Gloucester Whittle Square PCM/Gladstone (UPDATE 14/04/2021 Won in Court)

Umkomaas

Gladstone was asked whether or not the layby was a permitted place to park to which he responded that it's not (it is and their own submitted evidence states it is), this really went against them.

An ill-prepared, gun-for-hire legal advocate is commonplace in private parking cases. The poor sap probably only received the papers the night before, as is usual. 

Nonetheless, you've beaten PCM UK and Gladstones, you're paying them nowt, and they've likely copped for £200+ for the 'pleasure' of pursuing and harassing you. Very well done. 👍

D_P_Dance

They have wasted your time, now consider how you can waste some if theirs, read this,

https://www.citizensadvice.org.uk/law-and-courts/legal-system/small-claims/making-a-small-claim/

Coupon-mad

rajon said:

First of all I'd like to thank everyone here for the tremendous amount of help provided via this forum and on this thread. This amazing source of information which has been built from responses to past posts and this community which has been build is absolutely amazing.

I don't think i did a great job on fighting my case verbally as i wanted but it was enough to get the claim dismissed. The particular part in my case which got the claim dismissed was the lack of clear marked bays and signage not clearly defining what was considered a bay. The location which I parked has a layby next to it that is valid parking but did not have marked bays. Therefore the judge said it's not very clear what is a bay and what is not. Gladstone was asked whether or not the layby was a permitted place to park to which he responded that it's not (it is and their own submitted evidence states it is), this really went against them. The judge also considered my argument that the area i parked in is commonly used as parking the judge felt this was due to the confusion about this layby, mixed with the lack of road markings to define restriction and that PCM can do more to clearly define what is permitted parking.

The judge seemed also frustrated about the lack page numbers and exhibit number in the documents gladstone submitted (this was particularly difficult keeping track over a phone hearing). The Gladstone representative had to use page titles and description to navigate the the judge through their document. 

I probably could have given them a better mincing if I had some responses to some of the cases Gladstone referred to about the contract not being valid but in the end case was dismissed and i am happy about that. Thank you once again.

Brilliant news!

ANOTHER GLADSTONES / PCM ONE BITES THE DUST!

Snakes_Belly

Well done. 

I think that we can all reflect on the hearing afterwards and think that we could have done a better job. It's something though that is new to most of us and I think that we do well to come up against legally trained people who are used to putting over their case at the hearing.  

beamerguy

Well done, you must have been OK ... YOU WON.

This is yet another case of sheer incompetence by Gladstones