Gladstones FAQ letter - misleading, worth complaint to SRA and MP?

allymscott

Long story short:
I live in a flat with an allocated parking space. Permit not displayed on several occasions, got a ticket, appealed to IAS, PPC declined to pursue. Terms of Leasehold make no mention of requiring a permit.
Parked in neighbour's space, with his permission (have written confirmation of this), appeal rejected at IAS, ignored debt collection letters, now have LBC from Gladstones. Their FAQs are very generic and seem misleading. In particular this: "How can I be liable for the charge when I do not believe I entered into a contract? - In the case of Parking Eye v Beavis [2015] it was accepted as an established principle that a valid contract can be made by an offer in the form of the terms and conditions set out on the sign, and accepted by the driver's actions. By parking in the manner you did, the charge was properly incurred".

And this:  "The operator does not own the relevant land so had no authority to issue the charge. Can I be liable for the charge? - The contract is between you and the operator, not the landowner. Both VCS v HM Revenue & Customs (2013) and Parking Eye v Beavis (CA 2015) made it clear that a contracting party need not show that they have a right to do what they have promised in the performance of a contract, nor is (in the case of a parking operator) the agreement between the Operator and the Landowner of any relevance. Notwithstanding this, we are confident that all of our clients have the relevant authority, but in view of the above such authority will not be disclosed to you prior to our clients witness statement, if at all."
 With the first point, while this may have some relevance with regards to supermarket car parks, etc, it can't be applied in a blanket fashion to residential parking where spaces form part of the leasehold and primacy of contract applies. To try and infer that this is 100% the case in all situations is scaremongering to say the least. With the second point, I can't find anywhere in PE v Beavis that mentions that "a contracting party need not show that they have a right to do what they have promised", and I don't believe that VCS v HMRC can necessarily be applied to residential parking cases where there is no relevant variance in the leasehold. Also, how can they refuse to disclose any contract to operate on the land? Although I don't believe it's relevant anyway as the lease grants an unfettered right to park, but surely this would be a failure to comply with Part 6 (c) of the Practice Direction PAP: "the parties disclosing key documents relevant to the issues in dispute."

Thanks to all the very excellent help on this forum I'm confident that I can use the Primacy of Contract argument coupled with my neighbour's written permission to use his space to be successful in court, I shall be asking for advice re witness statements and defence if it gets that far, at the moment I'm picking holes in their LBC as advised on this forum, but I'd also like people's views on the these FAQs and whether it's worth flagging up to my MP and the SRA? Is it also worth bringing to the attention of the judge as proof of what a shambles Gladstones are as part of a request to strike the claim out as being vexatious and without merit? Please also note that the lack of apostrophe in "clients witness statement" is exactly how it appears in the FAQ. And these are solicitors? The mind boggles.

beamerguy

In the case of Parking Eye v Beavis [2015] it was accepted as an established principle that a valid contract can be made by an offer in the form of the terms and conditions

The Supreme court actually said ...
 "The main reason for the £85 charge was to meet the costs of enforcing the parking rules"

Gladstones are using Beavis but then go against it by adding a fake £60

WATCH THE SUPREME COURT RULING VIDEO in this thread
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6265050/beavis-insight-motorway-services-insight-and-claims-lost-in-court/p1?new=1

D_P_Dance

Why do you need a permit?  What does your lease/AST say about parking  Does it give you primacy of contract?  Read this,

http://parking-prankster.blogspot.com/2016/11/residential-parking.html

Of course you should complain to the SRA  if you think that that Gladstones have acted inappropriately, and to your MP.,  and the Management Company and landowner.

Coupon-mad

Parked in neighbour's space, with his permission (have written confirmation of this), appeal rejected at IAS, ignored debt collection letters, now have LBC from Gladstones. 

I think, as well as doing everything the NEWBIES thread tells you to do at LBC stage, it will look very reasonable if you reply to Gs and show them (again, as you have to their client) that you have written permission from the person who has that allocated or demised space.

allymscott

So, I replied to Gladstone's  LBC, telling them all the reasons I felt the LBC didn't comply and including a copy of the written permission from my neighbour to use his bay. All went quiet until this email from them...:

Dear XXX XXXXXXXX

 

We write further to your contact with our office dated XX XX 2021 , whereby we note we may not hold the correct forename for you on our systems.  

 We can undertake a review as to whether to update our systems in relation to your forename once in receipt of sufficient documentation to enable us to verify your identity. 

 Please provide proof of name (i.e. passport/driving licence/utility bill). Once in receipt of this documentation we will undertake a review. 

 Please note our systems will not be updated until we are in receipt of the requested documentation.  Please also note therefore, that we cannot update any Data Controller/Data Processors, with whom we have shared your personal data with, until such times as we have received the same.

 Please note that we do not retain identification documents. 

Such documents can be provided via email to our Data Protection Department; DataProtectionOfficer@gladstonessolicitors.co.uk or via reply.  

Under the General Data Protection Regulations we are obliged to respond to your request within one month of receiving it but please note that the one month compliance will not start until we receive proof of your identity.  

 We look forward to hearing from you.  

 Kind regards...

I have a long first name, and ever since the first letters from the PCM, they've left off the last few letters. However, they have been emailing and sending letters to my home address, so there is no doubt that they're talking to the right person. I'm just not sure why they've sent this request all of a sudden, and am I under any obligation to reply to it? Do they have an ulterior motive for asking to see proof of ID and how will the judge view a refusal to provide it? There is obviously a certain amount of copying and pasting of template letters going on at Gladstones as the last sentence makes mention of "my request" and I have made no such request.

I'm inclined to reply saying that as we have been corresponding on this matter for several months and I have signed every email with my full name and they have also been sending letters to my home address then they should be satisfied as to my identity and I am not minded to provide any of my official forms of ID as I am not legally compelled to do so.

I used the IAS and admitted to being the driver first off, so they have not had to use the DVLA to obtain my details, so I wonder if this is part of the reason they they're now asking for confirmation of ID?

All advice gratefully received...

Coupon-mad

Just show them the V5C logbook if that has the right name.  Tell them PCM have got it wrong.

allymscott

I've lost count of the times I've explained the situation. I randomly got another email from them yesterday stating that their client's position remains the same and if I still refuse to pay I should submit my defence once court papers have been issued. There's been no further mention of them wanting to confirm my ID and I haven't replied, which makes me think these are just random attempts to keep the pressure on and remind me that I'm on the verge of being taken to court.

Umkomaas

Which parking firm?  I know you used the acronym PCM, but I read that in the context you used it as a generic description for a parking firm. @Coupon-mad, I think, has read it as PCM (UK) as being the parking firm. Could you please clear up any confusion?

I have a long first name, and ever since the first letters from the PCM, they've left off the last few letters.

Some parking companies are keener than others to issue proceedings, if we know which one you're involved with, if it's one of the more 'timid' variety, it might be worth going on the offensive and telling Gladstones to get on with it or to insert their threats in places where the sun don't shine!

allymscott

Sorry, the company initials are PCM. Parking Control Management (UK) LTD

Umkomaas

allymscott said:

Sorry, the company initials are PCM. Parking Control Management (UK) LTD

Thanks, that does clear that up.  PCM (UK), while issuing some court claims, are not in the premier league in that regard. You might not frighten them off by going on the attack, but you just don't need this Sword of Damocles hanging over you (all part of the pressure play), but if a claim is going to come, best to get on with it soonest. 

Just one caveat - as PPCs are scraping the bottom of the barrel of unpaid parking charges, going back up to 6 years, getting close to the final date (of the actual parking event) for issuing a claim, just please confirm the year of the parking event. 

Coupon-mad

OK, does their LBC have a box as shown in this thread, saying that the estimated LEGAL fees are £80, yet the claim is under £300?

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/78446019#Comment_78446019

If so, please complete a report against Gladstones, who are already under investigation and have been for a year or more.