Euro Parking Services/Gladstones Solicitors - Court Claim (Defence help required)

palegreenghost

Hello, my dad received a claim form today and I'm just looking for a few pointers on building his defence. I'll include everything we have so far below.

I've already acknowledged the MCOL, I just need to send them the defence. I have my own thread on these forums for my own PCN so I've got a decent idea of what I'm doing but it'd be good to get some fresh eyes on his particular case to work out the specifics. 

He told me that he parked in that space, he usually goes to the cash machine at the petrol station, however he can't recall if he actually went to the machine or not, there's a chance that he forgot to bring his debit card, he left the petrol station premises briefly then got back in the car and left. As you can see from the period of parking it was just under 8 minutes, I don't know if that helps his defence or not? My dad 73 years old and has mobility issues just to add some context. 

Thank you (again)

PCN:


The Sign:


Claim Form:

Gr1pr

The POC do not identify any breach,  so use the new defence template by coupon mad in announcements,  on MCOL using dads account,  no sending anything by post or email 

Study other recent Gladstone defences where the breach is not pleaded,  so the Chan and Akande strike out versions

Castle

A password has been left showing.

(I should've added that there's more than one Tamworth Service Station).

palegreenghost

Is this sufficient for paragraph 3?

3. The Defendant has little recollection of the events considering this was over a year ago and has used the Cash machine/ATM at this particular location many times without issue. With regards to the POC in question, two recent persuasive appeal judgments in Civil Enforcement Limited v Chan (Ref. E7GM9W44) and Car Park Management Service Ltd v Akande (Ref. K0DP5J30) would indicate the POC fails to comply with Civil Procedure Rule 16.4(1)(e) and Practice Direction Part 16.7.5. On the 15th August 2023, in the Chan case, HHJ Murch held: 'the particulars of the claim as filed and served did not set out the conduct which amounted to the breach in reliance upon which the claimant would be able to bring a claim for breach of contract'. The same is true in this case and the Defendant trusts that the Court should strike out the extant claim, using its powers pursuant to CPR 3.4. The second recent persuasive appeal judgment also held that typical private parking case POC (like this) fail to comply with Part 16. On the 10 May 2024, in CPMS v Akande, HHJ Evans held: 'Particulars of Claim have to set out the basic facts upon which a party relies in order to prove his or her claim'."

Coupon-mad

Yep that'll do. Submit it.

Now to action: This month, we need you:.

PLEASE bookmark this thread below and do Public Consultation if you haven't done it yet. See this thread: -

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6617396/parking-code-of-practice-consultation-8-weeks-from-11th-july-2025/p1

We need every poster to come back & complete this vital Consultation before the deadline! Just 2 weeks left but please don't rush it. You can do some then save it and come back to it as you have time.

We understand that you may need some pointers. It looks laborious, we get that.

So to try to help, I've written some guidance on that thread.

Any questions on the Consultation please ask - on the dedicated thread - but I've covered up to question 20 already in that first post, openly telling everyone what I'm going to put and/or what sort of evidence you might wish to use for your response, if you agree with what we'll be saying from our experience.

Whilst your answers must of course be your own, there are vital points to safeguard motorists interests to make, that many people may not think of without our guidance because we see cases every day and we know the legal background. However, people like you have lived & breathed the intimidation, greed and unfairness first hand so your voice is needed!