Gladstone/ES Parking - County Court Claim Form

nosferatu1001

Offer them £20 to go away. 
Or your experienece is only a single case, and therefore is not evidence of anything wider. 

Umkomaas

Also from my experience I dont think the template defence is winning many judges over anymore. 

Can you elaborate please?

Coupon-mad

el_patron said:

Also from my experience I dont think the template defence is winning many judges over anymore. I think its probably better if Defendant’s draft their own defence and using that as a guide only. 
Thanks

That isn't true!    You are wrong with that assumption.    That Judge has really got to you...we've seen this so often, then people file a decent WS & evidence and either get a discontinuance or they find that they get a better Judge next time who really gets it.

Gladstones are far from 'good at what they do'' they fail almost every time in our cases, or discontinue when they see a decent WS and evidence!

We are winning 99% of cases still, consistently, since 2016.  This hearing was a bit like Mediation; a waste of time.  You will not be liable for more costs even if you lose.  Offer them ten or twenty quid so you can show the Judge later that you played nicely. Or offer nothing if you are sure you have a good case about signs or whatever (I haven't checked back).

You know the thing about Judges no longer striking out?    The reason for that is known and it is ALL COVERED in the HX thread I told you to read, where I wrote a new witness statement template. I told you WHY I wrote it and what the issue is about, in my reply above:

7 September at 4:04PM edited 7 September at 4:04PM

I told you the name of the appeal case and where to look for the latest WS example.  There are two now, on the threads by @blancswann (defendant was not driving so denied it) and @painbl (defendant was driving and admitted it).  Obviously you don't copy the stuff I wrote that is specific to that case, e.g. stuff about pay & display if it's not a pay & display car park. You just edit it.

Crack on!  Stop being despondent.  Even if you lose you won't pay the £60 and you will cost them a huge amount more!

AND - please now make a real difference - A TASK FOR SEPTEMBER.

The Government is (this month only) consulting about a new statutory code of practice (CoP) and framework to rein in the rogue parking firms.  Read and comment on the draft CoP proposal and the enforcement framework consultation, and get everyone you know to do the same.

You will need to register to comment on the CoP and enter an occupation even if you are retired or a homemaker, but otherwise it is easy to navigate, and comment upon each section/subsection individually. You can save comments to edit later and or submit comments once you are happy with them.

https://standardsdevelopment.bsigroup.com/projects/2020-00193#/section

You do not need to register to comment on the enforcement framework which can be found here. It has a link on page 5 to make comments.

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/913272/Code_Enforcement_Framework_consultation.pdf

At the very least, we say the parking charge level should be £50/£25 or higher level £70/£35, as per Council PCNs in E&W.  

And we say the added fake 'debt recovery' costs are just double counting the cost of letters, and MUST GO because that is unfair and illegal.

Please be heard.  You can bet the hundreds of PPCs will be commenting.

No apologies for repeating this vital 'call for action' to consumers, on every thread this month!

el_patron

Umkomaas said:

Can you elaborate please?

Yeah sure, its the impression I got from this judge so I could be wrong and this is just one case but the judge made it clear to me that he wasn't satisfied with the Defence. And that he knew I'd taken it from the internet. 
He said a large part of it was irrelevant because it referred to throwing the case out for abuse of process, which is something that judges won't do anymore. He also said I need to be more specific about what defence I'm actually using and should focus more on the events specific to the case rather than the technicalities. 
As I mentioned in my previous post I think there was an element of the judge trying to get me to negotiate because he said things I wouldn't expect from a judge. For example when I mentioned the claimants conduct, and how they'd ignored my SAR or request for all evidence at the LBC stage, or how the NTK didn't follow POFA etc he said "it doesn't matter that they haven't provided me the information because they probably still have it somewhere. And that if this does go to court he thinks it'll be difficult for me to win." This was a bit of a shock because from my point of view they didn't have a case.

el_patron

Thanks Coupon-Mad, I'll see what happens with the negotiations but will definitely follow your advice for the WS.

I've also forwarded your links on to friends and family to get more people commenting. 

Umkomaas

Which Judge, which court please?  There may be 'form'. 

Le_Kirk

Are you sure he was a judge?  He wasn't the the advocate working for the PPC?  It annoys me when people (be they judges or PPC) say that a defence "off the  Internet" is invalid"  Just because it is on a forum doesn't make it invalid; if that were the case very few defences could ever be used as they have all been used before!  

He also said I need to be more specific about what defence I'm actually using and should focus more on the events specific to the case rather than the technicalities. 

That sound like a Witness Statement (WS) to me.  A defence is a series of technical and legal arguments whilst a WS is a narrative telling the events specific to the case!