Forum Home» Motoring» Parking Tickets, Fines & Parking

BigDosser Claim Defence Help - Gladstones. Help appreciated.

New Post Advanced Search

BigDosser Claim Defence Help - Gladstones. Help appreciated.

edited 30 November -1 at 1:00AM in Parking Tickets, Fines & Parking
66 replies 1.1K views
BigDosserBigDosser Forumite
21 posts
10 Posts
edited 30 November -1 at 1:00AM in Parking Tickets, Fines & Parking
Hi

Having read the newbie thread and several threads on the forum, im sure its no surprise for you to hear that i too have received a county court claim form from Gladstones on behalf of UK Car Park Management Ltd.

Claim Reason: No parking outside of a marked bay
Dispute: I didnt see the signs or even knew they existed. Signs not clear, not visible, poorly lit (alleged claim was at night aka very dark), hidden by large coach (proven in claimants evidence). Evidence does not prove anything 1) 1st photo shows sign which is poorly lit and is illuminated by the flash on the camera, does not show that the sign would be visible in relation to where the car was. 2) 3 photos of my car which is very dark and hard to prove if its in a bay or not. Also hard to prove the driver was in the car at the time. All 4 photos timestamped within 7 mins so no proof i stayed over the grace period. Claimants have then provided 2 more photos, one is a iphone screenshot of the area, with green dots added to supposedly show where signs are, no proof of time/date, and no actual proof the signs exist or existed at the time of the claim. The other is a closeup of the sign, again no timestamp so again poor evidence. Also abuse of process as claiming £160.

Issue date on claim form is 13th Jan 20, AOS submitted 23/01, and received on 24/01. Im not 100% sure on the dates, but worst case i understand i have until at least 7th Feb to submit my defence which i have drafted below. My main points for my defence are; didn't see signs, unclear signs, poorly lit signs, poor evidence from claimant, abuse of process.

Id appreciate any advice and feedback on my draft defence and any confirmation on the dates in this case. Thank you to whoever reads this and helps me fight these crooks.

IN THE COUNTY COURT

CLAIM No: XXXXXX

BETWEEN:

UK CAR PARK MANAGEMENT LTD (Claimant)

-and-

XXXXXX (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 XXXXXX, of which the Defendant is the registered keeper.

3. The defendant would like to raise the point of the abuse of process being displayed by the claimant. 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 recover and is also an abuse of process.

4. The Defendant denies that the Claimant is entitled to relief in the sum claimed, or at all, because the signs were not seen or known about by the defendant. Upon review by the defendant after the material date, it is clear the signs are poorly positioned and can be obstructed by large coaches that park in the car park. It is clear to see in the evidence provided by the claimant that a large coach is blocking any view of signs. The signage is also poorly lit, and uses font which is too small to be read from a passing vehicle, especially in the dark.

There is also no proof that the timestamped photo of the sign, is anywhere near the place where the defendant’s car was, and therefore cannot be used as evidence by the claimant. It is, therefore, denied that the Claimant's signage is capable of creating a legally binding contract.


5. The Defendant is bemused by the witness’s statement evidence of the signage which they refer to be as the contract which was breached at the material time. The Defendant has the right to believe that there were no signs located in an easy to see place, with sufficient lighting which would make it visible in the dark at the material time. All the Claimant can provide in terms of sign locations is a phone screenshot of google/apple maps with added green dots showing where the signs supposedly should be. This is not proof that the signs were actually in these locations at the material time/date and is not proof that these signs exist at all. This photo is in addition to a close up of the parking sign, which does not have a time or date stamp and therefore cannot be used as evidence as it does not prove it was taken at the material time/date.

6. The defendant is also bemused how these 2 additional photos which the claimant has submitted were not in the original documents sent by the Claimant, and therefore the defendant has reason to believe the claimant is using these additional photos which do not prove anything, to add pressure and to scaremonger the defendant into paying the inflated claim. To summarise, the evidence is shocking and has no basis to be of hard evidence which the Claimant’s claim is reliant on.

7. 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:


Signature:


Date:
«134567

Replies

  • KeithPKeithP Forumite
    22.1K posts
    Part of the Furniture 10,000 Posts Name Dropper
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    Hello and welcome.

    What is the Issue date on your County Court Claim Form?
  • RedxRedx Forumite
    29.4K posts
    10,000 Posts Sixth Anniversary Name Dropper Photogenic
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    BigDosser wrote: »
    Issue date on claim form is 13th Jan 20,

    AOS submitted 23/01, and received on 24/01

    buried halfway down the post :)
    Newbies !!
    Private Parking ticket? check the 2 sticky threads by coupon-mad and crabman in the Parking Tickets, Fines & Parking Board forum for the latest advice or maybe try pepipoo or C.A.G. or legal beagles forums if you need legal advice as well because this parking forum is not about debt collectors or legal matters per se
  • KeithPKeithP Forumite
    22.1K posts
    Part of the Furniture 10,000 Posts Name Dropper
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    Thanks Redx. I missed that. :o
    BigDosser wrote: »
    Issue date on claim form is 13th Jan 20, AOS submitted 23/01, and received on 24/01. Im not 100% sure on the dates, but worst case i understand i have until at least 7th Feb to submit my defence which i have drafted below.
    I am going to assume you have at least got the Claim Issued Date correct and that you didn't file an Acknowledgment of Service before 19th January. Please confirm.
    Your MCOL claim history will have the definitive answers.


    With a Claim Issue Date of 13th January, and having filed an Acknowledgment of Service in a timely manner, you have until 4pm on Monday 17th February 2020 to file your Defence.

    That's nearly two weeks away. Plenty 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 could 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 [email protected]
    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. No need to do anything on MCOL, but do check it after a few days to see if the Claim is marked "defence received". If not, chase the CCBC until it is.

    After filing your Defence, there is more to do...
    1. Do not be surprised to receive an early copy of the Claimant's Directions Questionnaire. Nothing of interest there. Just file it.
    2. Wait for your own Directions Questionnaire from the CCBC, or download one from the internet, and then complete it as described by bargepole in his 'what happens when' post linked from post #2 of the NEWBIES thread.
    3. The completed DQ should be returned by email to the CCBC to the same address and in the same way as your Defence was filed earlier.
    4. Send a copy of your completed DQ to the Claimant - to their address on your Claim Form.
  • edited 10 February at 2:16AM
    Coupon-madCoupon-mad Forumite
    86.7K posts
    Part of the Furniture 10,000 Posts Name Dropper Photogenic
    ✭✭✭✭✭✭
    edited 10 February at 2:16AM
    You need to add the usual point about no proprietary interest (search for it).

    If you were visiting a resident then mention Jopson v Homeguard and that brief stops by visitors or residents - even if not in a bay - are not parking contraventions.

    Changed some of this, due to repetition and to make it flow better, I hope:
    3. The defendant would like to raise the point of the abuse of process being displayed by the claimant. 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. As such, it is and is also an abuse of the court process, and offends against the Consumer Rights Act 2015 (the 'grey list' of terms that are likely to be unfair, as set out in Schedule 2), paras 6, 10 and 14) and goes against the findings in ParkingEye Ltd v Beavis [2015] UKSC67, which is fully distinguished in all facts.

    . The Defendant is bemused by the witness’s statement evidence of the signage which they refer to be as the contract which was breached at the material time. The Defendant has the honest belief right to believe that there were no signs located in an easy to see place, with sufficient lighting which would make it visible in the dark at the material time.

    Not sure what you mean here (below)? Do you mean they produced more photos as part of a SAR? That's normal, they had to show all photos at that point:
    6. The defendant is also bemused how these 2 additional photos which the claimant has submitted were not in the original documents sent by the Claimant,
    PRIVATE 'PCN'? DON'T PAY BUT DON'T IGNORE IT (except N.Ireland).
    CLICK at the top of this/any page where it says:
    Forum Home»Motoring»Parking Tickets Fines & Parking - read the NEWBIES THREAD
  • 1505grandad1505grandad Forumite
    724 posts
    Sixth Anniversary 500 Posts Name Dropper
    ✭✭
    "2. The facts are that the vehicle, registration XXXXXX, of which the Defendant is the registered keeper."

    So where are the facts?
  • The_DeepThe_Deep Forumite
    16.8K posts
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    [FONT=Times New Roman, serif][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Nine times out of ten these tickets are scams, so consider complaining to your MP, it can cause the scammer extra costs and work, and has been known to get the charge cancelled.

    Parliament is well aware of the MO of these private parking companies, many of whom are former clampers, 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.

    [/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2019/8/contents/enacted[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]

    Just as the clampers were finally closed down, so hopefully will many of these Private Parking Companies.[/FONT][/FONT]
    You never know how far you can go until you go too far.
  • BigDosserBigDosser Forumite
    21 posts
    10 Posts
    Thanks for all your comments. Updated defence below. Looking to submit on 9th Feb. Do i need to add anything further? I was considering adding that the 3 photos of my car provided by the claimant, do not clearly show if i was parked in a  bay or not as they were taken in the dark and are basically close ups of the car - Worth adding or just stick to unclear signs?

    IN THE COUNTY COURT

    CLAIM No: XXXXX

    BETWEEN:

    UK CAR PARK MANAGEMENT LTD (Claimant)

    -and-

    XXXXXX (Defendant)

    ________________________________________
    DEFENCE
    ________________________________________

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

    2. The defendant admits that he is the registered keeper of the vehicle with registration XXXXXXX.   

     3.  The Defendant denies that the Claimant is entitled to relief in the sum claimed, or at all, because the signs were not seen or known about by the defendant. Upon review by the defendant after the material date, it is clear the signs are poorly positioned and can be obstructed by large coaches that park in the car park. It is clear to see in the evidence provided by the claimant that a large coach is blocking any view of signs. The signage is also poorly lit, and uses font which is too small to be read from a passing vehicle, especially in the dark. It is, therefore, denied that the Claimant's signage is capable of creating a legally binding contract. 

    4. The Defendant is bemused by the claimant’s evidence of the signage which they refer to be as the contract which was breached at the material time. The Defendant has the honest belief that there were no signs located in an easy to see place, with sufficient lighting which would make it visible in the dark at the material time. All the Claimant can provide in terms of sign locations is a phone screenshot of google/apple maps with added green dots showing where the signs supposedly should be. This is not proof that the signs were actually in these locations at the material time/date and is not proof that these signs exist at all. This photo is in addition to a close up of the parking sign, which does not have a time or date stamp and therefore cannot be used as evidence as it does not prove it was taken at the material time/date.

    There is also no proof that the timestamped photo of the sign provided by the claimant, is anywhere near the place where the defendant’s car was, and therefore cannot be used as evidence against the defendant.

    5. The defendant would like to raise the point of the abuse of process being displayed by the claimant. 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. As such it is an abuse of the court process, and offends against the Consumer Rights Act 2015 (the ‘grey’ list of terms that are likely to be unfair, as set out in schedule 2, paras 6, 10 and 14) and goes against the findings in Parking Eye Ltd vs Beavis (2015), UKSC67, which is fully distinguished in all facts.

     

    6. 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.


    7. 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: 

     


    Signature:

     


    Date:


  • KeithPKeithP Forumite
    22.1K posts
    Part of the Furniture 10,000 Posts Name Dropper
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    BigDosser said:
    Thanks for all your comments. Updated defence below. Looking to submit on 9th Feb. Do i need to add anything further? I was considering adding that the 3 photos of my car provided by the claimant, do not clearly show if i was parked in a  bay or not as they were taken in the dark and are basically close ups of the car - Worth adding or just stick to unclear signs?


    Why the rush?
    I said earlier "...you have until 4pm on Monday 17th February 2020 to file your Defence".
    Leave it for a few days. Leave time for more comments.
    Nothing gets sent with a Defence. Evidence comes later - some months later.
  • D_P_DanceD_P_Dance Forumite
    3.6K posts
    Part of the Furniture 1,000 Posts Name Dropper
    ✭✭✭✭
    You never know how far you can go until you go too far.
  • BigDosserBigDosser Forumite
    21 posts
    10 Posts
    KeithP said:
    BigDosser said:
    Thanks for all your comments. Updated defence below. Looking to submit on 9th Feb. Do i need to add anything further? I was considering adding that the 3 photos of my car provided by the claimant, do not clearly show if i was parked in a  bay or not as they were taken in the dark and are basically close ups of the car - Worth adding or just stick to unclear signs?


    Why the rush?
    I said earlier "...you have until 4pm on Monday 17th February 2020 to file your Defence".
    Leave it for a few days. Leave time for more comments.
    Nothing gets sent with a Defence. Evidence comes later - some months later.
    Thanks. Out of curiosity, how are you working this out? Dates below. 

    A claim was issued against you on 13/01/2020

    Your acknowledgment of service was submitted on 23/01/2020 

    Your acknowledgment of service was received on 24/01/2020





Sign In or Register to comment.

Quick links

Essential Money | Who & Where are you? | Work & Benefits | Household and travel | Shopping & Freebies | About MSE | The MoneySavers Arms | Covid-19 & Coronavirus Support