Fight against parking cowboys - court

Coupon-mad

You can add anything you like about unclear or non-prominent signs and terms, because the court has a duty under s71 of the CRA 2015 to assess the fairness & prominence of signs ('consumer notices') & terms. Whether the consumer pleads it in defence, or not.

Please read the WS and exhibits a-f list in the NEWBIES thread & read the 5 examples.

Havoc88

Hey everyone! I wanted to express my gratitude for your responses. I utilized the defense strategy mentioned in my initial post. Surprisingly, after being allocated a local court for the hearing and before I even received the witness statement to fill out, I received a letter from the court upon returning home. The case has been struck out, which is a significant outcome!

Part of the letter :

 “ And upon the court noting that:

1. The Particulars of Claim are entirely inadequate, in that they fail to particularise (a) the contractual term (s) relied upon; (b) the specifics of any alleged breach of contract; or (c) the alleged loss
2. Neither the Court nor the Defendant are able, on the basis of the Particulars within the Claim Form, to understand properly and specifically what case is being pursued
3. The Particulars appear to be in breach of CPR 16.4, 16D3 and 16D7, and fail to "state all facts necessary for the purpose of formulating a complete cause of action"

And upon the claim being for a very small amount, well within the small claims limit, such that the Court considers it disproportionate and contrary to the overriding objective to give permission to the Claimant to amend the claim”

Don't hesitate to stand up to these individuals. They're taking a chance by paying for court proceedings just to pressure you, and if you don't take action in response, they'll obviously come out on top.

Thanks!

nopcns

Great news. Which court? Which judge?

Havoc88

County court at Reading, there is no name of the judge. Yet court decided it’s a pointless claim lol.

patient_dream

So Gladstones case was inadequate ???? What a surprise ???

I think gone are the days that these legals can produce rubbish in court.  
Maybe the courts have woken up to the fact that is Gladstones that set up the IPC and IAS AND THAT OVER 90% of appeals FAIL

Well done, hopefully word will spread in the courts about Gladstones and the Dept of Levelling up realises that this outfit are simply not fit for purpose

Coupon-mad

Havoc88 said:

County court at Reading, there is no name of the judge. Yet court decided it’s a pointless claim lol.

Perfect!  As seen in these judgments too:

Judgments

One of those was also from Reading.  Can you show us a photo of the judgment, like those?

Le_Kirk

Coupon-mad said:

Havoc88 said:

County court at Reading, there is no name of the judge. Yet court decided it’s a pointless claim lol.

Perfect!  As seen in these judgments too:

Judgments

One of those was also from Reading.  Can you show us a photo of the judgment, like those?

Great and if/when I see the judgment I will add it to the list.

Havoc88

Hi see the judgment. 

Coupon-mad

Havoc88 said:

Hi see the judgment. 

Great stuff!

@Le_Kirk can add that to the judgments link to bring it bang up to date for 2024!

There was also one last week (post-CCJ I think?) which was won at a hearing with a short written judgment stating that the claim was dismissed due to breach of CPR 16. Anyone recall which one?

Havoc88

I hope you guys can make use of these paragraphs for your cases! I've got another ongoing case here: [https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6513842/parking-ticket-letters-from-debt-collectors-stage#latest]. Hopefully, this one can also be added to the list of victories, haha."