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

Coupon-mad

Yes I saw that but I think he means 'care of' as his address. He isn't saying he works for Gladstones.

1505grandad

"The PoCs lack clarity, as no explicit statement has been provided to indicate which specific term of the alleged contract was purportedly breached. In fact, the present PoCs are even less detailed than those struck out in Chan and Akande, offering no factual basis for a cause of action."

Then the second part goes into great detail of incident?

palegreenghost

Here's the PCNs

palegreenghost

1505grandad said:

"The PoCs lack clarity, as no explicit statement has been provided to indicate which specific term of the alleged contract was purportedly breached. In fact, the present PoCs are even less detailed than those struck out in Chan and Akande, offering no factual basis for a cause of action."

Then the second part goes into great detail of incident?

Should I remove this part? I included this part from because I saw it on another WS. 

Coupon-mad

You need to make the change I suggested.

That PCN is POFA compliant.

palegreenghost

Coupon-mad said:

You need to make the change I suggested.

That PCN is POFA compliant.

I've made that change thanks for that. Would you say it's ready to email out?
----
I've added the Statement of Truth, Defendant's Signature and Date too. Also added page numbers, it's 12 pages including the exhibits. 

Coupon-mad

Sounds ready.

palegreenghost

As mentioned earlier in the thread my dad's hearing is today but he's not attending, he asked that it be decided based on the evidence that he's already submitted. 

Do you know how and when he can find out how it went?

Coupon-mad

palegreenghost said:

As mentioned earlier in the thread my dad's hearing is today but he's not attending, he asked that it be decided based on the evidence that he's already submitted. 

Do you know how and when he can find out how it went?

Oh dear. That's bad news. People who don't attend make it c90% certain that they'll lose.

He will get a written order in the end but if he loses he'll probably hear from the Claimant faster.

MothballsWallet

Gr1pr said:

Gr1pr said:

So a brief stop on site,  reading the wordy signs,  rejecting the private parking company contract and leaving promptly , explanation is in the link below 

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/81783056#Comment_81783056

I gave you the link to the explanation in a previous reply , a few hours ago,  quoted above , they forbade him to park on the hatching, they forbade any actions apart from the ones authorised on the signs, he wasn't agreeing to pay £100 to park in that manner,  half in a bay,  half out, or to pay £100 to park whilst going to the chippy 

There is no way that he or me would read the sign and agree to park the car over the hatchings, go to the chippy next door,  and pay £100 to do so. !

30 or 50 years ago he could have done so, without any punishment apart from a verbal telling off by the landowner or manager, but not these days. ( you can't replicate what he did either, or me. ) , it's a different world  !

The solicitors should have added the alleged one or two breaches in the claim form 

He has to file his WS ASAP,  before he breaches that WS deadline date, especially as he has theirs above 


If i tell you that I am charging you £100 for every reply from me from this point on, are going to agree to pay me that amount. ? £100 fir ach and every reply,    Now that you are now warned  ?

What's worse is that many chippys that aren't part of a larger franchise don't accept card payments, they're cash payments only (a cynical person might ask why that is).