UKPCM Gladstones - Claim Form Received - Parking in visitors bay

granth1974

Apologies for bumping this thread but good news! After being assigned to my local court in Bromley, I got a letter today informing me that the case had been "struck out as an about of process by Deputy District Judge MacKenzie.

"The claim contains a substantial additional charge to the parking charge which it is alleged the Dedendant contracted to pay. This additional charge is not recoverable under the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule 4 nor with reference to the judgment in Parking Eye vs Beavis , which expressly approved the parking charge because it included costs of administration. Additionally, s71(2) of the Consumer Rights Act 2015 requires the court to consider the fairness of the overall contract term and the provision for additional charges falls into examples 6, 10 and 14 of the indicative list of unfair terms in Schedule 2 of that act. It is an abuse of process for the Claimant to issue a knowingly inflated claim for an additional sum which it is not entitled to recover. This order has been made by the court of its own initiative without a hearing Pursuant to Rule 3.3(4) of the Civil Procedure Rules 1998 and a party affected by the order may apply to have it set aside varied or stayed not more than 7 days after the date the order was served upon that party"

It goes without saying that I'm very pleased with this result and I hope everyone else on here gets a similar outcome.

Le_Kirk

Wahey, another victory and another judge sees through the Abuse of Process.

Umkomaas

The 'precedent' is spreading further afield - seemingly now arrived in Kent. This could be the PPC version of Covid-19!

Excellent news @granth1974, nice one. 👏 

Umkomaas

It is an abuse of process for the Claimant to issue a knowingly inflated claim for an additional sum which it is not entitled to recover.

I often ponder as to where 'simple error/misunderstanding' ends, and 'attempting to obtain money by deception' begins. 

Coupon-mad

@granth1974 said:
Apologies for bumping this thread but good news! After being assigned to my local court in Bromley, I got a letter today informing me that the case had been "struck out as an about of process by Deputy District Judge MacKenzie.
"The claim contains a substantial additional charge to the parking charge which it is alleged the Dedendant contracted to pay. This additional charge is not recoverable under the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule 4 nor with reference to the judgment in Parking Eye vs Beavis , which expressly approved the parking charge because it included costs of administration. Additionally, s71(2) of the Consumer Rights Act 2015 requires the court to consider the fairness of the overall contract term and the provision for additional charges falls into examples 6, 10 and 14 of the indicative list of unfair terms in Schedule 2 of that act. It is an abuse of process for the Claimant to issue a knowingly inflated claim for an additional sum which it is not entitled to recover. This order has been made by the court of its own initiative without a hearing Pursuant to Rule 3.3(4) of the Civil Procedure Rules 1998 and a party affected by the order may apply to have it set aside varied or stayed not more than 7 days after the date the order was served upon that party"
It goes without saying that I'm very pleased with this result and I hope everyone else on here gets a similar outcome.

Fantastic news!  ANOTHER UKCPM ONE BITES THE DUST!

Could you please link a scan or close up photo of the Order, to add to the collection (see attachments - you can choose to redact your name or not, as the case may be).  It will really help to have a scan of a Bromley one, to show how widespread this judicial opinion now is.

Fruitcake

Well done. Please supply the information requested above so it can be used to help others caught out by this scam.

Your next job if not already begun should be to get together with other residents and pressure the MA to get rid of the scammers. Use your court win as a hammer.

bargepole

Here's a summary of all the Courts which have now struck out parking claims containing add-ons as an abuse of process, using similar or identical wording. They are in various geographical regions, and on different Court Circuits:

Aldershot & Farnham

Bath

Bromley

Caernarfon

Isle of Wight

Luton

Manchester

Skipton

Southampton

Warwick

Willesden

Worthing

Note: These are just the ones we know about. Only a small percentage of court cases find their way to this forum, and there may well be many others floating around.

beamerguy

Not forgetting TRURO ?

UPDATE:   See this thread. BWLegal discontinued their case at Truro County Court.
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6101409/armtrac-kbt-bw-legal-lbc-update-claim-discontinued/p1
The court said that most get discontinued in the court now, or thrown out by judges

beamerguy

granth1974 said:

Apologies for bumping this thread but good news! After being assigned to my local court in Bromley, I got a letter today informing me that the case had been "struck out as an about of process by Deputy District Judge MacKenzie.


It goes without saying that I'm very pleased with this result and I hope everyone else on here gets a similar outcome.

GOOD NEWS ....... Case now in the Abuse of Process thread part 2
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6103933/abuse-of-process-thread-part-2/p1?new=1

Gladstones are well on the way to being serial failures

MothballsWallet

beamerguy said:

granth1974 said:

Apologies for bumping this thread but good news! After being assigned to my local court in Bromley, I got a letter today informing me that the case had been "struck out as an about of process by Deputy District Judge MacKenzie.


It goes without saying that I'm very pleased with this result and I hope everyone else on here gets a similar outcome.

GOOD NEWS ....... Case now in the Abuse of Process thread part 2
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6103933/abuse-of-process-thread-part-2/p1?new=1

Gladstones are well on the way to being serial failures

"Well on the way"? I thought they were a bigger failure than Theresa May as Home Secretary