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.

Gladstone LBC (UKCPM)

13

Comments

  • Duns89
    Duns89 Posts: 20 Forumite
    Ok. So I'm sorted just sent off to CCBCAQ@justice.gov.uk. Finger crossed. Cheers everyone.
  • Coupon-mad
    Coupon-mad Posts: 130,634
    Name Dropper First Post Photogenic First Anniversary
    Forumite
    Stick around and we'll see you at WS and evidence stage before the hearing!
    PRIVATE 'PCN'? DON'T PAY BUT DON'T IGNORE IT (except N.Ireland).
    CLICK at the top of this/any page where it says:
    Forum Home»Motoring»Parking Tickets Fines & Parking - read the NEWBIES THREAD
  • Duns89
    Duns89 Posts: 20 Forumite
    So it's that time (based on the bargepole post, I like the simplicity - hopefully that's a good thing). Should I be trying to use more law etc?

    The crux of it is;
    I was displaying a permit albeit not where they wanted.
    My brother owns the lease for the bay.
    I've requested evidence but what they have provided is lacking and no proof and their communication is poor!
    I have all letter to them and from me which I can show as exhibits.
    CPM have been removed from the site and a new management company were brought to the car park who have dropped tickets which I did get from them, I have a letter as precedent of this.


    Witness Statement

    1. I am XXXX, of XXXX, the Defendant in this matter. I will say as follows:

    2. On the Friday evening of the 03.03.17 the car was parked wholly within the corresponding parking bay which is highlighted within the lease of the property.

    3. On the Monday morning of the 06.03.17 the car was found to have a PCN wrongly placed on the windscreen (Exhibit xx). The PCN noted the reason ‘Not Displaying a Valid Permit’. This wording suggested a ‘Permit’ was not displayed at all, when in actual fact a permit had been displayed within the front passenger side window and provided this evidence (Exhibit xx).

    4. Given I felt this was a mistake by the attendant who had not seen the permit within the window I sent a letter and photos to UK CPM appealing this, informing them the permit was displayed and since moving to the property and UK CPM being invited onto the land this was how it had always been shown without any problem (Exhibit xx).

    5. UK CPM rejected the appeal and advise the use of IAS which is known to be a favourable appeals service to the parking companies and I was advised not to use this route. Since then I have been issued multiple debt recovery letters from DRP who I believe have no right to be chasing this matter (Exhibit xx).

    6. In October I was issued a letter before claim. This letter did not highlight the reason for the charge other than an outstanding payment for a PCN and came with no other information regarding the claim. I sent a letter back to Gladstone’s requesting the Preaction Protocol was obeyed and asked in particularly for evidence showing the car parked without a permit being shown (Exhitbit xx).

    7. Two months later I received a poorly worded and rather confused letter with no evidence (although stated this was included), so I again had to reply requesting for information (Exhitbit xx).

    8. The 8th February I finally received a response which included, a copy of the PCN, a formal demand with 2 photos of the vehicle printed, front and rear from a distance and a Q&A sheet (Exhitbit xx).

    9. Again I had to reply, now via an email which had been provided to me requesting that all evidence was provided to me which would be used to prove the car had been parked without a valid permit as required by the Preaction Protocol. I also explained the situation that UK CPM were to deter non-residents from parking within the car park and protect the rights of the residents with parking bays (Exhitbit xx).

    10. A reply from Gladstones was received almost 2 months later stating they had issued all relevant documentation to myself and they would no longer discuss the matter (Exhitbit xx).

    11. I responded again via email;
    • Requesting photographs showing my permit displayed in the side window.
    • Sent photos of the vehicle parked displaying the permit
    • Stated the client has no right to issue a PCN to myself as this goes against the primary contract which has been in place long before your client was appointed on the land. Primacy of contract cannot be varied by one party without the permission of the other.
    • Attaching documentation from the management company and lease / contract.
    • A final point, on a separate occasion by a new parking company (who are now overseeing the parking management due to complaints regarding CPM's strategy to permit resident on top of those without rights to park), a permit was not displayed in the car at all (unlike this case where a permit was displayed). On receipt of the lease / contract information that I have also provided you all charges were dropped and no further action was taken. This will be and should be taken as precedent.
    • (Exhitbit xx)

    12. My email was ignored and no further correspondence given until being issued with court papers some months later electing to pursue this matter via litigation.

    13. It is my position that permission to park within the car park in one’s bay is given via the lease of the property and parking space which has been given to me as a resident by my brother whom I will provide a witness statement from and the lease of the property highlighting this. (Exhitbits xx).

    14. It is also my position that the communication from the client’s solicitors has been slow and not forth coming, at times confusing and not thought through, and not as one would expect from a well-established and experienced company.

    15. I invite the Court to dismiss this claim in its entirety, and to award my costs of attendance at the hearing, such as are allowable pursuant to CPR 27.14.

    16. I would also like to remove a further 2 tickets in the same circumstances which have not been chased by the client removed.

    Statement of Truth

    I believe that the facts stated in this Witness Statement are true.
  • Coupon-mad
    Coupon-mad Posts: 130,634
    Name Dropper First Post Photogenic First Anniversary
    Forumite
    Exhitbit
    should be
    Exhibit

    This bit doesn't make sense, as a decision made later, by another parking firm, does not set any 'precedent' for an earlier scam PCN from UKCPM:
    This will be and should be taken as precedent.
    16. I would also like the court to take into consideration [STRIKE]to remove[/STRIKE] a further (at least) 2 tickets which were issued in the same circumstances which have not been progressed to court as yet.

    16.1. This serial litigator has been widely reported as routinely losing defended claims re residential properties, then filing new claims for other PCNs that turn on exactly the same facts, in the hope of forcing payment, or catching the victim out with a default CCJ, or expecting a different outcome from a different Judge.

    16.2. This would offend against the doctrine of res judicata and would be a gross abuse of process as well as further harassment against me. Should I prevail, I ask that the Court orders all PCNs against myself to be subject to the findings of the court, and that the Claimant cannot have another try with similar stockpiled PCNs later, that they should have amalgamated within this claim in the interests of justice and to avoid a further burden upon the court.
    [STRIKE]chased by the client removed[/STRIKE].
    PRIVATE 'PCN'? DON'T PAY BUT DON'T IGNORE IT (except N.Ireland).
    CLICK at the top of this/any page where it says:
    Forum Home»Motoring»Parking Tickets Fines & Parking - read the NEWBIES THREAD
  • Thanks Coupon, basically I’ve had a ticket from the new parking agent who after sending them my lease, understood the situation and dropped the charge. Entirely the same scenario so I thought it would be good to use as a precedent?

    With regards to evidence I will provide;
    A witness statement from myself and brother who can vouch for my living status and parking allowance.
    Lease – do I have to send a copy of the whole thing or just what is relevant and take the original to court on the day?
    Schedule 4 of the POFA
    Case transcripts from Parking Prankster (Tenancy trumps signage)
    The Beavis signage, not sure how much I am to rely on this as I don’t have many pictures of the signage around.
    Does the evidence need to be referenced in a particular manner?

    I have a date of the 26th of september to return all documents I am and CPM are to rely on, not had anything from CPM/Gladstones at this stage, which I was expecting to have.
  • Coupon-mad
    Coupon-mad Posts: 130,634
    Name Dropper First Post Photogenic First Anniversary
    Forumite
    edited 20 September 2018 at 7:59PM
    basically I’ve had a ticket from the new parking agent who after sending them my lease, understood the situation and dropped the charge. Entirely the same scenario so I thought it would be good to use as a precedent?
    Precedent means in simple terms 'goes before' whereas the new incident went after, so cannot be a precedent (and is not a legal precedent at all). You can mention it as an ''example of fair parking practice now practised at the site,'' (not a precedent) suggesting their own greed and predatory tactics were why the Claimant was removed from the location.
    With regards to evidence I will provide;
    A witness statement from myself and brother who can vouch for my living status and parking allowance.
    Good. And can he attend with you, as he could be key. He should take his full lease and be there in person, otherwise his WS is hearsay.
    Lease – do I have to send a copy of the whole thing or just what is relevant and take the original to court on the day?
    Brother takes it, and attends with you. For now, an excerpt will do.
    Schedule 4 of the POFA
    No. You are very clearly defending this as the driver so the POFA is irrelevant.
    Case transcripts from Parking Prankster (Tenancy trumps signage)
    Good!
    The Beavis signage, not sure how much I am to rely on this as I don’t have many pictures of the signage around.
    The Claimant will have to produce some, and you can then draw a comparison, e.g. the sparse placement of a few signs by the bins on a far wall (can your brother get pics for you, of the worst placed signs, in overcast bad light?!) It will help.

    Also tell him not to zoom in, so that the £100 buried in small print is nice & illegible.
    Does the evidence need to be referenced in a particular manner?
    Everything numbered, and all pages numbered and put into a file or ring binder with a contents page, and the claim number and date of hearing plastered on the front so the court clerks can't misfile or lose it, when you hand your WS and evidence file in.
    I have a date of the 26th of September to return all documents I am and CPM are to rely on, not had anything from CPM/Gladstones at this stage, which I was expecting to have.
    Really? They never supply any details until the last gasp. What made you think they would break the habit of a lifetime?!

    AFAIK, Gladstones are even filing late 'additional/secondary witness statements' to try to answer consumers own WS (not allowed but hey, that's a tactic they use).
    PRIVATE 'PCN'? DON'T PAY BUT DON'T IGNORE IT (except N.Ireland).
    CLICK at the top of this/any page where it says:
    Forum Home»Motoring»Parking Tickets Fines & Parking - read the NEWBIES THREAD
  • Below is a witness statement which I drafted recently for another case.


    That case will not, of course be identical to yours, but some of the issues and principles will be common to both.


    So, have a good read, get your head around the issues and principles and feel free to adapt to suit.




    In the County Court at Worcester
    Claim Nos. XXXXXXXX, XXXXXXXX & XXXXXXXX
    Claimant: Vehicle Control Services Limited
    Defendant: <your name>
    Date of Hearing: 16 November 2018
    Witness statement of <your name>

    Introduction

    1. I, <your full name>, of <your address> am the Defendant in this case and I make this, my witness statement.

    2. I acknowledge that vehicles registered in my name or otherwise associated with me by belonging to members of my family or our visitors were parked at <location> on the dates mentioned in the Claimant’s particulars of claims.

    3. I do, however, deny that I owe any amount to the Claimant in relation to the vehicles being parked there on those or any other occasions.

    4. Although the Claimant asserts that its cause of action is a breach of contract, I have never entered into any contract with the Claimant.

    5. This case relates to land on the Estate where my rights and obligations are governed by a long-term (250-year) lease (see exhibit XXX) running until the year 2246.

    6. The Claimant has chosen blatantly to disregard both the existence of my lease and my rights under it.

    7. In doing so, without making any attempt to seek or gain my consent, the Claimant has implemented a parking scheme on land which I own.

    8. The Claimant’s invalid scheme demands that anyone (including me) parking on my land must display a parking permit. In the event of a driver not doing so, the Claimant affixes a parking charge notice to the vehicle declaring that the driver has become liable for a parking charge of £100.

    9. The Claimant has affixed a number of tickets to vehicles parked in my demised parking space despite those vehicles having been parked in full compliance with my lease.


    The Claimant’s abuse of the Court process

    10. The Claimant has made no effort whatsoever to narrow the issues between us.

    11. Even at this late stage, the Claimant has not disclosed the identity of its client, i.e. the person who consented to the Claimant operating its parking scheme on the Estate.

    12. Although, in its Particulars of Claim, the Claimant makes bald statements about its “terms and conditions”, it has not provided me with a copy of the contract containing those terms and conditions and the Claimant has not specified the particular term(s) or condition(s) which it purports me to have breached.

    13. The Claimant appears to use the Court process as part of its business model in the knowledge that, by relying on the ignorance of others, many of the victims of its predatory residential parking schemes will be so intimidated that they will pay amounts to which the Claimant is simply not due.

    14. By bringing its claim, the Claimant is blatantly abusing the Court process.


    The Defendant’s lease

    15. Under my long-term lease, the “’Demised Premises’ means the apartment and parking space (if any) shown edged red on the Lease Plan being apartment number 30 on the third floor…”. My parking space is “shown edged red on the Lease Plan”.

    16. I do, therefore, have exclusive use of the land on which I park, i.e. my parking space, for the foreseeable future.

    17. When a vehicle is parked on the Estate by either myself, another member of my family or any visitor to the apartment, it is always parked in full compliance with my lease on my parking space.

    18. My lease makes no provision allowing either any other party to it or any stranger to it, such as the Claimant, to impose regulations on my parking space or those parking on it.

    19. Decisions as to whether and what such regulations might exist in relation to my parking space are matters entirely for my own discretion and prerogative.

    20. I am known as the “Tenant” under my lease. There are, of course, other parties to it:-

    a. the “Landlord”, i.e. the freeholder and lessor;

    b. the “Developer”, i.e. the party responsible for building the estate which, although introduced as one of the parties, is barely mentioned in it thereafter; and

    c. the “Company” which “was appointed by the Developer to carry out the management and maintenance of the Estate”.

    21. Although my lease grants some limited powers to the Landlord and/or the Company to prescribe regulations in relation to certain other matters, those powers do not extend to regulations relating to my parking space.

    22. My lease specifies the amounts which I am obliged to pay on an ongoing basis and these do not include parking charges.

    23. In any event, the Claimant is unable to enforce the terms of my lease because my lease does not expressly provide that the Claimant may do so and because my lease contains no clause that "purports to confer a benefit" on the Claimant, which would allow the Claimant to enforce the lease terms pursuant to the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999. The rule of "privity of contract" under which a person can only enforce a contract if he is a party to it does, therefore, apply.

    24. Furthermore, in the event of being in breach of my lease, which I deny, the Landlord’s and/or the Company’s remedy would be to seek damages from me and/or an injunction ordering me not to repeat the breach as opposed to an arbitrary parking charge.

    25. I am, of course, further protected against the Claimant’s unauthorised and predatory parking scheme by:-

    d. the legal principle of non-derogation from grant implied in all leases; and

    e. the legal principle of the right to quiet enjoyment also implied in all leases.

    26. My lease is the document of paramount importance in this matter. My lease trumps any arrangements into which the Claimant has entered due to my lease’s primacy of contract.


    The Claimant’s negligence

    27. Like all businesses, the Claimant should surely be aware of its obligations under Section 13 of the Supply of Goods and Services Act 1982, which is headed “Implied term about care and skill” and states that “In a relevant contract for the supply of a service where the supplier is acting in the course of a business, there is an implied term that the supplier will carry out the service with reasonable care and skill”.

    28. According to its website, the Claimant “was founded in 1990… we have experienced continual growth and now… operate on over 600 sites…”. The Claimant promotes itself to potential clients by stating that “Every operational environment is individual, with its own specific requirements”.

    29. It is strange then that, with all its knowledge and experience and its recognition that “Every operational environment is individual, with its own specific requirements”, the Claimant entered into a contract relating to my land without heeding the terms of my lease and the requirements of legislation.

    30. One would certainly expect a parking operator to be familiar with Schedule 4 to the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012, which is headed “Recovery of Unpaid Parking Charges”, and which contains the following definition:-

    “’relevant contract’ means a contract (including a contract arising only when the vehicle was parked on the relevant land) between the driver and a person who is—

    (a) the owner or occupier of the land; or

    (b) authorised, under or by virtue of arrangements made by the owner or occupier of the land, to enter into a contract with the driver requiring the payment of parking charges in respect of the parking of the vehicle on the land”

    31. Given that my lease runs until the year 2246 and has demised my parking space to me, I am both the owner and the occupier of the land for the foreseeable future.

    32. Both the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 and my lease are, of course, documents of public record available from Legislation.gov.uk and the Land Registry respectively. A raison d'être of the Land Registry is to provide leases, etc. to persons needing to obtain information on pre-existing rights affecting land.

    33. It is odd that, despite its boastful knowledge and experience and its recognition that “Every operational environment is individual, with its own specific requirements”, the Claimant commenced using my land for the purposes of its business without realising that its client had no right whatsoever to consent to such an arrangement.

    34. I submit that the Claimant’s behaviour indicates that it has not carried out its so-called “car park management” service with any care or skill at all. It has, at best, been negligent.

    35. The Claimant’s negligence has resulted in it applying for and obtaining my personal data from the DVLA without reasonable cause and, in doing so, has flagrantly disregarded data protection legislation and deceived the DVLA.

    36. In addition, the Claimant’s negligence has resulted in it attempting to enforce a non-existent term of my lease and, by doing so, the Claimant has committed a tortious act: i.e. the act of interference with contractual relations which, in the common law of torts, occurs when one person intentionally damages someone else's contractual or business relationships with a third party causing economic harm.

    37. Furthermore, by making use of my parking space for the purposes of its business, the Claimant has serially trespassed on my land.

    38. The Claimant should not be allowed to hide behind its own negligence.

    39. Perhaps, with all the Claimant’s self-proclaimed knowledge and experience and its recognition that “Every operational environment is individual, with its own specific requirements”, the Court might conclude that it is impossible to attribute the Claimant’s actions to mere negligence.

    40. Instead, the Court might attribute the Claimant’s actions to intentional fraud worthy of investigation by the Police.


    The Claimant’s lack of standing

    41. There is nothing which compels me to enter into a contract with the Claimant for parking on my parking space.

    42. I have not granted the Claimant the right to use my parking space for the purposes of its business.

    43. As the parking space being part of the premises demised to me without any rights being reserved, no other person has the power to grant the right to the Claimant to use my parking space for the purposes of its business.

    44. The Claimant does not, therefore, have any right to use my parking space for the purposes of its business.

    45. It follows that the Claimant has no parking to offer there, i.e. for the purposes of the alleged contract, there can be no consideration for my alleged promise to abide by the Claimant's terms and conditions of parking. Consequently, this lack of consideration means that no enforceable contract could have been formed between the Claimant and myself.

    46. In turn, it follows that the Claimant has no grounds for charging for parking in my parking space.

    47. Insofar as my parking space is concerned, the Claimant is nothing better than a serial trespasser and a nuisance (and is possibly much worse) without any standing whatsoever.


    The Landlord’s and the Company’s lack of standing

    48. As stated previously, “although my lease grants some limited powers to the Landlord and/or the Company to prescribe regulations in relation to certain matters, those powers do not extend to regulations relating to my parking space”.

    49. My lease (in paragraph 4.3 on page 4) states that “The Lessor or the Company may {acting reasonably) vary such regulations or make further regulations for the good management of the Building or the Estate and for the benefit of lessees of Dwellings on the Estate.”.

    50. Any regulations made in accordance with paragraph 4.3 on page 4 must serve the dual purpose of being “for the good management of the Building or the Estate” AND “for the benefit of lessees of Dwellings on the Estate”.

    51. I have never been made aware of any regulations having been made under paragraph 4.3 on page 4, e.g. I have never been given a copy of any such regulations.

    52. Even if such regulations have been made, they are clearly not “for the benefit of lessees of Dwellings on the Estate”. I have little doubt that the Claimant would assert that I, as a lessee, derive some benefit from the Claimant managing parking on my parking space, but any such assertion would simply not be true.

    53. If a trespasser were to park a vehicle on my parking space, the Claimant would not take any action to remove the trespassing vehicle.

    54. The Claimant would simply affix a ticket to the vehicle and leave it there in the hope that it would be able to secure payment of a parking charge.

    55. I, on the other hand, would be left by the Claimant to face the cost and inconvenience of finding somewhere else to park.

    56. The Claimant would not offer part of any parking charge to me to compensate for the cost and inconvenience which I suffered. Instead, the Claimant would simply line its own pockets with the parking charge after, perhaps, paying an amount of commission to its client.

    57. At its worst, the Claimant’s behaviour results in it seeking to extort hundreds of pounds of undue parking charges from me. It is preposterous to claim that any regulations encouraging such selfish behaviour is for the benefit of either this particular lessee or the lessees in general.

    58. My lease (in paragraph 9 on page 15) contains a regulation stating that requiring me:-

    “Not to cause any obstruction in or on the main entrances stairways or passages in the Building nor in or on the drives or access roads and footpaths adjacent or leading to the Building by leaving or parking or permitting to be left or parked any motorcycle bicycle perambulator or other vehicle belonging to or used by the Lessee or occupier of the Demised Premises or by any of his friends servants or visitors and to observe all regulations made by the Company from time to time relating to the parking of such vehicles.”

    59. I have never been made aware of any regulations having been made under paragraph 9 on page 15, e.g. I have never been given a copy of any such regulations.

    60. In any event, the single sentence in paragraph 9 on page 15 concerns itself “regulations made by the Company from time to time relating to the parking of such vehicles”, i.e. vehicles causing an obstruction in certain specified places. This has nothing whatsoever to do with a “motor car” parked in its “parking space”, both terms being very noticeable by their absence from the sentence.

    61. There is nothing in the lease specifically allowing the Landlord or the Company to make regulations relating to parking on my parking space.

    62. My parking space is mine until the year 2246. Until then, both the Landlord and the Company have ceded their rights to it to me.

    63. Even if my lease were to permit the Landlord or the Company to make some regulations to accommodate the Claimant, those regulations could not run contrary to the legal principle of non-derogation from grant are implied in all leases.

    64. The principle of non-derogation from grant was summarised by Lord Denning, Master of the Rolls (i.e. the Head of Civil Justice), in Molton Builders Ltd v City of Westminster (1975) (30 P&CR 182, at p 186). The broad principle expounded by Lord Denning was that:-

    “…if one man agrees to confer a particular benefit on another, he must not do anything which substantially deprives the other of the enjoyment of that benefit: because that would be to take away with one hand what is given with the other…”.

    65. Lord Denning’s words are particularly apt in many parking cases involving leaseholders with allocated parking spaces. If Lord Denning had been deciding this case, he may have changed his words to say:-

    “if the Landlord and/or the Company agrees to confer the exclusive right to park in a demised parking space on a Lessee, the Landlord and/or the Company must not then enter into an arrangement allowing a parking contractor to rent out the space to any Tom, !!!! or Harry at an exorbitant charge for the purposes of the parking contractor’s business because that would not just substantially deprive, it would entirely deprive the Lessee of the enjoyment of that benefit in two ways: the Lessee, who would have paid a higher purchase price for a property with a parking space, would have been deprived of the exclusive use of that space and the Lessee would be treated no differently to Tom, !!!! or Harry insofar as the parking contractor’s terms are concerned. That would be to take away with one hand what is given with the other…”.

    66. In any event, as already mentioned, if I were to be in breach of my lease, which I deny, the Landlord’s or the Company’s remedy would be to seek damages from me and/or an injunction ordering me not to repeat the breach as opposed to an arbitrary parking charge.

    67. Additionally, in paragraph 7.1 on page 10 of my lease, the Landlord covenants:-

    “That the Lessee paying the rents hereby reserved and performing and observing the several covenants on his part and the conditions herein contained shall peaceably hold and enjoy the Demised Premises during the Term without any interruption by the Lessor or any person rightfully claiming under or in trust for it.”

    68. The Landlord and the Company have no standing in relation to parking on my demised parking space.


    The managing agents’ lack of standing

    69. The lease makes provision for the Company to employ managing agents.

    70. Where agents have rights under the lease, this is expressly stated.

    71. The managing agents have no rights under the lease.

    72. The managing agents are mentioned on only two occasions in the lease: the first time on page 11 involving circumstances where “written notice has previously been received by the Company or its solicitors or managing agents”; and the second time on page 16 where it mentions that “Total Expenditure” may include “reasonable fees of the Company for the management of the Estate and the cost of employing managing agents (if employed)”.

    73. As the Company lacks standing in this matter and its managing agents have no standing in their own right, it follows that the managing agents have no standing at all in this matter.



    Summary

    74. By bringing its claim, the Claimant is blatantly abusing the Court process.

    75. My lease is the document of paramount importance in this matter. My lease trumps any arrangements into which the Claimant has entered due my lease’s primacy of contract.

    76. With all the Claimant’s self-proclaimed knowledge and experience and its recognition that “Every operational environment is individual, with its own specific requirements”, the Claimant has acted negligently as a minimum but has, perhaps, acted fraudulently.

    77. Insofar as my parking space is concerned, the Claimant is nothing better than a serial trespasser and a nuisance (and is possibly much worse) without any standing whatsoever.

    78. The Landlord and the Company have no standing in this matter.

    79. The managing agents have no standing in this matter.

    80. I submit that the Claimant’s claim should be dismissed.


    Counterclaim

    81. If, before the Claimant introduced its parking scheme, it had bothered to use skill, care and diligence to make enquiries through the Land Registry to find what pre-existing terms applied to the land, the Claimant would have realised that it needed to negotiate with and obtain agreement from myself the parking scheme to apply in the my demised parking space.

    82. At the date of calculation in mid-August 2018, the Claimant has been using my demised parking space for its business purposes for a period of 1,047 days.

    83. It follows that the Claimant has trespassed on the Defendant’s rented parking space for that number of days.

    84. In local car parks available to the general public, the cost of one day’s use of a parking space can be obtained for £8.

    85. My understanding is that, under Common Law, insofar as trespass is concerned, the Court is required to assume a hypothetical negotiation between a willing and reasonable person in the position of the trespasser, i.e. the Claimant, and a willing and reasonable person in my own position as the owner and occupier of the land.

    86. I further understand that the appropriate measure of damages for trespass is the price which such persons would have negotiated as the reasonable price payable for the relevant right of user, or the sum of money which might reasonably have been demanded as a quid pro quo for permitting the trespass.

    87. As the Claimant deems £100 to be a reasonable charge for the use of my demised parking space for one day, the Court could regard that as a reasonable amount on which to base my counterclaim.

    88. Frankly, however, I believe £100 for one day’s use of a parking space to be an exorbitant amount, not a reasonable amount.

    89. Instead, I regard the very much lower amount of £8, which is the cost of one day’s use of a parking space available elsewhere locally as being much more reasonable figure on which to base the counterclaim.

    90. My counterclaim is, therefore, for the sum of £8,376, i.e. 1,047 days at £8 per day.

    91. Although that amount is based on a counterclaim for trespass alone and I believe that it would be reasonable for the Court to award a further amount for tortious interference with my lease, I seek the sum of £8,376 in settlement of the whole of the counterclaim.

    92. In addition to agreeing to the counterclaim, I would ask the Court to order the Claimant to cease and desist from its activities in relation to my parking space.

    93. As the Claimant did not submit a defence to my counterclaim within the usual 14-day deadline, I request the Court to award me the sum, i.e. £8,376, sought in my counterclaim by default.

    94. The Claimant’s particulars of claim, being so lacking in cause of action and based on contract law, offer no defence to the counterclaim which is based on property law.

    95. I believe that, as a result of the Claimant’s failure to provide either a defence to the counterclaim or adequately detailed particulars of claim, a finding in favour of my counterclaim is justified.


    I believe that the facts stated in this witness statement are true.


    Signed: Dated:
    <your full name>
  • I should have said that, if you need clarification of anything in the witness statement provided by me, please do not hesitate to ask.
  • Duns89
    Duns89 Posts: 20 Forumite
    Thanks for the help here. The Evidence / witness statement waere sent to the court and the claimant the last week of September as the letter from the court stated, I believe it may have landed with the claimant a day later - hopefully that is not an issue?

    I have now today by email just received the witness statement from Gladstone's this is basically 4 weeks after the stated date from the court. I have previously rung the court before today to ask if they had received anything and they had not, I also asked for that to be shown on the record. Given the lateness of this being excessive not just a couple of days, I'm assuming anything in their witness statement cannot be used???

    The date of hearing is around 2 weeks away.......surely unfair for them to have my information for 4 weeks prior to sending their evidence? I expect I can complain about this / have it dropped?
  • nosferatu1001
    nosferatu1001 Posts: 12,961
    First Post First Anniversary Name Dropper
    Forumite
    No, you CANNOT assume that. That isnt how court works!

    What you do is write to teh court objecting to the late service of the claimants WS, stating this has prejudiced your ability to defend, and ask that the court does not grant any relief from the usual sanction, which is that the WS would be struck out .
    As they are professionally represented (dont laugh at the back!) there is no excuse for this, and Gladsstones own insurance will cover them for any loss caused by their negligence.

    You would ask the court that, in the absence of any witness on the day - as you expect the CLaimant firm will fail to turn up - the claimant will lack any evidence to prove their unevidenced claim, the claim shoudl be struck out.
This discussion has been closed.
Meet your Ambassadors

Categories

  • All Categories
  • 342.5K Banking & Borrowing
  • 249.9K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
  • 449.4K Spending & Discounts
  • 234.6K Work, Benefits & Business
  • 607.1K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
  • 172.8K Life & Family
  • 247.4K Travel & Transport
  • 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
  • 15.8K Discuss & Feedback
  • 15.1K Coronavirus Support Boards