Gladstones Letter before Claim

Guys_Dad wrote: »

If you have the case numbers for the two quoted cases in para 9, it would help.

You refer to the IPC CoP. Make sure you have copies of that for court and you may wish to attach the relevant section with your papers.

Thank you i will try and find the case numbers. I wonder if i can reference further cases or do i not want to go to over board with this :-)

Coupon-mad wrote: »

12 and 19 appear to repeat #4, so remove repetition. And I don't like this (written by someone else I know, so I would remove this line):



Once the repetition is weeded out, you have covered the bases. Email and/or post the defence, do not try to use MCOL as it truncates all the wording into a big pile of words! Does not look readable for the Judge, so follow the advice for defences as set out by bargepole, in the links under 'Small Claim?' in the NEWBIES thread.

I have removed the line as instructed and got rid of 12 and 19.

My point 4 now looks like this:

4. The Defendant therefore disputes the amount claimed, as it comprises excessive and non-contractual elements, and additional costs must be proved.
The Claimant has claimed a £50 legal representative’s cost on the claim form, despite being well aware that CPR 27.14 does not permit such charges to be recovered in the Small Claims Court.
The Defendant also has the reasonable belief that the Claimant has not incurred the stated additional costs and it is put to strict proof that they have actually been incurred.

The Defendant also has a good faith belief that due to the sparse particulars the £50 claimed for filing the claim has not been incurred. This appears to be an attempt at double recovery as a way to inflate the value of the claim. The solicitor has been incompetent and is not due £50. In the alternative, the Claimant is put to strict proof to show how this cost has been incurred.

Even if they have been incurred, the Claimant has described them as "legal expenses". These cannot be recovered in the Small Claims Court

a) Additionally, as this is already included as part of the costs of the claimant, factored into the £100 parking charge, this is essentially double charging.
b) The £50 solicitor cost was disputed in the test case of ParkingEye v Beavis and Wardley. HHJ Moloney refused to award the £50.
c) The £50 was also struck out by DJ Sparrow on 19 August 2015 in ParkingEye v Mrs S, claim number B9FC508F.

Hey Guys,

We have received the N180 form from Gladstones and the court.

on the court one i'll follow the aadvice on the bargepole thread however for this:

D3 = 1 witness (that’s you) (or more if you are going to get another person to provide a statement)

Do i need to put myself on it too so i can represent her and give evidence etc?

Also is this a case of filling in the physical form and making a copy and sending them out or can it be done digitally or online etc????

Thank you Coupon-Mad appreciate it.

Have another Silly question on the form it asks if there any days within the next six months when you are not able to attend a hearing? My wife is pregnant and is due for September. Is it acceptable to block out that entire month? I will include an explanation on my e-mail when i sent the form across. Ideally id block out October too as i don't think so soon after giving Birth she would be happy to attend? Is this reasonable on my part?

I figured as you never quite know when the baby will come and if we miss the court date if it was September.