Court Case WON!!! on 9th Jan, Gladstones and NPML grilled

Castle

dejam said:

However, we hit home hard with the schedule of costs as Gladys made every mistake under the sun with this one and behaved unreasonably. No Grace Period was mentioned by the judge, breach of POFA 5.1, flawed Particulars of Claim, but most damning of all, submitting an unlawful WS by a Paralegal, all resulting in an award of costs which was £60 to the defendant and over £1500 pro bono costs to the defendant's representive which is all going to the charity The Access to Justice Foundation. Ouch Gladys!!!!

Be interesting to find why it was unlawful.

ChirpyChicken

Bad news for NPM especially with that divorce settlement. 
Nice one @troublemaker22

ChirpyChicken

Castle said:

dejam said:

However, we hit home hard with the schedule of costs as Gladys made every mistake under the sun with this one and behaved unreasonably. No Grace Period was mentioned by the judge, breach of POFA 5.1, flawed Particulars of Claim, but most damning of all, submitting an unlawful WS by a Paralegal, all resulting in an award of costs which was £60 to the defendant and over £1500 pro bono costs to the defendant's representive which is all going to the charity The Access to Justice Foundation. Ouch Gladys!!!!

Be interesting to find why it was unlawful.

Murzur comes to mind

joolsbfd

so good .. you lot are amazing helping sort some of this such unscrupulous stuff. i,m just logging in after a court summons to try and work through what i need to do next.. im doing it becuase of a sense of injustice and anger, but partly wish i'd just spent the hundred odd quuid to not have to face it all. 

Gr1pr

Not a summons,  just a Money Claim,  same as everyone else on here 

Study the 2nd post in the newbies sticky thread in announcements and posts 1 & 2 in the defence template thread 

Just start a new thread with a few details,  claimant,  lawyers,  issue date,  picture of the redacted POC from the lower left of the claim form after hiding the VRM details first 

Coupon-mad

ChirpyChicken said:

Castle said:

dejam said:

However, we hit home hard with the schedule of costs as Gladys made every mistake under the sun with this one and behaved unreasonably. No Grace Period was mentioned by the judge, breach of POFA 5.1, flawed Particulars of Claim, but most damning of all, submitting an unlawful WS by a Paralegal, all resulting in an award of costs which was £60 to the defendant and over £1500 pro bono costs to the defendant's representive which is all going to the charity The Access to Justice Foundation. Ouch Gladys!!!!

Be interesting to find why it was unlawful.

Mazur comes to mind

It was Mazur that tipped the balance into unreasonableness. National Parking Management and Gladstones:

"Costs statement for about £3k in favour of the pro bono designated charity, the Access to Justice Foundation, and for £124 for the Defendant's work as a litigant in person.

Costs finally granted due to the final straw argued: breach of LSA (Mazur) ... the Claimant's WS was signed in July under a declaration of truth by an unqualified paralegal who stated that he had conduct of the case and Gladrags had not notified the Defendant or the Court of any change in how they were conducting the case since July. He reconsidered his initial refusal on costs and assessed them summarily at 50% of the amounts sought."

Claim no: M4GF1180

9/1/2026

Romford Court, before DDJ Kemp

National Parking Management Ltd v Miss X

No transcript but useful for quoting in Gladstones cases, especially in the Romford area court circuit.