Quick Check - Gladstones Claim (Horizon Parking) UPDATED 08/05/2025 - Claim Dismissed

Taiko

One bit further, I've extracted the metadata as they sent this via Word, which shows the Skeleton was created in May, just to push it further.

The WS they submitted was by a new solicitor to them, who according to LinkedIn only joined them in April this year. Parts of his WS are word for word identical to an Elise Davies WS submitted in March, so if anything does happen I'll push the credibility points home as well as the legal parts.

I just hope for their sake they don't try to then accuse me of using a template WS. Reason being, there is a trap within it which proves I authored it, which will be easy to share with the judge.

Coupon-mad

"One bit further, I've extracted the metadata as they sent this via Word, which shows the Skeleton was created in May, just to push it further. 

The WS they submitted was by a new solicitor to them, who according to LinkedIn only joined them in April this year. Parts of his WS are word for word identical to an Elise Davies WS submitted in March".

Wow. They lied. Who would have thunk it?

Johnersh

The identical WS is useful to evidence that this is mere recitation of information on file/legal argument and not factual evidence in the true sense of the word at all.

If the o/p visited a Tesco ATM can't you just log into your online banking and voila the transaction that proves a second visit?

As @Coupon-mad notes PoFA Sch 4 wouldn't exist nor would s.172 of the Road Traffic Act if, as a matter of law the keeper and driver were interchangeable. Interestingly, the claimant has not attempted to cite the limited case law that can be relied upon that there should be a rebuttable presumption.

Taiko

Annoyingly, I transferred my banking to Nationwide in March 2024, and don't have the records from Nov 23 for my old HSBC account. Can't be certain which of us used our cards when in any case. It's why I've stuck by the narrative with the Google Timeline data, and being able to work out what was done on that day from that series of events. The identity of the driver is complicated by the dual use, and WS included medical evidence which supports that I'm not always able to drive due to a condition that wasn't diagnosed/treated until well into 2024.

It'll be interesting how it goes, as they've stated they won't be attending. This is also despite the order following set-aside having in bold text "Parties to attend". Fully prepared for a rent-a-gob, but I can't help but feel that bold part was a very specific instruction.

Car1980

"Annoyingly, I transferred my banking to Nationwide in March 2024, and don't have the records from Nov 23 for my old HSBC account"

You could request they supply it.

Coupon-mad

don't have the records from Nov 23 for my old HSBC account

Email HSBC a SAR for that transaction, if there is time before the hearing.

I agree 'Parties to Attend' is a clear order.

Taiko

Update from today's hearing at Portsmouth County Court with District Judge Samuel.

Nobody turned up from the Claimant, and I raised the issue with the judge based on the bolded order. He was happy though that they gave notice, and proceeded onwards.

Was very much in and out very quickly for this. He asked me a few questions about the day, and was happy with my explanation of the days events. He was also aware of the various locations mentioned within my WS and the distances, and was satisfied with my Google Location Data.

Despite this, and the fact the Claimant had the data in July 2025, and was re-sent to them at the set-aside a few months ago, he did not find their conduct unreasonable, as he did agree that it only shows where my mobile is, and not where the vehicle is. He believed my accounts though for the double-dip.

He was not interested in the £80 discrepancy, nor did he want to go into keeper liability, so I felt pretty good early on that it was going my way with little need to argue. I'd mentioned the templated WS from Gladstones, but he accepted that these are somewhat permissible. He asked about my own, and I mentioned that it was fully my own words. I then evidenced this, as within the formatting I'd used steganography so that in a specific part of my witness statement the first letter of each line spelled out my full name, which is unlikely to happen by chance. He was again happy with this, and said it helped build credibility.

Claim was dismissed, and this is probably where I felt a bit let down. I was able to obtain mileage, parking and £95 for the day's leave. I argued on unreasonable conduct, citing the lack of engagement from the Claimant, the disregard of the order to attend, the fact they'd had the location data for 10 months and the 3 statements of truth falsely signed with the higher amount. I also brought the metadata from the skeleton, and raised the issue it was dated the 17th yet referenced parts of my witness statement that they would not have received until at least the 21st April as it was posted.

He did not accept unreasonable conduct was proven, as he believed there to be a valid point about the location data not detailing the vehicle. A shame really, but might be something to bear in mind for the future.

Coupon-mad

Well done though!

ANOTHER ONE BITES THE DUST!

😃

Gr1pr

Well done, ( I assume that its a Horizon Parking company case via Gladstones )

Taiko

The Judge did suggest this could be relevant for reporting to the SRA, but he was loathe to do much else. I'll probably contact them, with the various documents and see what happens.