IMPORTANT REMINDER: Please make sure your posts do not contain any personally identifiable information. If you are uploading images, please take extra care that you have redacted all personal information.
EXTENDED: You've got another week to add your travel & holiday deals questions for expert MSE Oli as part of the latest Ask An Expert event.
URGENT Help needed! - Discovered CCJ from PCN
Latest MSE News and Guides
Replies
Gladstones sent a representative who I spoke with in the waiting room asking me to make an offer to settle (didn't give an offer amount).
I have just phoned up Gladstones a moment ago to see if I could make an offer to settle (offered to pay them the CCJ so £316 minus my N244 fee of £275, so approx £40) Gladstones refused and said they wouldn't settle for anything less than the full CCJ amount
The hearing has been rescheduled for Thursday (in 2 days).
When I spoke to the rep he was relying pretty heavily on the one letter sent to my address. I'm a bit worried? They seem to think they have a case here... I'm in half a mind just to pay the full amount and agree to their draft order to get it set aside. Do you have any thoughts?
BBC WatchDog “if you are struggling with an unfair parking charge do get in touch”
Never mind that they sent one letter (ages ago) to the right address. That makes it worse.
Having 2 addresses in play (plus an email address) meant they could not be sure at LBC stage which was correct for service. In fact they knew the old address wasn't for long term rentals so that was "least likely" to be right.
They could at all times have contacted you.
They were required to do a further 'soft trace' before litigation (Code of Practice, mandatory). That would have confirmed the position.
They failed to take sufficient steps.
Sit on your hands.
Gladstones now have your phone number. Ignore them if they call you.
Go to the hearing and spell out the position.
CLICK at the top of this/any page where it says:
Forum Home»Motoring»Parking Tickets Fines & Parking - read the NEWBIES THREAD
Thank you both for the swift responses
I realised this morning that I have misplaced my original parking ticket so no longer had evidence of it, so my chances of defending the claim are substantially weakened (I would therefore have to rely on the standard template defence on this forum + added costs)
My main concern is that if I do fight it on Thursday, then it could go to a further hearing after that, for the actual 'set aside' hearing.
Whereas, if I just agreed to the draft order to pay the whole lot, Thursday would most likely be the end of it.
At this point my main priority is I don't want this to go past Thursday (the stress is giving me heart pains) and I don't mind paying the £315 to gladstones to finish this, even though its totally unjust.
I feel terrible to say that as you have put so much effort into helping me but unfortunately I feel as though the bullies have won as I just can't keep this going, it's affecting my work as well.
Do know the 'process' for agreeing to gladstones set aside order? And the most effective way of finishing this by the Thursday hearing?
Sit on your hands.
Just ask the Judge after he/she sets aside the CCJ, if the PCN claim itself is not dismissed, then in order to narrow the issues, please can the court order that the Claimant do furnish you with copies of:
(a) the claim form
(b) the PCN and/or Notice to keeper
(c) the photo evidence
(d) the terms on the sign
and then you will respond within 14 days with a defence (or make an offer if pragmatic to end the dispute).
CLICK at the top of this/any page where it says:
Forum Home»Motoring»Parking Tickets Fines & Parking - read the NEWBIES THREAD
Thank you again, so to summarise my arguements for Thursday:
- The claimant had strong reason to believe the address was not correct as it was my university address (uni car park, no response to letters, found an alternative address in 2020, credit search done in 2020, if real, would have showed my old one wasn't used since 2017)
- They failed to take reasonable steps to ascertain my correct one (Could have emailed me at any time, sent a letter before claim to my alternative address(es), sent an LBC to my DVLA registered address)
- They Claim to have sent a letter to my new address in June 2020 (I don't recall seeing this letter, should I say I never received it?) If they did send the letter, from the Claimants Witness Statement, the letter doesn't make any reference to a claim - just I owe them a debt and need to contact them, if they had reason to believe I was elsewhere why didn't they send an LBC to the new address they found for me, a very easy and reasonable thing to do, or my original DVLA address (which also would have reached me)? If I had seen anything about a claim, naturally I absolutely would have responded
And if I fail to get it struck out and the judge wants a further hearing after Thursday, I can always just agree to the Claimants Draft order to agree to a set aside (hopefully with a few costs knocked off)?
Also here is my Draft Defence if the judge asks about my ability to defend the original claim, can you see any ways to improve it?
DRAFT DEFENCE
1. The Defendant denies that the Claimant is entitled to relief in the sum claimed, or at all.
2. It is denied that any conduct by the driver gave rise to a ‘parking charge’ and it is denied that this Claimant (understood to have a bare licence as managers) has standing to sue or to form contracts in their own name at the location.
The Defendant has a real prospect of defending the claim.
3. It is admitted that the Defendant was the registered keeper of the vehicle in question but liability is denied.
4. Secondly the inflated costs, which the Claimants admit (in para 37 of their WS) that the claim was inflated 'in error' (it was also further inflated by a false +£60 or £70 'admin fee' that the parking firm paid to no-one, because both DRP and Gladstones are ambulance chaser-style unregulated 'debt chasers' who act on a 'no pre-action recovery, no fee' basis). Interest was then applied wrongly on the whole exaggerated quantum, from day one. That is an abuse and unjust so the CCJ must be set aside.
5. The driver did not agree to pay a parking charge, let alone unknown costs, which were not quantified in prominent text on signage. The Claimant has provided a photo of the Sign, which is ineligible and cannot be expected to form a binding contract. It comes too late when purported debt recovery fees are only quantified after the event.
6. This Claimant continues to pursue a hugely disproportionate fixed sum (routinely and automatically added per PCN) despite knowing that this is now banned. It is denied that the quantum sought is recoverable (Authorities: two well-known ParkingEye cases where modern penalty law rationale was applied). Attention is drawn to paras 98, 100, 193, 198 of ParkingEye Ltd v Beavis [2015] UKSC67. Also ParkingEye Ltd v Somerfield Stores Ltd ChD [2011] EWHC 4023(QB) where the parking charge was £75, discounted to £37.50 for prompt payment. Whilst £75 was reasonable, HHJ Hegarty (sitting at the High Court; later ratified by the CoA) held in paras 419-428 that unspecified 'admin costs' inflating it to £135 'would appear to be penal'.
7. Whilst the new Code and Act is not retrospective, it was enacted due to the failure of the self-serving BPA & IPC Codes of Practice. The Minister is indisputably talking about existing (not future) cases when declaring that 'recovery' fees were 'designed to extort money'. A clear steer for the Courts.
8. This finding is underpinned by the Government, who have now stated that attempts to gild the lily by adding 'debt recovery costs' were 'extorting money'. The Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities ('DLUHC') published in February 2022, a statutory Code of Practice, found here: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/private-parking-code-of-practice
9. Adding costs/damages/fees (however described) onto a parking charge is now banned. In a section called 'Escalation of costs' the incoming statutory Code of Practice says: "The parking operator must not levy additional costs over and above the level of a parking charge or parking tariff as originally issued."
10. The Code's Ministerial Foreword is unequivocal about abusive existing cases such as the present claim: "Private firms issue roughly 22,000 parking tickets every day, often adopting a labyrinthine system of misleading and confusing signage, opaque appeals services, aggressive debt collection and unreasonable fees designed to extort money from motorists."
11. The claimant uses an automated bulk litigation business model which operates on the basis that keepers will sometimes be the driver. The claimant is a known serial litigator of Default County Court judgements, to the extent that the significance of the problem has led to previous Prime Ministers, Members of Parliament and the current Government to express concern and intervene.
12. In this case, the claimant has pursued the Defendant when they knew there was no legal authority to do so. This abuse of process and flouting of the regulations continually wastes the courts, and Defendants time, and is why there is significant effort on behalf of the Government to stop it.
13. The claim is entirely without merit and the Claimant is wasting the court's time with speculative PCNs which have no legal basis.
14. The facts in this defence come from the Defendant's own knowledge.
Statement of Truth
I believe that the facts stated in this defence are true. I understand that proceedings for contempt of court may be brought against anyone who makes, or causes to be made, a false statement in a document verified by a statement of truth without an honest belief in its truth.
Defendant’s signature:
Date:
You have nailed everything else.
CLICK at the top of this/any page where it says:
Forum Home»Motoring»Parking Tickets Fines & Parking - read the NEWBIES THREAD
On the 1st November 2016 the Defendant parked in the car park to attend a number of University Lectures. The Defendant purchased a full day parking ticket which the parking attendant failed to see within the car and incorrectly issued a ‘parking fine’. The Claimant contacted the Defendant via a letter shortly thereafter to the Defendants temporary University address, which the Claimant correctly ‘guessed’ was the Defendant’s university address from a soft credit search. The Defendant responded via email with the evidence of having a full day parking ticket and considered this matter closed. Despite vacating and completing the rental tenancy in June 2017, the Claimant continued to make contact with the Defendant long after the tenancy had expired. The Claimant then claims to have done a further credit search in June 2020, whereby they found an alternative address for the Defendant (at Surrey Address) and allegedly sent a letter to this address, this letter provided in the Claimants Witness Statement under article GS-2 makes absolutely no reference to an impending claim or requests for the Defendant to validate their address for 'service of a Claim'. No Letter Before Claim, or any other correspondence was ever sent to Surrey Address. The defendant had their DVLA and Electoral roll both registered at Surrey Address. The Credit Search conducted by the Claimant in 2020 would have shown the University address as not used by the Defendant since 2017, But the Surrey Address was in use throughout 2020. The Claimant admits in their own Witness Statement they held email address details for the Defendant the entire time.
Should I give this Draft Defence to the usher in the waiting room so the judge can read it before the hearing?