Dispute Resolution Hearing 26 March @ Huddersfield County Court NPML/Gladstones

skintbutwantstosave

LDast said:

Where is there a "keeper liability" sub heading in the template defence? Keeper liability has already been denied in the template. You will expand on that at WS time.

The PoC say that the unknown driver parked at some unspecified location called the "Hair & Beauty Bar" on a specific date. It doesn't say why parking at some unspecified location incurs a PCN. Forget about everything else for now. 

You only need to add a single paragraph to the defence template after the para where you say you are the keeper but were not the driver. It only has to say that the defendant denies parking at the unspecified location as there is no address. 

"The defendant denies that the vehicle was parked at an unspecified location that the claimant has alleged in their woefully inadequate particulars of claim. The claimant is put to strict proof that the defendants vehicle was ever parked at the unspecified location."

The facts known to the Defendant:

4. The facts in this defence come from the Defendant's own knowledge and honest belief.  Conversely, the Claimant sets out a cut-and-paste incoherent and sparse statement of case. The POC appear to be in breach of CPR 16.4, 16PD3 and 16PD7, and fail to "state all facts necessary for the purpose of formulating a complete cause of action". The Defendant is unable, on the basis of the POC, to understand with certainty what case, allegation(s) and what heads of cost are being pursued, making it difficult to respond. However, the vehicle is recognised and it is admitted that the Defendant was the registered keeper but not the driver.  

 5.      The Defendant denies that the vehicle was parked at an unspecified location that the Claimant has alleged in their woefully inadequate particulars of claim. The Claimant is put to strict proof that the Defendant’s vehicle was ever parked at the unspecified location.

6.      The Claimant will concede that no financial loss has arisen and that in order to impose an inflated parking charge, as well as proving a term was breached, there must be:

 (i)                  a strong 'legitimate interest' extending beyond mere compensation for loss, and

(ii)                'adequate notice' of the 'penalty clause' charge which, in the case of a car park, requires prominent signs and lines.

7.      The Defendant denies (i) or (ii) have been met. The charge imposed, in all the circumstances is a penalty, not saved by ParkingEye Ltd v Beavis [2015] UKSC67 ('the Beavis case'), which is fully distinguished.

LDast

There you go. We got there eventually.

skintbutwantstosave

LDast said:

There you go. We got there eventually.

Thanks for all your help - will email the Defence to Court now. 

skintbutwantstosave

So, Gladstones have emailed me the DQ and have said in their cover email that they would like to "mediate without further court intervention".

I am yet to receive the notice of allocation from court /date to file DQs, do I agree to mediation when I fill out the N180 ? 

Your thoughts are appreciated. 

Many thanks 

Gr1pr

Chances are that you will receive the new N180 where mediation is mandatory, so you don't get a choice 

So wait for the DQ from the CNBC in Northampton and then download it, fill it in and email it to both parties 

The 12 steps told you what to expect 

Coupon-mad

You have to attend Mediation now.  This new change is covered in lots of threads since May.

skintbutwantstosave

Coupon-mad said:

You have to attend Mediation now.  This new change is covered in lots of threads since May.

So the court has sent a letter in the post to say that  the Claimant will try contact me to try settle the matter, if they do not contact the court then the matter will be stayed. I have not had any communication from the Claimant Solicitors, other than an email enclosing the DQ that they want to mediate. Do I need to do actively do anything? 

Gr1pr

Which parking company are Gladstone's representing. ?

Seeing as you have posted redacted pictures previously, I suggest that you redact the latest letter from the CNBC in Northampton. ( Not a court, no Court is actually involved yet. ) so we can study it, because we and you were expecting an N180 from the CNBC, especially as Gladstone's sent you theirs recently 

LDast

If the case is stayed, just sit tight and wait. The claimant will now have to pay a fee to the court to unsay the case with no guarantee it will happen unless they can give a good explanation to the judge as to why they waited so long to respond to the defence. Assuming it was unstayed, they would still have to pay the trial fee.

Who is the claimant/solicitor?

skintbutwantstosave

The Claimant is National Parking Management Limited and the Solicitors is Gladstones in Warrington. 

on 23 July Gladstones emailed a copy of the DQ, as Defence was filed week earlier on 17 July.

Date of the Court letter is 22nd July and it was franked on 25 July and I received it on 26 July. 

28 days from receipt of Defence would this start on 17 July or 22nd July when the Court sent it to the Claimant? 
17 July = 14 August
22 July = 19 August

So for now, your advice is not to complete the DQ and wait for communication from the Court and Claimant Solicitors and see whether they ask for the stay to be lifted. 

Thanks.