F0GF1K4A proudsonofduck wins vs UK CPM/Gladstones 10/3/2020

macka1

Submitting my WS tomorrow to Gladstones, what was your statement of costs? Could you post it in here for a rough guide how to structure mine? Thanks 

Umkomaas

macka1 said:

Submitting my WS tomorrow to Gladstones, what was your statement of costs? Could you post it in here for a rough guide how to structure mine? Thanks 

There'll be an example in the NEWBIES FAQ sticky, second post, try there. 

beamerguy

proudsonofduck said:

Pretty sure it was Judge Harvey

Claim number F0GF1K4A

How does one go about getting a transcript of the judgement? I want to make sure that when I share the details they are 100% accurate.

Also want to ensure my complaint to the SRA includes direct quote from the Judge.

Thanks have added this to abuse of process part 2 ... all in the first post
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6103933/abuse-of-process-thread-part-2/p1?new=1

proudsonofduck

Have updated this with a full court report in the first post

keypulse

Congratulations proudsonofduck and thanks for the encouraging and detailed report.

beamerguy

proudsonofduck said:

Have updated this with a full court report in the first post

A great report, thank you.  I would also say congratulations to Judge Harvey for his understanding of the current situation with legals like Gladstones and BWLegal plus the other copycats who present such poor cases to the courts and STILL attempt to add fake amounts despite courts saying it's abuse of process, just as said by Judge Harvey as well.
It would be nice to see a general ruling in county courts that such fakers are prohibited. Each area has a Circuit Judge who could instruct all courts in his area to take action with fakers and timewasters.
It would indeed release valuable time for the county courts

Coupon-mad

proudsonofduck said:

Apologies some of my recollection may be a little hazy and the chronology could quite well be a little muddled

Given it was dry yesterday I decided to walk to the court (this is an important detail to be recalled later!). Arrived at about 9.40 for my 10am hearing. Signed in with the usher and sat in the waiting room.

Of the dozen or so cases due up in front of DJ's Ellis and Harvey that day, five were parking companies, three of them UKCPM.

After about an hour the waiting room had emptied out and it was just me, I spoke to the usher who informed me that UKCPM wouldn't be attending and it seemed they were not going to be sending any reps so it was just the judge and I. A little while later the usher informed me that as DJ Ellis was over-running so my case was going to be heard by another judge (I forgot to ask but have since identified it was DJ Harvey).

Five minutes later I was taken to his chambers by the usher. I greeted him with a polite 'hello sir' and he went straight into things:

"I see the main thrust of your defence is with regards to Abuse of Process, I have a transcript of the relevant hearing here..."

For some reason I got a little paranoid that he was going to say he disagreed with other judges who have been striking cases out, or worse there had been some development since I submitted my WS that meant this line of defence was now null and void - as such I said that was one arm of my defence, but since reading the claimant's WS I felt there were some other important areas of my defence I would like to discuss and politely asked if I could talk about Proprietary Interest (PI), which he agreed to. He spent a couple of minutes reading the relevant documents and then invited me to share with him my thoughts on their documentation.

UKCPM/Gladstone's had supplied two documents as evidence of PI - I pointed out that the first document (a photocopied 'Service Agreement' on UKCPM headed paper) had not been completed, not been signed and didn't have the name of any person or company on it (just the address of the land in question) - the judge agreed and essentially said it was a worthless piece of evidence as there was no way for the court to determine who the agreement was with and it was dated 9 years before the alleged incident (I had already informed him that the current landowner acquired the property in 2017)

The second document was a 'Parking Enforcement Contractual Agreement' on UKCPM headed paper and seemingly an original. I pointed out that the document wasn't signed but most importantly the date of Commencement of this 'contract' was 10 MONTHS AFTER the alleged infringement! Therefore by their own evidence they had no right to enforce parking charges!

This seemed to really annoy the judge - he said that UKCPM/Gladstones either did know or should have known this 'contract' was not valid and they had deliberately included it hoping that the detail wasn't picked up by the overworked court system and in his view it was a deliberate attempt to mislead the court.

We then moved on to signage, I showed him the location of their signs and explained how I felt the location and size of font were inadequate. I also showed him the signs next to the visitor bay and explained how these signs inferred different terms and conditions to UKCPM's signs. He agreed that as I had been parked in a Visitor Bay and the signage quite clearly said two hours parking then it was entirely reasonable to park in that spot for two hours for free, given that the claimant had not demonstrated that the vehicle had stayed longer than two hours there was no evidence of any breach of the Ts and Cs. However he felt that wasn't really relevant because the signage was so inadequate so there could be no contract to begin with.

After about 30 mins he called things to a halt and began his summing up:

The facts are...visitor bay is common ground...one would expect two hours free parking and no evidence to show an overstay...inadequate signage on an concrete lintel above the entrance road which one would need binoculars to read (at this point I had to try really hard not to burst out laughing)

The he really started laying into them - the witnesses evidence is unhelpful, it is evidently a cut and paste document which seems to be common practice with these operators, that they just cite long tracts from other cases that are completely irrelevant to the case and do not attempt to address the defence, that the evidence of landowner agreement is completely unsatisfactory, he was skeptical of any validity and if Gladstones want courts to read their documents properly then he suggests they should do so themselves!

He then moved on to abuse of process and began taking the court through the Britannia Parking case (I think), Judge Jones-Evans summary and Judge Grands orders. He read at length from Judge Grand's summary and reeled off all of the relevant stuff - POFA, CPR, PE vs Beavis. He was in complete agreement that this was an abuse of process, that the claimant was trying to add illegal costs, was trying to mislead and was in contempt of court, that this was an abuse of the court's jurisdiction, that Mr Chapman should not be producing this document and wasting the court's time with it.

We then went on to my costs, he felt the claimant's behaviour was evidently unreasonable therefore would allow further costs under CPR 27.14.

I then went on to point out that because I had walked and not driven it would be unreasonable of me to claim the £11.44 for mileage and parking that I had originally asked for in my schedule of costs and asked for them to be removed. He agreed to this but then went on to say that I had seemingly under claimed for loss of leave and helped me to add £76.92 to my schedule - £293.02 to be paid within 14 days

I stood up, started to pack my things away and said to him I expect he will see a few more of Jack Chapman's witness statement's before the end of the day and they are likely to be of equal quality, to which he smiled and bid me goodbye.

Once again a big thank you to the regular posters and those who guide and help us - couldn't have done it without your dedication and knowledge

Lovely to read that court report from Worthing!  Hopefully we will get the same in GUNIT's case (see his thread).

Which car park was this one about, please, and can we have your claim number?  Others with a case from the same car park can then quote your win and look for the same things you found.

Coupon-mad

Edit - I see the claim number is in the thread title, but can you confirm which exact car park this is about?

F0GF1K4A

beamerguy

Claim number F0GF1K4A

proudsonofduck

Southfield House, 11 Liverpool Gardens, Worthing
Unlikely that it will be useful for others as it is an office car park rather than a public pay and display.