IMPORTANT: Please make sure your posts do not contain any personally identifiable information (both your own and that of others). When uploading images, please take care that you have redacted all personal information including QR codes, number plates and reference numbers.
Claimant asking for more than double , and has not made clear how a breach of terms has happened!!
happysue
Posts: 49 Forumite
Hey all,
So this is a second post In regards to the Defendant getting 2 MCOL in the space of weeks.
This one from Horizon Parking Limited being helped by Gladstone Solicitors.
From writing the first defence, The defendant feels they know what to write in the second one.
However, the Defendant wants to know if any of the experienced members have ever seen a Claim worded like this. With the Total amount being £252.31?
The letter sent before this claim stated that the vehicle was parked in an adult and child bay (Which the Defendant does not deny , as the car had the right to be parked where it was).
However that is not mentioned here below!
“The driver of the vehicle with registration ******* (the ‘vehicle’) parked in breach of the terms of parking stipulated on the signage (the ‘contract’) at the ******on. **/**/16 thus incurring the parking charge (the PCN’). The driver of the Vehicle agreed to pay the PCN within 28 days of issue yet failed to do so. The Claimant claims the unpaid PCN from the Defendant as the driver/keeper of the Vehicle. Despite demands being made, the Defendant has failed to settle their outstanding liability. THE CLAIMANT CLAIMS £80 for the PCN, £70.00 contractual costs pursuant to the Contract and PCN terms and conditions, together with statutory interest of £27.32 pursuant to s69 of the County Courts Act 1984 at 8.00% per annum, continuing at £0.03 per day.”
So this is a second post In regards to the Defendant getting 2 MCOL in the space of weeks.
This one from Horizon Parking Limited being helped by Gladstone Solicitors.
From writing the first defence, The defendant feels they know what to write in the second one.
However, the Defendant wants to know if any of the experienced members have ever seen a Claim worded like this. With the Total amount being £252.31?
The letter sent before this claim stated that the vehicle was parked in an adult and child bay (Which the Defendant does not deny , as the car had the right to be parked where it was).
However that is not mentioned here below!
“The driver of the vehicle with registration ******* (the ‘vehicle’) parked in breach of the terms of parking stipulated on the signage (the ‘contract’) at the ******on. **/**/16 thus incurring the parking charge (the PCN’). The driver of the Vehicle agreed to pay the PCN within 28 days of issue yet failed to do so. The Claimant claims the unpaid PCN from the Defendant as the driver/keeper of the Vehicle. Despite demands being made, the Defendant has failed to settle their outstanding liability. THE CLAIMANT CLAIMS £80 for the PCN, £70.00 contractual costs pursuant to the Contract and PCN terms and conditions, together with statutory interest of £27.32 pursuant to s69 of the County Courts Act 1984 at 8.00% per annum, continuing at £0.03 per day.”
0
Comments
-
Yes they ha e0
-
Yes they have issued a lot of claims recently via GS for Horizon
Did you out yourself at any stage as the driver..... Gladstones trying to double the pcn charge...
Abuse of process comes to mind0 -
“The driver of the vehicle with registration ******* (the ‘vehicle’) parked in breach of the terms of parking stipulated on the signage (the ‘contract’) at the ******on. **/**/16 thus incurring the parking charge (the PCN’). The driver of the Vehicle agreed to pay the PCN within 28 days of issue yet failed to do so. The Claimant claims the unpaid PCN from the Defendant as the driver/keeper of the Vehicle. Despite demands being made, the Defendant has failed to settle their outstanding liability. THE CLAIMANT CLAIMS £80 for the PCN, £70.00 contractual costs pursuant to the Contract and PCN terms and conditions, together with statutory interest of £27.32 pursuant to s69 of the County Courts Act 1984 at 8.00% per annum, continuing at £0.03 per day.”
Well YES it's called ...
THE GREAT GLADSTONES SCAM
Gladstones by the way, do not have a clue what they are doing, they are just a robo claim inept bunch of rogue traders.
The £70 is a scam and this is what the courts have said ...
""The claim contains a substantial charge additional to the parking charge which it is alleged the defendant contracted to pay, This additional charge is not recoverable under the protection of freedoms act 2012, Schedule 4"
READ THIS:-
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.php?t=6014081
READ POST #14 ON THIS THREAD BY COUPON-MAD and copy the text into your defence.
It's all about getting Gladstones kicked out of court for ABUSE OF PROCESS
parked in an adult and child bay (Which the Defendant does not deny , as the defendant had the right to do so).
What age is your child ? Of course you are right
Gladstones get more stupid as each day goes along.
PS: THE INTEREST. The question is why did they take so long to bring a claim ? Are they profiteering on the interest together with a fake £70
Judges dislike scammers and are probably sick to death with the timewasting scams Gladstones bring to court0 -
BrownTrout wrote: »Yes they have issued a lot of claims recently via GS for Horizon
Did you out yourself at any stage as the driver..... Gladstones trying to double the pcn charge...
Abuse of process comes to mind
The defendant never answered to any letters, or named the driver. They certainly never agreed to pay ANYTHING!0 -
“The driver of the vehicle with registration ******* (the ‘vehicle’) parked in breach of the terms of parking stipulated on the signage (the ‘contract’) at the ******on. **/**/16 thus incurring the parking charge (the PCN’). The driver of the Vehicle agreed to pay the PCN within 28 days of issue yet failed to do so. The Claimant claims the unpaid PCN from the Defendant as the driver/keeper of the Vehicle. Despite demands being made, the Defendant has failed to settle their outstanding liability. THE CLAIMANT CLAIMS £80 for the PCN, £70.00 contractual costs pursuant to the Contract and PCN terms and conditions, together with statutory interest of £27.32 pursuant to s69 of the County Courts Act 1984 at 8.00% per annum, continuing at £0.03 per day.”
Well YES it's called ...
THE GREAT GLADSTONES SCAM
Gladstones by the way, do not have a clue what they are doing, they are just a robo claim inept bunch of rogue traders.
The £70 is a scam and this is what the courts have said ...
""The claim contains a substantial charge additional to the parking charge which it is alleged the defendant contracted to pay, This additional charge is not recoverable under the protection of freedoms act 2012, Schedule 4"
READ THIS:-
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.php?t=6014081
READ POST #14 ON THIS THREAD BY COUPON-MAD and copy the text into your defence.
It's all about getting Gladstones kicked out of court for ABUSE OF PROCESS
parked in an adult and child bay (Which the Defendant does not deny , as the defendant had the right to do so).
What age is your child ? Of course you are right
Gladstones get more stupid as each day goes along.
PS: THE INTEREST. The question is why did they take so long to bring a claim ? Are they profiteering on the interest together with a fake £70
Judges dislike scammers and are probably sick to death with the timewasting scams Gladstones bring to court
The age of the children were ages 4 and 80 -
“The driver of the vehicle with registration ******* (the ‘vehicle’) parked in breach of the terms of parking stipulated on the signage (the ‘contract’) at the ******on. **/**/16 thus incurring the parking charge (the PCN’). The driver of the Vehicle agreed to pay the PCN within 28 days of issue yet failed to do so. The Claimant claims the unpaid PCN from the Defendant as the driver/keeper of the Vehicle. Despite demands being made, the Defendant has failed to settle their outstanding liability. THE CLAIMANT CLAIMS £80 for the PCN, £70.00 contractual costs pursuant to the Contract and PCN terms and conditions, together with statutory interest of £27.32 pursuant to s69 of the County Courts Act 1984 at 8.00% per annum, continuing at £0.03 per day.”
Well YES it's called ...
THE GREAT GLADSTONES SCAM
Gladstones by the way, do not have a clue what they are doing, they are just a robo claim inept bunch of rogue traders.
The £70 is a scam and this is what the courts have said ...
""The claim contains a substantial charge additional to the parking charge which it is alleged the defendant contracted to pay, This additional charge is not recoverable under the protection of freedoms act 2012, Schedule 4"
READ THIS:-
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.php?t=6014081
READ POST #14 ON THIS THREAD BY COUPON-MAD and copy the text into your defence.
It's all about getting Gladstones kicked out of court for ABUSE OF PROCESS
parked in an adult and child bay (Which the Defendant does not deny , as the defendant had the right to do so).
What age is your child ? Of course you are right
Gladstones get more stupid as each day goes along.
PS: THE INTEREST. The question is why did they take so long to bring a claim ? Are they profiteering on the interest together with a fake £70
Judges dislike scammers and are probably sick to death with the timewasting scams Gladstones bring to court
Thank you for your help.0 -
I'm not saying that it is right, but they will allege that by parking, the driver agreed to the terms.The defendant never answered to any letters, or named the driver. They certainly never agreed to pay ANYTHING!
One of those terms will be something like "by parking in contravention of these terms, the driver agrees to pay £xxx within 28 days of receiving a PCN asking for that money".0 -
I'm not saying that it is right, but they will allege that by parking, the driver agreed to the terms.
One of those terms will be something like "by parking in contravention of these terms, the driver agrees to pay £xxx within 28 days of receiving a PCN asking for that money".
only if they have correctly issued the PCN0 -
Of course. Although that won't stop them alleging the debt.twhitehousescat wrote: »only if they have correctly issued the PCN
0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 343.1K Banking & Borrowing
- 250.1K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 449.7K Spending & Discounts
- 235.2K Work, Benefits & Business
- 607.9K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 173K Life & Family
- 247.8K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 15.9K Discuss & Feedback
- 15.1K Coronavirus Support Boards