WIN - Another Loss for Gladstones

Coupon-mad

Wouldn't that judgment mean that most PPC witness statements should be thrown out?


Arguably yes, but anything goes in small claims and corners are cut. It is 'DJ Bingo' luck of the draw who the Defendant gets at the hearing.

The Claimant’s solicitor has ripped apart my Defence, which I would like your view on.

They haven't - and we don't even need to see it because their WS is a template. Search the forum for a word or phrase from it. Please! Seriously we've seen it before.

It's yawnworthy, quotes from this forum, no doubt rudely accuses you (effectively) of being too dumb to understand your own defence and has been seen dozens of times before on here and laughed at. Spare us!

Search for an unusual word from it! Laugh at it.

Umkomaas

Search for an unusual word from it! Laugh at it.

'Nonsensical' might be a good starting point!

Johnersh

Wouldn't that judgment mean that most PPC witness statements should be thrown out?

Yes. The peril is that defendants sometimes add in their legal cases arguments too, which blurs the boundaries. 

You can take the point if your own statement is pure fact. The authority (court of appeal) plus absence if ability to cross examine are solid points.

Nevertheless, I agree it is trial, so one can never predict what a judge might order.

Finally unless and until there is a law against using precedent documents (in which case the entire legal profession is stuffed) I see no merit in the snide remark to the effect that the defendant doesn't understand the points being raised.  That's often incorrect if the defendant has done their research and it's not fact but an ad hominem attack - usually contained in a statement from somebody who themselves is not a qualified lawyer. 

jaycee31

Court hearing this morning.  Case dismissed.  General acceptance that Claimant and their solicitor had made a sh&t show of it all.  Another Gladstone shambles put to bed.  Unfortunately no LIP costs allowed due to Small Claims track.

MANY MANY THANKS to all.

patient_dream

jaycee31 said:

Court hearing this morning.  Case dismissed.  General acceptance that Claimant and their solicitor had made a sh&t show of it all.  Another Gladstone shambles put to bed.  Unfortunately no LIP costs allowed due to Small Claims track.

MANY MANY THANKS to all.

Well done .... sounds like Gladstones and their fairy dreaming trip

Shame about costs, so many judges will go up to £95 <<<<< they are allowed

Gladstones were zapped and that is all that matters.   Do tell us what charade they put on this time

Umkomaas

Well done and thanks for telling us the result. Could you go a tad further by letting us know the location of the court, who the judge was and the court case reference number please?  And, importantly, on what exactly did the judge reach the decision to dismiss?

95Rollers

Well done. Shame you didn't get the LIP costs as they wasted your time, but glad its all over now. Look forward to the court report.

Snakes_Belly

Well done on your win   It's always good to end the week on a win.

jaycee31

Umkomaas said:

Well done and thanks for telling us the result. Could you go a tad further by letting us know the location of the court, who the judge was and the court case reference number please?  And, importantly, on what exactly did the judge reach the decision to dismiss?

Sorry, bit late in coming back...

It was Oxford County Court, judge was DDJ Rea.  She was extremely fair, although I think she could have been a little harder on the Claimant (biased view of course ).  Gladstones sent a solicitors agent, they didn't even show up.  He was ill prepared, didn't have my bundle and wasn't completely confident.

The case should have been thrown out due to Gladstones being their usual inept selves, having missed submission dates and lack of engagement with me on pack submission, but a previous judge had let them off along the way due to an oversight and having scheduled the hearing, the decision was "as we are all here, we may as well proceed", after the solicitors agent also argued for a relief from sanction for their shortcomings.

The court admin hadn't supplied the judge with my full emailed WS (some was missing) or the Claimant's bundle which they submitted by post.  But she did have my original WS from February for the set aside case.

The DDJ eventually determined that the grace period overrun of 2 minutes (that I was arguing due to Bank Holiday traffic etc. etc. plus ANPR entry to exit not being the paid "parking period") was excessive to penalise and dismissed the claim.

Coupon-mad

Nicely done!

ANOTHER ONE BITES THE DUST!

Now you've won this battle and earned the 'virtual t-shirt', please don't disappear just yet.

A final Public Consultation is coming.

We need you; motorists need you to help us make a difference forever.  What a waste of your time this was, and why should there be such a litigation culture in parking?   It's truly horrible being pursued for £100 plus false 'fees' for no reason, by an ex-clamper aggressive firm, isn't it? 

Join us in trying to end the conniving PPC and DRA 'added fees' fuelling the court culture. 

There will be one window of opportunity later this year.  My best guess is in October/November.

Together, we can stop the rotten parking industry from riding roughshod over the new statutory Code and the charge level caps, and otherwise bullying all motorists forever, using the regulation to gain kudos and status.

If you are not likely to pop back here every week to check, please set up email alerts for this forum and bookmark this thread (below) as we intend that one of us posts on it when the Government opens the Consultation:

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6333989/mse-parking-ticket-appeals-guide-feedback#latest

Read the latest posts there.

The PPC money-grabbers have blocked the new Code by filing for Judicial Reviews.  Stopped the declared and much welcomed parking code from February 2022, which stated that added £70 false 'DRA fee' extortion was to be banned and that parking levels would start at £50.

It's on hold. Motorists urgently need it reinstated and the ban on false 'DRA fees' confirmed, to stop the rot.

This year will be your chance to make a difference, plus any other drivers you know (family, friends) who are also fed up to the back teeth with the greedy and unscrupulous parking industry and the stranglehold they have on people.

We need high numbers of real victims to make a point of responding to this final Consultation