Gladstone Solicitors - Letter before claim (LPS)

Daytona246

It's local parking security ltd

I think I found one they have missed. The NTD is a scan of the receipt they sent. 

7. A notice to driver has been given that contains the following mandatory information:
- Which car the ticket relates to
- What land the car was parked on
- The period the car was parked

The NTD receipt doesnt mention anything about POFA. 
The NTD only shows the time of the ticket and not how long the car was parked. Its the same for the NTK as well.  The poor image they have sent of the machine signage says 85 but nothing says POFA.

Also

- What the parking charges are for the infringement of the rules, and of the maximum additional costs they may seek to recover,  and the date by which those parking charges should be paid
- Any discounts for early payment.
- How to pay and to whom (this must be the person legally entitled to the money – the “Creditor”)
- The date and the time the notice was issued
- How appeals and complaints can be dealt with.
hxxp://parkingfine-appeals.co.uk/keeper-liability-explained/

The NTD doesn't have this info. 


The Gladstones LBC specifies the the costs are £100 plus the fake £60. The NTD and NTK are both £85. No idea how it became  £100....

Umkomaas

The NTD doesn't have this info. 

There's no requirement for the NtD to carry anything about PoFA as it is aimed at the driver, not the keeper. 

The Gladstones LBC specifies the the costs are £100 plus the fake £60. The NTD and NTK are both £85. No idea how it became  £100....

Well, that's something for any future defence. 

Daytona246

Below  is a copy of the NTK. Further down I have commented on a few points

This letter is sent to the registered keeper advising that a Parking Charge Notice (PCN) was issued to the driver of the vehicle xxxxc at x:xx PM on the xx-xx-2016 at the location "Sports Club - Stratford Upon Avon - Sports Club. , Swans Nest Lane, Stratford upon Avon, Warwickshire. CV37 7LS. " for the alleged contravention of "Parking without displaying a valid ticket". This PCN has not been paid and the opportunity to pay a discounted amount has been lost. The driver of the vehicle agreed to be bound by the terms and conditions of the car park, which were clearly displayed on signage in prominent places.

Failure to provide driver details or payment of the full amount of £85.00 within 28 days of this notice will result in your case being passed to our Debt Recovery Agency where the outstanding charge will increase and further administrative costs may be incurred. This letter will form part of our case against the driver of the vehicle.

As the PCN issued to the above vehicle remained unpaid for 28 days, we have requested your details from the DVLA as the registered keeper of the vehicle, through the reasonable cause criteria of pursuing an outstanding private parking charge. After 28 days of this notice, we have the right to recover the unpaid parking charge from the registered keeper, as described under schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012.

How To Pay

  Make Payment By Post.

Please complete the

Payment Slip below. Internet

www.lpspay.co.uk

Select "Pay Online" on the website.  

  Call our 24 hour telephone payment line: 0844 474 0904

Please be advised that all card payments are subject to a £1.50 processing fee.

If you believe that the charge should not be paid and wish to challenge this PCN, please write to P.O. Box 6321. Warwick. CV34 9QB. All correspondence must include your name, serviceable postal address, the name and address of the driver (if different), the vehicle registration and reference number. Appeals must be received within 28 days of issue. On receiving an appeal we will respond to you in writing within 14 working days, charges will be put on hold until an appeals decision has been made. If the appeal is unsuccessful you will be provided with the contact details of the Independent Appeals Service (POPLA) and a unique appeal reference. Please be advised that if you choose to appeal to the Independent Appeals Service and your appeal is unsuccessful you will lose the right to pay at the reduced amount.

Here are some points I have compared to the NTK above

5. The maximum sum that may be recovered from the keeper under keeper liability is the amount specified on the notice to keeper. This isn’t the case – letter before claim says different its 100 and not 85.

9. A notice to keeper has been given that contains the following mandatory information:

- Which car the ticket relates to

- What land the car was parked on

- The period the car was parked The period the car was parked is not stated only the time that the ticket was allegedly placed on the windscreen. 

- Advise that the driver is liable for the parking charge and the amount and that it has not been paid in full

- State whether a notice to the driver was given either to the driver or placed on the vehicle and if so to repeat the information in that notice about paying the parking charge and when

- Specify the outstanding amount of the parking charge and of the maximum additional costs they may seek to recover, and of the dispute resolution arrangements. As above the maximum amount of additional costs are not specified 

- Invite the registered keeper to pay the outstanding parking charge or, if he was not the driver,  to provide the name and address of the driver and to pass a copy of the notice on to that driver

- Identify the “creditor” who is legally entitled to recover the parking charge

- Warn the keeper that if the parking charges remains outstanding after 28 days and the name and address of the driver has not been given, or otherwise known to the person entitled to the parking charge,  that “creditor” will be entitled to recover the parking charge from the registered keeper.

- Details of the discount for payment within 14 days,

- Date of the notice

Coupon-mad

 Am I banged to rights here

On what thread that you have read, is ANYONE, EVER 'bang to rights' when faced with a fake PCN?

Can we please ban that phrase I quoted, and ban ''have I got a leg to stand on?''

For goodness sake, posters like you WIN practically every single case, and have done since 2017 on this forum.  These cases are easy, the PPCs ad their robo-claim waster 'legal firms' are hopeless and we have a template defence that can be used.  By following our advice, people win.

How exactly does this meet the wording in the POFA Schedule 4, para 8(2)f?  CLUE: - it doesn't:

 After 28 days of this notice, we have the right to recover the unpaid parking charge from the registered keeper, as described under schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012.

Daytona246

Coupon-mad said:

 Am I banged to rights here

On what thread that you have read, is ANYONE, EVER 'bang to rights' when faced with a fake PCN?

Can we please ban that phrase I quoted, and ban ''have I got a leg to stand on?''

For goodness sake, posters like you WIN practically every single case, and have done since 2017 on this forum.  These cases are easy, the PPCs ad their robo-claim waster 'legal firms' are hopeless and we have a template defence that can be used.  By following our advice, people win.

How exactly does this meet the wording in the POFA Schedule 4, para 8(2)f?  CLUE: - it doesn't:

 After 28 days of this notice, we have the right to recover the unpaid parking charge from the registered keeper, as described under schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012.

Thank you Coupon-Mad. I'm being a div! From what I'm reading it looks like it does apply .

I think I am worrying myself with all that's going on at the moment in the world. 

I found sched 4, para 4, (5)

(5)The maximum sum which may be recovered from the keeper by virtue of the right conferred by this paragraph is the amount specified in the notice to keeper under paragraph 8(2)(c) or (d) or, as the case may be, 9(2)(d) (less any payments towards the unpaid parking charges which are received after the time so specified).

Its 100 plus fake 60  

Umkomaas

How exactly does this meet the wording in the POFA Schedule 4, para 8(2)f?  CLUE: - it doesn't:

Thank you Coupon-Mad. I'm being a div! From what I'm reading it looks like it does apply .

I think I am worrying myself with all that's going on at the moment in the world.  

I found sched 4, para 4, (5)

Have another go.  Coupon-mad doesn't make mistakes on any of this stuff!

beamerguy

Daytona246 ......  you forget one important thing ...... Gladstones are the most incompetent solicitor in the UK

Right now, Gladstones are struggling to keep their scam and scam IPC afloat

The fake £60 is the biggest mistake they ever made. In fairness to them though, they just copied the scam from another dodgy legal who are now well out of their depth anyway.  Then the stupid IPC added this to their code of practice ????    Low intelligence prevails here

And are Gladstones going to be stupid enough to lie to a court about the fake £60 in view of the new Civil Procedure rule that says .....

For witness statements, the statement of truth’s wording will be as follows:
I believe that the facts stated in this witness statement are true.  I understand that proceedings for contempt of court may be brought against anyone who makes, or causes to be made, a false statement in a document verified by a statement of truth without an honest belief in its truth.

Will they lie ???????? I suspect they will

D_P_Dance

Everyone should complain to the SRA about these unlawful charges.  If they get hundreds of similar complains they may take action.  This firm should be struck off imo.

https://www.sra.org.uk/

Daytona246

Umkomaas said:

How exactly does this meet the wording in the POFA Schedule 4, para 8(2)f?  CLUE: - it doesn't:

Thank you Coupon-Mad. I'm being a div! From what I'm reading it looks like it does apply .

I think I am worrying myself with all that's going on at the moment in the world.  

I found sched 4, para 4, (5)

Have another go.  Coupon-mad doesn't make mistakes on any of this stuff!

Do you mean they have not quoted the full info?? 
I'm surprised if Judge's are not sick and tired of these cases! 

beamerguy

Daytona246 said:

Umkomaas said:

How exactly does this meet the wording in the POFA Schedule 4, para 8(2)f?  CLUE: - it doesn't:

Thank you Coupon-Mad. I'm being a div! From what I'm reading it looks like it does apply .

I think I am worrying myself with all that's going on at the moment in the world.  

I found sched 4, para 4, (5)

Have another go.  Coupon-mad doesn't make mistakes on any of this stuff!

Do you mean they have not quoted the full info?? 
I'm surprised if Judge's are not sick and tired of these cases! 

Judges are sick of the timewasting gladstones hence they spank them.

And as said above the SRA should strike them off if it's only for the reason that Gladstones make the SRA look like scam junkies