form and will lead to small claims court. If you follow the advice in the NEWBIE sticky post # 2, you will see how to complete the AoS using MCOL (all log-in and password details should be in the letter your received from CCBC) and there are also example defences from which to choose. Select the nearest to your situation, adjust it and post it on here for critique. When you do the AoS put NOTHING in the defence box, not even a full stop.

If you post the issue date of the claim form, KeithP will be along to tell you by when you must complete the AoS and submit your defence.

The_Slithy_Tove

For a start, edit your post so that it doesn't give away who was driving. Horizon don't know who was driving, so don't go telling them (they monitor these forums). And it means you can challenge on keeper liability through non-conformance to POFA - just one of several defence points you'll be putting forward.

No way do you pay £400. You definitely defend this. £400 is an outrageous sum, and even if you defend and lose, you won't be paying even half of that, as long as you have the right points in the defence.

Was this where the driver lives or was the vehicle visiting someone else? If the former, then signage is less likely to win, as multiple visits make such an excuse poor. But if it's where the driver lives, then the lease/tenancy come into play.

In fact, even if the driver was just visiting, if they could get the lease/tenancy for the property, and see what it says about parking, that could add points to the defence.

You need to send a Subject Access Request (SAR) to Horizon to get all documentation they have about you/your car/the PCN(s).

The_Deep

They are now claiming over £400 which includes court fee and legal representatives cost.

Almost certainly an abuse of process, read this

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6014081/abuse-of-process-district-judge-tells-bwlegal

and complain to their regulatory body, the SRA that they are rying to defraud you.

http://www.sra.org.uk/home/home.page

Nine times out of ten these tickets are scams so consider also complaining 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.

Dan_Barns

So I should tick ‘I dispute the claim in full’ but not write anything on the letter under ‘defence’. Then go to the website on the letter which is moneyclaim . Co.uk or something and write a defence on there and use the forums to help me?

KeithP

Just as Le_Kirk has already asked:

What is the Issue Date on your Claim Form?

Dan_Barns

Hi Keith thanks for answering

The issue date is 06/08/2019

KeithP

Anon wrote: »

The issue date is 06/08/2019.

With a Claim Issue Date of 6th August, you have until Tuesday 27th August to do the Acknowledgement of Service, but there is nothing to be gained by delaying it. To do the AoS, follow the guidance offered in a Dropbox file linked from post #2 of the NEWBIES FAQ sticky thread. About ten minutes work - no thinking required.

Having done the AoS, you have until 4pm on Monday 9th September 2019 to file your Defence.

That's over four weeks away. Loads of time to produce a Defence, but please 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.

In post #2 of the NEWBIES thread is full guidance on how to create a winning Defence and links to many examples of winning Defences.


Also, if you have based your forum username on you real name you are best advised to get it changed to something much more anonymous.

To help with that, you might like to read this short extract from The MSE Forum Guide - Frequently Asked Questions & Rules:

Q. How can I change my username?

A. In most circumstances, this is not permitted.

The only reason we will change your username is if it puts your privacy at risk. This usually means you've inadvertently registered using your name, email address or something that gives away your identity within your username.

If you fall into this category, email forumteam@moneysavingexpert.com and request that it is changed, giving three alternative usernames in order of preference.

Dan_Barns

Hi all, would you be able to tell me if this defence is a good one and if I should add/remove anything?

CLAIM No:

BETWEEN

(Claimant)

and

My name (Defendant)

________________________________________
DEFENCE
________________________________________

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

2. The facts are that the vehicle, registration ...., of which the Defendant was the registered keeper, was parked on the material date and had a valid permit to be parked on ...

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 not park in the no parking zones, giving no definition of where the no parking zones are nor indicating which zones are suitable parking zones as there are no road markings set out.

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. Furthermore there is no signage upon the entrance. 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 prorpietary 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 £231.55, for which no calculation or explanation is given, and which appears to be an attempt at double recovery. It is an abuse of process from the claimant to issue a knowingly inflated claim for an additional sum which it is not entitled to recover. Please refer to claim number
F0DP201T District Judge Taylor Southampton Court, 10th June 2019.

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.

I believe the facts contained in this Defence are true.

NAME

DATE

Le_Kirk

It looks like a standard Bargepole concise defence so in that regard it is good but does it cover all the points raised in the POC? Did the claim add a spurious £60? If yes, then search for Abuse of Process thread by beamerguy with comments at post # 14 of that thread by Coupon-mad and add those defence points in as well, making sure you add the judges' instructions as a quote not an order to the court.

Castle

And remove your VRN in paragraph 2.