ES parking Gladstone's court threat

Phil54321

Hi I am new to this forum, hoping someone can offer some advice. I received a letter from ES Parking limited On 02/09/2019 saying that they had sent a previous letter about a parking fine and that this was now a final demand for£125 and that my time for appeal had expired. This was the first letter I have received from them, I never received the initial letter. I responded straight away with a template letter that I adapted, disputing the charge and asking them to provide evidence and details of why the charge was issued. I then received an email from Gladstone's solicitors with a bundle of photos and a copy of the original letter which I never received, now requesting £160 or they will take me to court. The photos show I stayed 19 minutes in a car park that is advertised as 90 minutes free parking. But in the terms and conditions (on various signs) it says that the car owner must stay on site, and they have photos showing me leaving what they say is the perimeter of the site. Basically I went to the sandwich shop right next to the place. Can anyone help? Have I got a chance or should I just accept that I've been scammed and pay up? Any help much appreciated, thanks.

Umkomaas

To whom does the Gladstones letter tell you to pay?

Phil54321

Hi it says to pay Gladstone's either via their website or by bank transfer

beamerguy

I then received an email from Gladstone's solicitors with a bundle of photos and a copy of the original letter which I never received, now requesting £160 or they will take me to court. The photos show I stayed 19 minutes in a car park that is advertised as 90 minutes free parking. But in the terms and conditions (on various signs) it says that the car owner must stay on site, and they have photos showing me leaving what they say is the perimeter of the site.

Are these terms in clear view that can easily be seen ?

Gladstones are still in their scam mode and practice ABUSE OF PROCESS by adding a fake £60

READ ABOUT ABUSE OF PROCESS
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6014081/abuse-of-process-district-judge-tells-bwlegal

... and why the judges are kicking these fakers out of court
GLADSTONES ARE FAKERS.

So depending on who they are asking you to pay, if it's Gladstones direct, then ask them on what authority they have to add £60 and let's see what rubbish they come back with

Phil54321

Thanks for the quick response. I have had a read about the abuse of process as you suggested and it is a good point I could try to use in my defense. The initial letter (the one I never received) was to pay ES Parking £100, reduced to £60 for prompt payment. The first letter I received from them was the final demand for £125. I disputed this, then the next letter was the Gladstone's one, demanding £160. So Gladstone's have added £35. Reading the thread you posted suggests the £100 limit from the supreme court ruling includes the cost of recovery. If Gladstone's incur additional costs then that is to be agreed via the SCC, which is why it is abuse of process to ask for £160 at this stage - is my understand correct? What a scam! It's appalling that these fraudsters are allowed to operate.

beamerguy

Phil54321 wrote: »

Thanks for the quick response. I have had a read about the abuse of process as you suggested and it is a good point I could try to use in my defense. The initial letter (the one I never received) was to pay ES Parking £100, reduced to £60 for prompt payment. The first letter I received from them was the final demand for £125. I disputed this, then the next letter was the Gladstone's one, demanding £160. So Gladstone's have added £35. Reading the thread you posted suggests the £100 limit from the supreme court ruling includes the cost of recovery. If Gladstone's incur additional costs then that is to be agreed via the SCC, which is why it is abuse of process to ask for £160 at this stage - is my understand correct? What a scam! It's appalling that these fraudsters are allowed to operate.

The Supreme Court actually said that £85 was a fair charge also saying that includes all costs in collecting the charge.
It's the PPC's and their ATA's who have increased it.

Of course it's a scam and that is why it is important to ask Gladstones on what authority they have to add £60.
Responses we have seen so far are meaningless and against the law of POFA2012
It is very important to draw them out on this

Coupon-mad

and they have photos showing me leaving what they say is the perimeter of the site.

Same advice as here, once you get your claim:

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6068822/defence-claim-advice

Have you emailed a SAR to the Parking firm (not Glastones)?

Phil54321

Hi I have emailed Gladstones like beamerguy suggested to ask what authority they have to charge an additional £60. Not had any response yet, I'll update when/if I do.

Have you emailed a SAR to the Parking firm (not Glastones)?

Hi yes I emailed a SAR letter to ESP and then again to Gladstone's. ESP didn't respond directly, Gladstones responded on their behalf. They have provided a bundle with photos, site map with location of signs etc. I'll take my own photos I think next time I'm passing. Thanks again to everyone for the help ��

Phil54321

Over a year on and the case was finally heard at Stockport County Court court today and I am relieved to say I won! It was a telephone hearing and Brian Hargreaves of Gladstone's was there representing the claimant ES Parking ltd.
The parking charge was issued at Seymour Grove retail park in Trafford. Gladstone's argued that I had breached the contract for leaving "the site" even though I was only gone for 20 minutes. I argued that the sandwich shop I visited had a rear entrance directly onto the car park and also stored it's bins on the car park and therefore it was reasonable to assume that the shops were part of the site. I also argued that the boundary of the site was not defined anywhere and only highlighted in subsequent correspondence from Gladstone's. The judge upheld my points and also said that the tactics of the claimant amounted to a trap! Deliberately out to trick people. Really happy I won, justice served

Redx

Well done , it was entrapment and very devious , trickery at it's very worst

I think Hargreaves is e s parking , so they and Gladrags lose yet again !!

Another one bites the dust  !!

Coupon-mad

Yay well done!  Brian Hargreaves is indeed ES Parking, so he will be spitting feathers that he lost, haha!