Defence for Court claim (Gladstones representing) parking fine

Coupon-mad

 I’m unsure why to include - as if it’s clear I’m not the driver , is it even relevant to be talking about the visibility/clarity if the signs? 

Yes, very much so because that NTK can hold you liable as registered keeper so your only point is unclear/unproven signage (if they have proved landowner authority in their bundle which I expect they have?).

This is not right:

"* Disproportionate Charge and Penalty: The charge of £170, is an unconscionable penalty and does not represent a genuine pre-estimate of any loss incurred by the Claimant or landowner."

Instead of that, you could just copy paras 4-9 of the new Template Defence as your final bit, just before your Statement of Truth.

Your WS doesn't list any exhibits yet.

Each photo you are adducing as evidence needs an exhibit number which you must refer to when talking about its relevance in your WS. There is a list of recommended exhibits in post 2 of the NEWBIES thread (the section about WS stage).

You need Chan and Akande as well because your first point should be that the POC are so poorly pleaded that the claim myst be struck out, pursuant to the persuasive appeal cases of CEL v Chan and CPMS v Akande.

amiemurphy_2

Coupon-mad said:

 I’m unsure why to include - as if it’s clear I’m not the driver , is it even relevant to be talking about the visibility/clarity if the signs? 

Yes, very much so because that NTK can hold you liable as registered keeper so your only point is unclear/unproven signage (if they have proved landowner authority in their bundle which I expect they have?).

This is not right:

"* Disproportionate Charge and Penalty: The charge of £170, is an unconscionable penalty and does not represent a genuine pre-estimate of any loss incurred by the Claimant or landowner."

Instead of that, you could just copy paras 4-9 of the new Template Defence as your final bit, just before your Statement of Truth.

Your WS doesn't list any exhibits yet.

Each photo you are adducing as evidence needs an exhibit number which you must refer to when talking about its relevance in your WS. There is a list of recommended exhibits in post 2 of the NEWBIES thread (the section about WS stage).

You need Chan and Akande as well because your first point should be that the POC are so poorly pleaded that the claim myst be struck out, pursuant to the persuasive appeal cases of CEL v Chan and CPMS v Akande.

So I should remove the part in my WS that talks about not being the driver? 

amiemurphy_2

Is there any other parts of the WS that I should remove? The part about POFA? Should that be removed? 

And what about the part about consumer rights? 

amiemurphy_2

Do I need to submit a the Beavis document as an exhibit as my defence mentions it? 

Coupon-mad

Just go through the recommended exhibits in the NEWBIES thread and decide which ones to include and then number all your exhibits with your initials and sequential numbers in the same order that your WS talks about them.

Here's a recent WS with Chan & Akande that might help:

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6575502/ukcps-claim-form/p3

However, also search the forum for

Gladstones paralegal witness

and change to NEWEST results because people normally call out a Glsdstones WS. You'll see.

amiemurphy_2

I’m away tomorrow and had to file the WS and evidence tonight as it’s already late and honestly had no more time to work on it. Could you please let me have your opinion? 

Here it is:

1. Introduction

1.1 I am the Defendant in this claim and the registered keeper of the vehicle NA18 YTG on the date of the alleged incident.

1.2 This statement sets out the events and circumstances relevant to the parking charge notice (PCN) issued by National Parking Management (the Claimant) concerning an alleged parking contravention at Woodgrange Road on 08/03/2024.

2. Circumstances of the Alleged Incident

2.1 Upon receiving the PCN I had no recollection of the site or parking on the site. 

2.2 As a conscientious driver, I would not have  intentionally parked in a restricted area.

  

3. Examination of Claimant's Evidence 

3.1 Regarding Exhibit GS2 - The claimant has submitted two computer graphic images of signage I presume is supposed to be relevant to the alleged contravention. It is not clear to me if these images match the signs displayed at the site of the alleged contravention. 

3.2 Regarding Exhibit GS3 - The Claimant has submitted a number of photographs dated 13/01/2023 of the alleged site where my vehicle was parked and the corresponding signage relevant to the claim. I contend that it cannot be presumed that these photographs are relevant to the contravention date which is more than a year later after these photographs were taken. 

3.3 Regarding  Exhibit GS4 - the claimant has submitted a number of photographs revealing that I was not the driver of the vehicle at the time of the contravention. This would explain why I could not remember parking at this site. 

4. Evidence I have submitted - 

4.1 I visited the site listed on the PCN to confirm the reliability of the Claimants evidence (namely photographs Exhibit Gs3 and Gs4). I found the site appearance and signage to be changed from the photos submitted under exhibits GS3 and GS4 dated 23/01/2024. 

4.2 I have submitted my own recent photographs namely exhibits AM1, AM2 and AM3 dated 27th august 2025 to demonstrate the current site and signage.

It is unknown when the changes to the site and the signage occurred. It’s possible that these change’s occurred before or after the contravention date. This would put into question the reliability or relevance of the Claimants exhibits GS3 and GS4.

4.2 I believe the signage depicted in my exhibits AM1, AM2 and AM3 to be insufficient as to the purpose of forming a legal contract with an unsuspecting motorist. In the area where my vehicle was photographed there is one fairly inconspicuous white sign on a white wall that does not stand out or would be visible unless you knew to look for it. The small print is unintelligible from any distance more than 1 metre away. See Exhibit AM2.

I found only a sign erected on the left side of the entrance to this road but nothing on the right side that would be visible to a driver making a right hand turn into the entrance of the location. As demonstrated in Exhibit AM1. 

4.3 The sign displayed at the left side of the entrance to the site (on the left side) is a different sign than that submitted in the Claimants evidence exhibit GS3. It is now a visibly smaller sign with minimal information. As shown in my evidence exhibit AM3.

5.Reiteration of Defence Points

5.1 I reiterate my core defence points already submitted to the Court:

*This claim is unfair and inflated and it is denied that any sum is due in debt or damages. 

* To impose a PC, as well as a breach, there must be: (i) a strong 'legitimate interest' extending beyond compensation for loss, and (ii) 'adequate notice' (prominence) of the PC and any relevant obligation(s). None of which have been demonstrated. This PC is a penalty arising as a result of poor signage and covert surveillance, thus it is fully distinguished from ParkingEye v Beavis [2015] UKSC67. See Exhibit AM4.

*Attention is drawn to (i) paras 98, 100, 193, 198 of  Beavis (an £85 PC comfortably covered all letter chain costs and generated a profit shared with the landowner) and also to (ii) the binding judgment in ParkingEye v Somerfield Stores ChD [2011] EWHC 4023(QB) which remains unaffected by Beavis and stands as the only parking case law that deals with costs abuse. HHJ Hegarty held in paras 419-428 (High Court, later ratified by the CoA) that 'admin costs' inflating a £75 PC (already increased from £37.50) to £135 were disproportionate to the minor cost of an automated letter-chain and 'would appear to be penal'. Exhibit AM4.

* Consumer Rights Act 2015 Breaches: The Claimant's terms and notices, if any existed prominently, would likely breach the fairness and clarity requirements of the CRA 2015.

It is neither admitted nor denied that a term was breached but to form a contract, there must be an offer, acceptance, and valuable consideration (absent in this case). The Consumer Rights Act 2015 (s71) mandates a 'test of fairness' duty on Courts and sets a high bar for prominence of terms and 'consumer notices'. Paying regard to Sch2 (examples 6, 10, 14 & 18), also s62 and the duties of fair, open dealing/good faith, the Defendant notes that this Claimant reportedly uses unclear (unfair) terms/notices. On the limited information given, this case looks no different.

6.Conclusion

6.1 For the reasons outlined in my Defence and further elaborated in this Witness Statement, particularly given the demonstrably unreliable and unidentifiable nature of the Claimant's own evidence, I respectfully submit that the Claimant's claim has no merit and should be dismissed in its entirety.

Statement of Truth

I believe that the facts stated in this Witness Statement 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.

Coupon-mad

Yep that's fine but your first preliminary matter at the hearing is to ask for the Claim to be struck out due to the cases of Chan and Akande.

So print them off in duplicate (to hand to the Judge) and make yourself a crib sheet regarding what to say about it.

Hopefully they were in your defence if you used the forum template?

amiemurphy_2

Coupon-mad said:

Yep that's fine but your first preliminary matter at the hearing is to ask for the Claim to be struck out due to the cases of Chan and Akande.

So print them off in duplicate (to hand to the Judge) and make yourself a crib sheet regarding what to say about it.

Hopefully they were in your defence if you used the forum template?

Hiya. Thank you. Yes they were 

amiemurphy_2

@Coupon-mad would you mind helping me articulate some points to write down for myself regarding chan&akande. I’d be very grateful 

Coupon-mad

Sorry but I have no time. This is the last few days of the public consultation so I'm busy.

Also, you don't need anyone to write a word! Just search the forum. Covered HUNDREDS of times on Witness Statements.

Use that to write yourself some bullet points.