Gladstones Claim Form

Coupon-mad

paynele47 said:

Have now received the Directions Questionnaire from Gladstones saying they are proceeding.  

As expected - to be ignored - as stated in the first 12 steps in the Template Defence thread.

But please please please find time to do this new Call for Evidence this month:

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/80375249/#Comment_80375249

The Committee invites evidence on:

• What the current level of delay in the County Court is

• The ways in which the County Court engages with litigants in person, and how this could be improved

• The causes of action giving rise to claims in the County Court

• What future reforms to the County Court should be considered.

Please also state that private parking firms and their bulk litigators are the main problem as far as small claims delays are concerned, as the dominate and clog up court lists.

Parking claim numbers are rising every year and will make up about a third of all small claims in 2023, based on the 2022 figures that the MoJ divulged in the DLUHC's recent Parking Code of Practice Call for Evidence:
https://www.gov.uk/government/calls-for-evidence/private-parking-code-of-practice-call-for-evidence#:~:text=The%20call%20for%20evidence%20is,help%20the%20decision%2Dmaking%20process.

About half a million parking claims are made every year and all this MUST STOP.  The MoJ must separate parking cases with a new pre-action protocol requiring use of ADR instead of inflated debt demands.

These generic roboclaims churn through the system, clogging up court time over meritless rip-off PCNs where the POC are boilerplate and lack even the most basic details of the alleged breach (please show your own Claim Form as evidence) and attach CEL v Chan and say parking claim bulk litigators should be banned from the county court system as vexatious litigants.

They are inviting evidence not rants or opinion so we need people like you to respond, who are currently caught up in a PPC claim and can attach the above evidence.

Closes in 4 weeks. Please do it to push for parking cases to be taken out of this system.

You want to change things? This Committee is your voice.  The Government is already regulating the private parking industry, so they are listening and are aware of the scourge of unfair PCNs from rogues and bulk litigators.

Interested parties have until 14 December to make a submission to the committee.

paynele47

Coupon-mad said:

paynele47 said:

Have now received the Directions Questionnaire from Gladstones saying they are proceeding.  

As expected - to be ignored - as stated in the first 12 steps in the Template Defence thread.

But please please please find time to do this new Call for Evidence this month:

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/80375249/#Comment_80375249

The Committee invites evidence on:

• What the current level of delay in the County Court is

• The ways in which the County Court engages with litigants in person, and how this could be improved

• The causes of action giving rise to claims in the County Court

• What future reforms to the County Court should be considered.

Please also state that private parking firms and their bulk litigators are the main problem as far as small claims delays are concerned, as the dominate and clog up court lists.

Parking claim numbers are rising every year and will make up about a third of all small claims in 2023, based on the 2022 figures that the MoJ divulged in the DLUHC's recent Parking Code of Practice Call for Evidence:
https://www.gov.uk/government/calls-for-evidence/private-parking-code-of-practice-call-for-evidence#:~:text=The%20call%20for%20evidence%20is,help%20the%20decision%2Dmaking%20process.

About half a million parking claims are made every year and all this MUST STOP.  The MoJ must separate parking cases with a new pre-action protocol requiring use of ADR instead of inflated debt demands.

These generic roboclaims churn through the system, clogging up court time over meritless rip-off PCNs where the POC are boilerplate and lack even the most basic details of the alleged breach (please show your own Claim Form as evidence) and attach CEL v Chan and say parking claim bulk litigators should be banned from the county court system as vexatious litigants.

They are inviting evidence not rants or opinion so we need people like you to respond, who are currently caught up in a PPC claim and can attach the above evidence.

Closes in 4 weeks. Please do it to push for parking cases to be taken out of this system.

You want to change things? This Committee is your voice.  The Government is already regulating the private parking industry, so they are listening and are aware of the scourge of unfair PCNs from rogues and bulk litigators.

Interested parties have until 14 December to make a submission to the committee.

Brilliant. I will deffo do it.

Many thanks

paynele47

So have now got a date at The Royal Courts of Justice at the Strand. They have filed their defence witness statement and are excusing themselves from attending. Should I post their Witness Statement and redact it?

It looks pretty comprehensive TBH

Coupon-mad

No thanks. We don't need to (or have time to) trawl through a massive prolix template we've seen before from Gladstones umpteen times.

It's for you to go through it and the evidence and find the holes because you know your case inside out. We don't, but we'll assist once you spot something.

Look at the dates on signage photos.

Look at the site map of signs, is it true?

Look at the landowner authority as well.

What's your deadline to submit your WS?

paynele47

Thanks Coupon Made. So date for court is 6th August, so 14 days before then is the deadline, which makes it 23rd July

LDast

Is the Claimants WS signed by someone from Gladstones? In other words, is it a statement from someone with direct knowledge of the facts? Someone from Gladstones cannot have direct knowledge.

If it was signed by someone from Gladstones, you need the following at the beginning of your WS:

As a preliminary matter, I wish to bring to the Court's attention that the Claimant's Witness Statement, signed by [Paralegal or Solicitor's Name] of Gladstones Solicitors, does not comply with CPR 32.4 and Practice Direction 32, which require that a witness statement be made by an individual with direct knowledge of the facts. Furthermore, Practice Direction 32, paragraph 18.2, stipulates that the statement must be in the witness's own words and include details of how the witness has direct knowledge of the matters stated. As [Paralegal or Solicitor's Name] does not have direct involvement in the events in question, the Witness Statement fails to meet these requirements. In light of this non-compliance, I respectfully request that the Court strike out the claim pursuant to CPR 3.4(2)(c) due to the Claimant's failure to comply with the relevant rules and practice directions.

paynele47

Its been written by a legal assistant

Coupon-mad

Yep, so the above can be added.

paynele47

Does anyone know where I can obtain these exhibits for my Witness Statement? I have 2 weeks to submit.

5.      Similarly, at the Wakefield County Court on 8th September 2023, District Judge Robinson considered mirror image POC in claim K3GF9183 (Parallel Parking v anon) and struck the Claim out without a hearing. (See Exhibit 02).

 

6.      Likewise, in January 2023 (also without a hearing) District Judge Sprague, sitting at the County Court at Luton, struck out a similarly badly-pleaded parking claim with a full explanation of his reasoning. (See Exhibit 03).

 

7.      Furthermore, at Manchester District Judge McMurtrie and District Judge Ranson also struck out a claim (again without a hearing) on the grounds of POC’s lacking clarity, detail, and precision. As stated in the final image below, the Claimant’s solicitors confirmed they would not file an amended POC, demonstrating again the reliance of a number of firms on robo-letters and illegitimate practices. (See Exhibit 04).

Le_Kirk

This is the most up-to-date link for Judgments such as you request.