Court pending after paying fine!

KeithP · 10 July 2018 at 3:41PM

When you are happy with the content please re-read post #31.

Remember, there is no immediate rush.
Perhaps wait a couple of days for comment.

Loadsofchildren123 · 10 July 2018 at 4:06PM

I think Gladstones have stuffed up.

The NtKs are the documents which seem to bear the same date of issue, but all relate to parking on different days.

Gladstones have become confused when they've pushed it through the template, and they've said that the parking events were all on the same date, which is wrong.

So just act dumb. If they realise their mistake (which they may at the end) and try to rectify it on the day, argue they can't. If they've made a mistake, that's a matter between them and their client, but they can't expect to punish you for it by suddenly being allowed to amend their claim. You are entitled to defend the claim as you find it, ie. three charges for parking on the same day when there was only 1 PCN.

Work this into your defence, but don't draw attention to their mistake.

Did the signs offer a 24 hour period as Johnersh asked? If so, make this point. Make the point that there was only 1 NtD on the 22nd. So they are only entitled to pursue you for that one. And you've already paid it. Make the other points I've advised as well.

F1neF1ghter · 12 July 2018 at 2:34PM

Loadsofchildren123 wrote: »

I think Gladstones have stuffed up.

The NtKs are the documents which seem to bear the same date of issue, but all relate to parking on different days.

Gladstones have become confused when they've pushed it through the template, and they've said that the parking events were all on the same date, which is wrong.

So just act dumb. If they realise their mistake (which they may at the end) and try to rectify it on the day, argue they can't. If they've made a mistake, that's a matter between them and their client, but they can't expect to punish you for it by suddenly being allowed to amend their claim. You are entitled to defend the claim as you find it, ie. three charges for parking on the same day when there was only 1 PCN.

Work this into your defence, but don't draw attention to their mistake.

Did the signs offer a 24 hour period as Johnersh asked? If so, make this point. Make the point that there was only 1 NtD on the 22nd. So they are only entitled to pursue you for that one. And you've already paid it. Make the other points I've advised as well.

Thank you so much, really happy with my defence thanks to your advice and to everyone else thank you loads! Such a fantastic community to help one another to get justice against these scum companies!!

You are absolutely right on Gladstones screwing up, it was the first thing that came to my head when I saw the court claim doc...couldn't believe some moron approved it and yes it does in fact go against their own signs on the estate which I had snapped almost 2 years ago! Clearly states once in a 24hr period so they have royally messed up.

I will update in due course but once again I am very grateful.

Cheers!

Erudite_Owl · 13 July 2018 at 4:22PM

I believe there are system problems with Indigo Park - there are instances where PCNs are issued where annual electronic permits are in existence. they have also recently changed the wording on the PCNs, so appeals now have to be sent to Indigo Park, and not submitted on the web address (ipaymypcn.net) they direct you to so as to "manage your PCN online" - they still have the appeal option on the ipaymypcn.net on-line form, which still informs you your appeal has been sent, but they do not recognise this as an appeal, they do not answer it, they do not forward it to Indigo, and they may not tell you until the 28 days expires, even beyond the BPA requirement to respond within 14 days. Also, not sure if anyone else has spotted, the post-date on the letters don't seem to correspond to the delivery date by a wider margin that normal delivery time...

Fruitcake · 13 July 2018 at 4:56PM

Erudite_Owl wrote: »

I believe there are system problems with Indigo Park - there are instances where PCNs are issued where annual electronic permits are in existence. they have also recently changed the wording on the PCNs, so appeals now have to be sent to Indigo Park, and not submitted on the web address (ipaymypcn.net) they direct you to so as to "manage your PCN online" - they still have the appeal option on the ipaymypcn.net on-line form, which still informs you your appeal has been sent, but they do not recognise this as an appeal, they do not answer it, they do not forward it to Indigo, and they may not tell you until the 28 days expires, even beyond the BPA requirement to respond within 14 days. Also, not sure if anyone else has spotted, the post-date on the letters don't seem to correspond to the delivery date by a wider margin that normal delivery time...

What has this got to do with a UKCPM court case?

If you need help with a parking problem, please read the sticky thread for NEWBIES then start your own thread where you will get bespoke help.

beamerguy · 13 July 2018 at 5:41PM

F1neF1ghter wrote: »

You are absolutely right on Gladstones screwing up,

Nothing new about Gladstones then ..... Pinky and Perky
at their best

F1neF1ghter · 30 July 2018 at 8:51PM

Hi everyone,

Hope you've all had a great July! Just an update:

Recevied the acknowledgement of my defence from the court and that they've passed it on to Gladstones. Gladstones have now responded with the following:

"We act for the Claimant and have notified the Court of our Client's intention to proceed with the claim.

Please find enclosed a copy of our Client's completed Directions Questionnaire, which will be filed with the court upon their request. You will note we intend to request a special direction that the case be dealt with on the papers and without the need for an oral hearing.

This request is sought simply because the matter is in our Client's opinion relatively straightforward and the costs incurred by both parties for attending an oral hearing would be disproportionate. We trust you agree.

You will note our Client has elected not to mediate. It's decision is not meant to be in any way obstructive and is based purely on experience, as mediation has rarely proven beneficial in these types of cases. Notwithstanding this, our Client would be happy to listen to any genuine payment proposals that you wish to put forward."

Standard Gladstones response crap I'm guessing? What would be next guys? Again my thanks in advance.

Cheers to all!

Umkomaas · 30 July 2018 at 8:59PM

All contained in the NEWBIES FAQ sticky, post #2. Bargepole explains everything about this stage of proceedings in that sticky's section.

KeithP · 30 July 2018 at 9:01PM

F1neF1ghter wrote: »

Standard Gladstones response crap I'm guessing?

No need to guess.
Surely you have read this in Bargepole's walkthrough linked from post #2 of the NEWBIES FAQ sticky thread:

Note: Gladstones are currently including a 'request for special directions' asking the Court to hear the case on the papers only, without an oral hearing. You should oppose this, and include the following text in D1: "The Defendant opposes the Claimant's request for special directions, and requests that the case be listed for an oral hearing at the defendant's home court, pursuant to CPR 26.2A(3)".

F1neF1ghter wrote: »

What would be next guys? Again my thanks in advance.

Read more of post #2 of the NEWBIES thread.
But you already know that - you've been told that several times.

F1neF1ghter · 23 October 2018 at 3:53PM

Hello everyone!

Hope you all had a fantastic summer as judging by today, summer has unfortunately departed us

Now for a little update with the scum.

I have received a court date that was originally for the 21st of Dec but has now for some reason been amended for January 2019 (can't remember the exact date).

Sorry in advance if I need to read somewhere else but what exactly do I do now?

Thanks guys as usual!

Court pending after paying fine!

Comments

Categories

Get our FREE Weekly email full of deals & guides - and it’s spam-free