URGENT Small Claims Court - Gladstone Solictors acting for EPS (Euro Parking Services Ltd)

My defence statement is as follows:


1) It is admitted that the defendant, ******, residing at
******** is the registered keeper of the vehicle.
2) It is denied that any indemnity costs are owed and any debt is
denied in its entirety.
3) No evidence has been supplied by this claimant as to who parked
the vehicle. Under the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 there is no
presumption in law as to who parked a vehicle on private land nor
does there exist any obligation for a keeper to name a driver. I
choose to defend this claim as the registered keeper, as is my
right.
4) This is a completely unsubstantiated and inflated three-figure
sum, vaguely and incoherently adduced by the claimant's solicitors
in their claim. The Particulars are not clear and concise, so I
have had to cover all eventualities in defending a 'cut & paste'
claim. This has caused significant distress and has denied me a
fair chance to defend this claim in an informed way.
5) As an unrepresented litigant-in-person I respectfully ask that
I be permitted to amend and or supplement this interim defence as
may be required following a fuller disclosure of the Claimant's
case.
6) This claim merely states: “parking charges and indemnity costs”
which does not give any indication of on what basis the claim is
brought. For example whether this charge is founded upon an
allegation of trespass or 'breach of contract' or contractual
'unpaid fees'. Nor are any or coherent grounds for any lawful
claim particularised, nor were any details provided to evidence
any contract created nor any copy of this contract, nor
explanation for the vague description 'parking charges' and
'indemnity costs'.
7) The Claimant’s solicitors are known to be a serial issuer of
generic claims similar to this one, with no due diligence, no
scrutiny of details nor even checking for a true cause of action.
HMCS have identified over 1000 similar poorly produced claims and
the solicitor's conduct in many of these cases is believed to be
currently the subject of an active investigation by the SRA.
8) I believe the term for such conduct is ‘robo-claims’ which is
against the public interest, demonstrates a disregard for the
dignity of the court and is unfair on unrepresented consumers. I
have reason to believe that this is a claim that will proceed
without any facts or evidence supplied until the last possible
minute, to my significant detriment as an unrepresented Defendant.
9) I suggest that parking companies using the small claims track
as a form of aggressive, automated debt collection is not
something the courts should be seen to support.
10) It is denied that the Claimant has authority to bring this
claim. The proper Claimant (if any debt exists, which is denied)
would be the landowner.
11) The alleged debt as described in the claim are unenforceable
penalties, being just the sort of unconscionable charges exposed
as offending against the penalty rule, in ParkingEye Ltd v Beavis.

14) It is submitted that (apart from properly incurred court fees)
any added legal fees/costs are simply numbers made up out of thin
air, and are an attempt at double recovery by the Claimant, which
would not be recoverable in the small claims court. The lack of
diligence in this claim demonstrates admirably that at best a
‘copy and paste' is the closest a human, legally trained or not,
came to the information transmitted from claimant to the Money
Claims Online system. There are no and POFA prevents claims
exceeding the sum on the original parking notice.
15) It is denied that there was any 'relevant obligation' or
'relevant contract' relating to any single parking event.
16) In the pre court stage, there has been no Notice of Owner
received and Letter before claim. The Claimant’s solicitor has not
provided this or the claimant in order to defend myself against
the alleged debt.
17) The defendant denies the claim in its entirety voiding any
liability to the claimant for all amounts claimed due to the
aforementioned reasons. It is submitted that the conduct of the
Claimant is wholly unreasonable and vexatious. As such, I am
keeping a note of my wasted time/costs in dealing with this
matter.
18) I request the court strike out this claim for the reasons
stated above, and for similar reasons cited by District Judge
Cross of St Albans County Court on 20/09/16 where a similar claim
was struck out without a hearing, due to Gladstones' template
particulars for a private parking firm being 'incoherent', failing
to comply with CPR16.4, and ''providing no facts that could give
rise to any apparent claim in law''.

Points 12 and 13 not included due to technical error on the system
on Money Claim Online

Thanks for your reply. What could I put in my witness statement?

Is there any guidance at all or templates to suit my case?

I've just checked the Judge's direction and it states that by the 1st September 2018 the Claimant and the Defendant must send to the Court and to each other copies of the witness statements of all the witnesses they intend to rely upon at the final hearing. Gladstone's have sent their witness statement from Euro Parking Services Limited dated 23rd October 2018. I must admit I haven't submitted my WS. Gladstones or Euro Parking Services haven't provided any evidence including pictures of up until now in regards to the parking charge which I consider last minute in the WS they have provided. Is it possible to ask the judge to strike the claim out as the deadline was passed? Is it still worth writing out the WS and submitted it as the deadline has been missed?


Gladstones Solicitors have also sent in a letter that 'The assumption is that our client is not attending the hearing and therefore we kindly request this notice to be treated as a notice pursuant to CPR 27.9. How ever on some occasions our Client may wish to attend and will do so'. I consider this to be ambiguous and that this doesn't really follow the CPR 27.9.


I've had a look at their witness statement which includes evidence from the director as the witness. I believe the Director of the Company cannot be the witness as he was not there when the alleged breach for parking was not there. The employee of the company who took the pictures of the alleged debt has not been included in the witness statement which seems strange. Should the WS of been from the employee of the company?

The points that I have posted have not been answered? I can submit the WS without a problem, is it ok to go to the court and hand them in person?