Gladstones and old address - 1 unknown CCJ, 1 unknown Claim

duckieb

Thank you! And no of course not - I am only raising points in my speech/cribsheet for tomorrow that I have already mentioned in my WS and Defence, because as you said I don't want to be seen to ambush (and also I wouldn't even know how or what else to add). I have been trying to find some threads with an experience of how the telephone hearing actually went but can't seem to find that. I have prepped my own argument, hoping the judge will give me time to speak, and we shall see what happens. 

Umkomaas

I have been trying to find some threads with an experience of how the telephone hearing actually went but can't seem to find that.

We ask every court winner to provide us with a synopsis of their hearing. Most do that. We try to annotate every court win with the phrase 'ANOTHER ONE BITES THE DUST'. Put it into the forum search engine and it should then link you to court wins as a starting point for you. 

duckieb

Hello all - I just had the hearing and thought I would jot everything down here before I forget! Firstly thank you all for the extensive resources, help and support. Unfortunately the Judge (who was very nice) did not strike out the claim, although I could tell he was trying hard to and spent most of the time grilling the Gladstones solicitor (and did also say that if I wasn't my usual profession, I would make a 'jolly good lawyer'). Gladstones had done their research and work here, far moreso than seems to be the case in previous hearings I've read about, and the solicitor seemed competent enough (although quite aggressive). However the claim was for 3 PCNs but the wrong date had been included for the last one on the claim form. The judge struck out that last PCN, and also did not allow for the ridiculous extra charges. As such, he allowed for £200 total for the 2 PCNs which is far better than what they were trying to get previously! Gladstones also asked for court fees which were £210 total (legal representation, court fee of £60, something else) which I thought was quite excessive. 

In terms of how it went:
It was via telephone, and we all just joined the call. Everything was quite clear and easily heard. Gladstones had their representative who had emailed through a bundle, and the Judge had mine which I had physically taken over to the Court (he was very complimentary and kept saying how excellent and organised it was). The whole thing lasted an hour. The Judge clearly said to me that it was up to the Claimant to satisfy him which put me at ease straight away. I'll split it up by point -

1) I had argued that since all documentation had gone to my old address, the NTK was not PoFA compliant. However as I changed my DVLA address much later (I was quite honest about that and actually he seemed to really appreciate it), he said as per CPR 6.9 they allow the last known address to mean 'current address of service' and so he felt it would be unfair to punish the Claimant. 

2) I argued that the PoC were not sufficiently detailed - he felt they were, although said he had struck out a case the week before for much sparser particulars of claim. However as it was defective with a wrong address for the 3rd PCN he would remove that one (the Gladstones rep tried to say that I could have asked for an amendment if I noticed a mistake, and that clearly I had prepared a detailed defence and it hadn't hindered me. He said that a few times and I was shocked and incensed that they were trying to use the fact that I had researched and worked so hard on a defence to justify all their rubbish paperwork and lack of following rules as apparently it hadn't 'affected me.' I said as much when the Judge asked me). 

3) We talked about added costs and abuse of process. He said the £100 PCN is justifiable and quoted Beavis. However he said there is difficulty in prosecution of further costs, which are physically and legally obscure on PCM(UK)'s stupid signs. He did say that overall he doesn't agree that they constitute abuse of process so much so that claims should be struck out, but would remove those costs. Gladstones tried to quote Semarck-Julienn in their usual misleading manner and THANK GOD I had come across this already and made a note as to how to respond. The Judge looked at it himself and said in his judgement that much like that case and as already mentioned, he doesn't quite agree it's abuse of process but the added costs are inflated and should not be added. 

4) Gladstones asked for their costs as I said above which frankly were quite hefty - £60 court fee, £80 representation, £70 something else. They also tried to claim interest at 8%, and the judge refused and said 4% is the maximum he allows. Gladstones also asked if a counter-claim had been filed because they thought that was what I meant with my schedule of costs. I had to specify that I included that in the case of the claim going my way as I had spent a considerable amount of time on it (the Judge agreed) but no counter-claim has been filed. They seemed quite stressed about that. 

Even if the case wasn't struck out, it feels like a success. Had I had more information about the case, perhaps I could have argued better and won from a different angle, but since I know so little about it all I do feel I did pretty well and at least got rid of extra charges and one PCN. The judge was lovely and very impressed by the work put in and that definitely helped. Unfortunate that Gladstones get anything as they annoyed me no end with their claims. But all in all, a decent outcome! 

Redx

A nice report , commiserations on not winning outright , so not too bad considering !!

It's a monkey off your shoulders once full payment is made promptly to Gladstone's

At least you put up a good fight , so it's still cost them more than the judgment

Le_Kirk

Good report, bad outcome, although mitigated by having one struck out and interest and spurious costs removed.

zhonguonuren

Your report is great and very helpful to those that follow. 

I have received a reply from the SRA that Gladstones is being investigated.  It has already changed its address - I telephoned the previous address (golf club) and asked if I could view the company register (they were a bit taken aback).  

The notification is supposed to be confidential but I suspect many on here have had the same response from the SRA. 

Keep complaining! 

Johnersh

The right result insofar as if you're entire particulars consists of 3 dates and you don't specify them correctly, you can't succeed on them all, as one was never part of the claim.

The ppc could have applied to amend when when the defence was filed. So whilst there was finger pointing at you, the judge knew it was on C and (rightly) didn't let that fly.

If you get the bolt ons excluded as here, then very little is lost arguing the toss. Decent job.