Gladstone solicitors letter - cowboy signage

Coupon-mad

Agreed - but the sign is ambiguous when you take into account that entrance sign as well, that suggests (ambiguously) a per hour rate.

nosferatu1001

I think you can argue that, but it does not state a per hour rate. it correctyly states one hour is 20p
It does not state 20p / hour, or anything else. 

Coupon-mad

I agree, it doesn't. The other sign though, with the weird gap between 1 hour and 2 hours, leaves a consumer scratching their head IMHO and could easily lead to an understanding that it's 20p per hour for short stays. 

I mean, you and I would not conclude that, but the average man/woman in the street might well do.

Fruitcake

Does anyone know a man who regularly uses the Clapham Omnibus whom we could ask? 

nosferatu1001

Right now there arent many!
The gaps could helkp, but its a dodgy arugment. It is not predatory, for sure, and it might be ambiguous, buit I would not be confident on a court agreeing. 

Egbert_Nobacon

Fruitcake said:

Does anyone know a man who regularly uses the Clapham Omnibus whom we could ask? 

I,as a regular Omnibus user find the signs very confusing.
Supposing I was away for 26 hours how much should be paid ?
Perhaps the Gladstone’s rep will be able to explain in court how clear this is.

parchway2021

Thanks all for your continued input. I have pursued a SAR with the claimant and this has been fulfilled. As per the newbie thread I have asked for a PDT machine record which was ignored, and I will be chasing them to supply this. 

I will also be writing up a landowner complaint to send out this week, as I've had little time to do this so far. 

Question: should I reply to the solicitors email saying I deny any liability and I will be defending it in court? Or best to just wait for an LBC and prepare my defence when it comes? 

beamerguy

Probably wait for the LBC, it may never come.  Then you deny and question Gladstones legal authority to add £60 ?

You could do that now if you wish just to see what nonsense they reply with

As Egbert_Nobacon says above ... "Perhaps the Gladstone’s rep will be able to explain in court how clear this is"

In other words, this will be yet another fine old mess that Gladstones will enter into ... 

parchway2021

Thanks beamerguy - they have already asked for the extra £60 (£160 total) again with another 30 days presumably before the LBC is sent out. I think it could look better to the court if I have laid out my intentions proactively. 

As far as a landowner complaint, I'm not too sure what sort of content to include. I have read through other posts for inspiration, how does the following sound?

"Dear <names of land owners>,

Due to the upsetting, intimidatory and unlawful actions of parking agents "Premier Parking Logistics" on your land (74 Cecil Street, B19 3SU), I am forced to pursue this complaint to inform you of the gross misconduct occurring on your behalf.  

During the incident in question over two years ago, unclear signage and ambiguous pricing had caused a PCN to be issued for an extremely minor (20 minute) supposed-overstay, asking for £60 and increasing to £100 if not paid within 30 days. Any reasonable member of society would agree that the current signage in place is ambiguous to say the least, and charging a completely disproportionate sum in this case of ambiguity - where a ticket had been purchased for what was thought to be more than enough time/money -  is absolutely reprehensible. At a push, one could even go as far to say that when all information is considered, the ambiguous signage combined with intimidating correspondence and disproportionate claim amount is borderline intentionally misleading in an attempt to make a quick-win over those unwilling or even unable to exercise their right to defend themselves. 

After the initial shock of receiving the ridiculously disproportionate pseudo-fine for an unfairly issued ticket, I started to research Premier Parking Logistics and have found many such cases of similar events asking for large sums of money and employing scare tactics to unjustly gouge money out of citizen's pockets. I quickly received intimidating correspondence threatening legal action, and an increase to the amount claimed to an even higher to a sum of £160. This practice alone is unlawful and clearly intended to cause enough distress and inconvenience to convince any defendant to pay immediately without due process in fear of ever-increasing fines. 

Many landowners and businesses are wanting to distance themselves from these unjust, intimidatory and unlawful practices especially in these already challenging and hard times. I strongly suggest you follow suit to protect the good reputation and customer satisfaction that comes with the <landowner company> name. 

I have sought quality advice on how to proceed and will be exercising my right to defend myself against these unjust claims from Premier Parking Logistics and their (also reprehensibly conducted) solicitors Gladstone Solicitors. I am giving you the opportunity here to quash the PCN once and for all as a show of goodwill during these times where mental/physical health should be at the forefront of our minds, rather than defending ourselves against unjust and unlawful scare tactics. 

I would also suggest doing your own research on both Premier Parking Logistics and Gladstone Solicitors to see the kind of agents you are associating yourselves with by contracting them for your parking solutions. I strongly suggest removing them as your parking contractors. If this is escalated further, I will also be complaining to your MP <name>.

Yours,

<name>"

Umkomaas

I will also be complaining to your MP <name>.

SUGGESTION

.... my MP <name>, and ask him (her) to also report this situation to <name>, the MP for the constituency in which your business is located.