Your browser isn't supported
It looks like you're using an old web browser. To get the most out of the site and to ensure guides display correctly, we suggest upgrading your browser now. Download the latest:

Welcome to the MSE Forums

We're home to a fantastic community of MoneySavers but anyone can post. Please exercise caution & report spam, illegal, offensive or libellous posts/messages: click "report" or email forumteam@.

Search
  • FIRST POST
    • MORB
    • By MORB 15th Dec 17, 10:15 PM
    • 46Posts
    • 10Thanks
    MORB
    Judgement for Claim (in defalult) - PCM & Gladstones
    • #1
    • 15th Dec 17, 10:15 PM
    Judgement for Claim (in defalult) - PCM & Gladstones 15th Dec 17 at 10:15 PM
    Hi all,
    I have received a JfC in default on behalf of PCM from Gladstones. The matter is regarding 3 alleged parking contraventions that occurred in feb '17. I sent requests for POCs shortly after receiving the invoices initially sent my PCM (do not still have copies, but was a few lines requesting POC's), likely toward the end of May.

    I heard nothing further and presumed PCM were no longer going to to pursue the invoices. In July I left the UK and the address to which initial correspondence were sent. a family member continues to reside there, and in making preparations to return to the UK requested that they open residual mail sent to the address. Amongst the mail was the JfC (in default) dated the 20th Nov. As such no preceding correspondence were received (other letter in the pile was the LBC from Gladstones, but still no POCs!!).
    I have been out of the country and travelling for over 5 months and of no fixed abode during this time. I will be leaving the UK again for a prolonged period again in a few months but am happy to allow PCM/courts/Gladstones to correspond to the original address while this plays out. The claim is for 658 and constitutes 3 alleged contraventions, none of which have merit, and likely pertain to instances of stopping in a loading bay that had no prohibitive markings (no yellow lines -was not a parking space) and which was for the sole use of my previous employer (from whom I obviously had permission to be in the bay).

    Next steps:

    - Fill in the N244 form and return 3 copies to CCBC.
    - Including a statement of my case RATHER than a witness statement
    - Indicate that I'd wish for reimbursement from the claimant of the set aside fee
    - Pay 255.00 via cheque (how very archaic???)

    I will post up my defence shortly for critique but would in lieu of that be very grateful for any comment the great and wise here would be willing to offer?

    Thanks in advance
    Last edited by MORB; 15-12-2017 at 11:59 PM.
Page 2
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 4th Jan 18, 10:30 PM
    • 56,275 Posts
    • 69,906 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    Remove it, because it just does not have legs any more, even where the facts differ from Beavis:

    2.5.2. Claimed charge is an Unenforceable Penalty: I further submit that the Parking Charge that the Claimant claimed, given it is not based on any loss suffered due to the alleged breach, is nothing but an unenforceable penalty.
    PRIVATE PCN? DON'T PAY BUT DO NOT IGNORE IT TWO Clicks needed for advice:
    Top of the page: Home>>Forums>Household & Travel>Motoring>Parking Tickets, Fines & Parking - read the 'NEWBIES' FAQS thread!
    Advice to ignore is WRONG, unless in Scotland/NI.

    • MORB
    • By MORB 5th Jan 18, 1:54 PM
    • 46 Posts
    • 10 Thanks
    MORB
    Ok - removed.
    • MORB
    • By MORB 26th Jan 18, 3:40 PM
    • 46 Posts
    • 10 Thanks
    MORB
    Hi all, I'm currently awaiting a date for the set aside hearing as CCBC moved the jurisdiction to another more convenient court. In the interim I have received a Notice of Enforcement from DCBL high court baliffs to seize belongings.

    The letter explains I need to make payment within the week to UK CPM ltd - obviously this is connected to the case pending a hearing date. What would be your advice in this instance?
    • Quentin
    • By Quentin 26th Jan 18, 6:26 PM
    • 35,136 Posts
    • 19,238 Thanks
    Quentin
    Did you ask for enforcement proceedings to be put on hold pending the outcome of your set aside hearing in your set aside application?

    If so send the bailiffs a copy and ask them to await the outcome of the hearing before taking action.

    (If you haven't asked for a hold on enforcement proceedings then apply now!)
    Last edited by Quentin; 26-01-2018 at 8:46 PM.
    • MORB
    • By MORB 26th Jan 18, 11:57 PM
    • 46 Posts
    • 10 Thanks
    MORB
    I did ask the court to put enforcement proceedings on hold yes.

    Are they obliged to wait given I have requested?
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 27th Jan 18, 12:21 AM
    • 56,275 Posts
    • 69,906 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    I'm currently awaiting a date for the set aside hearing as CCBC moved the jurisdiction to another more convenient court.
    Send DCBL that letter. DO NOT let them in. Does the letter say they are acting for the High Court?
    PRIVATE PCN? DON'T PAY BUT DO NOT IGNORE IT TWO Clicks needed for advice:
    Top of the page: Home>>Forums>Household & Travel>Motoring>Parking Tickets, Fines & Parking - read the 'NEWBIES' FAQS thread!
    Advice to ignore is WRONG, unless in Scotland/NI.

    • MORB
    • By MORB 27th Jan 18, 12:33 AM
    • 46 Posts
    • 10 Thanks
    MORB
    Ok.

    No just for the county court.
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 27th Jan 18, 12:34 AM
    • 56,275 Posts
    • 69,906 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    How much are they wanting to collect?
    PRIVATE PCN? DON'T PAY BUT DO NOT IGNORE IT TWO Clicks needed for advice:
    Top of the page: Home>>Forums>Household & Travel>Motoring>Parking Tickets, Fines & Parking - read the 'NEWBIES' FAQS thread!
    Advice to ignore is WRONG, unless in Scotland/NI.

    • MORB
    • By MORB 27th Jan 18, 12:37 AM
    • 46 Posts
    • 10 Thanks
    MORB
    Circa 850

    Other than sending the hold letter what would you recommend further based on the above Coupon-mad?
    Last edited by MORB; 27-01-2018 at 9:40 AM.
    • MORB
    • By MORB 28th Jan 18, 12:47 PM
    • 46 Posts
    • 10 Thanks
    MORB
    @coupon-mad - sorry to push for a response but I will be out of the country for a few days so need to get the letter sent off including all the necessary content you advise. Thanks in advance.
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 28th Jan 18, 4:17 PM
    • 56,275 Posts
    • 69,906 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    As already advised:

    Send DCBL that letter. DO NOT let them in.
    PRIVATE PCN? DON'T PAY BUT DO NOT IGNORE IT TWO Clicks needed for advice:
    Top of the page: Home>>Forums>Household & Travel>Motoring>Parking Tickets, Fines & Parking - read the 'NEWBIES' FAQS thread!
    Advice to ignore is WRONG, unless in Scotland/NI.

    • Quentin
    • By Quentin 28th Jan 18, 5:56 PM
    • 35,136 Posts
    • 19,238 Thanks
    Quentin
    @coupon-mad - sorry to push for a response but I will be out of the country for a few days so need to get the letter sent off including all the necessary content you advise. Thanks in advance.
    Originally posted by MORB
    See #24. .
    • MORB
    • By MORB 7th Feb 18, 5:10 PM
    • 46 Posts
    • 10 Thanks
    MORB
    Thanks - both.

    @coupon-mad - wasn't sure if the answers to your questions were going to elicit new advise.

    UPDATE:
    I sent the holding letter to bailiffs and in the interim have been sent a letter for the set aside hearing in April.

    What is now the best prep for this hearing?
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 7th Feb 18, 9:59 PM
    • 56,275 Posts
    • 69,906 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    I would read other set aside threads here, and see what sort of evidence and details other people took with them.

    Search for 'set aside' and read lots of results, this forum board only (not the box top right, not searching 'MSE').
    PRIVATE PCN? DON'T PAY BUT DO NOT IGNORE IT TWO Clicks needed for advice:
    Top of the page: Home>>Forums>Household & Travel>Motoring>Parking Tickets, Fines & Parking - read the 'NEWBIES' FAQS thread!
    Advice to ignore is WRONG, unless in Scotland/NI.

    • MORB
    • By MORB 13th Mar 18, 4:19 PM
    • 46 Posts
    • 10 Thanks
    MORB
    Should I be checking with the court periodically/before the court date to see if Gladstones have submitted anything ?
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 14th Mar 18, 1:22 AM
    • 56,275 Posts
    • 69,906 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    They won't submit anything re a set aside hearing.

    Show us what you are intending to take.
    PRIVATE PCN? DON'T PAY BUT DO NOT IGNORE IT TWO Clicks needed for advice:
    Top of the page: Home>>Forums>Household & Travel>Motoring>Parking Tickets, Fines & Parking - read the 'NEWBIES' FAQS thread!
    Advice to ignore is WRONG, unless in Scotland/NI.

    • Johnersh
    • By Johnersh 14th Mar 18, 9:12 AM
    • 958 Posts
    • 1,840 Thanks
    Johnersh
    Ok, so not to p1ss on anyone's chips, but here are some things to think about....

    1. When was the application to set aside made? It looks on here as though it was Jan 18, despite the o/p being aware of the judgment in Nov 17. If that is the case, be prepared for an argument on acting promptly.

    2. Do bear in mind that service at a last known address is perfectly acceptable within the rules and you may have a difficulty if you have returned to that address and at all times had relatives there able to make you aware of incoming post. Not saying you will - just expect to address it. It's also why you need a rock solid defence to produce evidencing that the case is wholly defensible.

    3. Ask the court for a copy of the claim form. If it has a wrong address or something that may explain why it was not received, that may give you an argument for failed service and a requirement/obligation to set aside.

    4. Your case is not as straightforward as it is with defendants who have moved away and the PPC has issued court proceedings years after undertaking a DVLA address check.
    "The best advice I ever got was that knowledge is power and to keep reading."
    DISCLAIMER: I post thoughts as & when they occur. I don't advise. You are your own person and decision-maker. I'm unlikely to respond to DMs seeking personal advice. It's ill-advised & you lose the benefit of a group "take" on events.
    • MORB
    • By MORB 14th Mar 18, 2:26 PM
    • 46 Posts
    • 10 Thanks
    MORB
    Thanks @Jonersh / Coupon-mad.

    I Discovered the judgement for claimant (in default) on returning to UK late Dec. Sent set aside 5/1/2017.

    Noted re: the last known address. I'd like to argue that a letter sent to the owner of the property to advise that a vehicle connected to the address was potentially subject to increasingly onerous penalties/proceedings would have been a reasonable and expected action considering they had received no response from me.
    This would have:
    a) avoided the monetary/time cost to claimant, and unnecessary escalation to the court in the first instance (ref: Justice Minister The Rt Hon Sir Oliver Heald QC MP announcement on the 23rd December 2016)
    b)i) allowed the resident of the property to alert me lawfully (ie without opening mail addressed to another individual)
    ii) would have resulted in a response from me that advised the claimants solicitors that compliant POC's had not been received despite a request for the same.
    iii) provided an opportunity to advise claimants solicitors that in the instance compliant POC's had initially been sent and I was the driver at the time (which I do not recall), that I had the explicit consent from the company for whom I then worked, to load, unload and park at the site of the alleged contravention. ( I will be obtaining a signed letter from one of the co-founders of the still resident company supporting this).

    In addition would you advise that I go to the site to take pictures of the signs and the area where loading and unloading takes place ( interestingly there are no double yellow lines here, as there are at most other locations around the site) ?
    I am working on percentages a little here as I do not recall being on the site and parked in an unauthorised location, but were I the driver at the time, this is the likeliest place for the car to have been despite having never received photos of any of the alleged contraventions.

    I will be taking the above in addition to what was prepared in witness statement (copied below for ease of ref):

    1.3. I believe the Claimant has behaved unreasonably in pursuing a claim against the Defendant without ensuring they held the a current and correct contact details. According to publicly available information my circumstances are far from being unique. The industry!!!8217;s persistent failure to use correct and current addresses results is an unnecessary burden for individuals and the justice system across the country. This is a topical issue: I note that the Justice Minister The Rt Hon Sir Oliver Heald QC MP announced on the 23rd December 2016 a consultation and information campaign to help protect consumers from debt claims. The consultation will look at ways to; !!!8220;better protect consumers who are sent mail to inaccurate addresses and verify addresses again before a claim is sent.!!!8221; He added:
    "It cannot be right that people who are unaware of debts can see their lives and finances ruined by county court judgments. In the digital age, we must ensure companies pursuing unpaid debts make every reasonable effort to contact individuals, rather than simply relying on a letter to an old address."


    1.4. On the basis provided above I would suggest that the Claimant did not fulfil their duty to use the Defendant!!!8217;s current address when bringing the claim.


    1.5. I have also not received any previous documentation (Full, Proper & Compliant Particulars of claim) from the Claimant in this matter and I thus was never able to properly challenge the Claimant!!!8217;s claim. This is despite my best efforts as noted below.


    1.6. Having discovered Default Judgement court papers contain no details of the alleged incident and I do not know what the Default Judgement relates to. I not confident that I know what vehicle this relates to.


    1.7. I attempted to contact the Claimant via phone number on their website more recently (Dec 2017). I was not able to get through to a member of the Claimant!!!8217;s staff to discuss the matter as they have an automated phone system that does not allow you to talk to an advisor without inputting a numerical code. As I had never received any return communication from them I do not have such a code. There is no alternative means of contacting them provided. I am still without further detail having established no other correspondence had been received. I have immediately responded to the discovery of the Judgement against me and have given the Claimant adequate time to provide the requested information but they have not done this. This means as the Defendant, I still do not have adequate details of the incidents the Claimant alleges have taken place and had long ago reasonably concluded that the claimant ceased their claim. As such I left the country believing the matter was at an end due to no further correspondence after the initial requests for compliant particulars of Claims many months ago (May 2017)..


    1.8. Considering the above I was unable to defend this claim properly. I thus believe that the Default Judgement against me was issued incorrectly and thus should be set aside.

    2. Order dismissing the Claim


    2.1. I have received no documentation regarding what vehicle this alleged contravention relates to, thus do not even know that I am in fact the Registered Keeper.

    2.2. The Claimant, PCM have not proved that the alleged incident relates to a vehicle for which I am the Registered Keeper. Further to this, even then any Notice to Keeper served by the Claimant would have needed to comply with the requirements of Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012. This includes the requirement to issue the Notice to Keeper within 14 days of the alleged incident. Since I have not received any documentation from the Claimant prior to finding out about the Default Judgement, or indeed after, I submit the Claimant will not have complied with the requirements of the Act and thus cannot claim this charge against me as the Registered Keeper in any case.

    2.3. If the Notice to Keeper was not issued within 14 days, then the Claimant is required to prove who the driver of the vehicle was at the time of the alleged incident. I have no recollection of ever parking at the location of the alleged incident. The vehicle that I am the Registered Keeper of, can driven by other insured adult and is on occasion driven by other adults with their own comprehensive insurance. I submit that the Claimant cannot provide such evidence of the identity of the driver. I further submit that the Claimant does not include !!!8216;Protection of Freedoms Act 2012!!!8217; wording on the Parking Charge Notices they issue and therefore cannot hold the Defendant automatically liable for the alleged incident merely for being the Registered Keeper of a vehicle.


    2.4. If the Claimant has obtained details of the vehicle for which the Defendant is the Registered Keeper, and used those details to make a claim for a !!!8220;Parking Charge Notice!!!8217;!!!8217;, I thus dispute the claim in its entirety as I do not know the wording of the contract nor do I know the means by which the contract was alleged to come into force.

    2.5. I further submit that the Claimant!!!8217;s claim is without merit due to substantial issues in law. This is for the following main reasons:

    2.5.1. Lack of Standing by Claimant: The Claimant is unlikely to be the landowner of the car park in question, and will have no proprietary interest in it. This means that the Claimant, as a matter of law, will have no locus standi to litigate in their own name. Any consideration will have been provided by the landholder, and only they would have been able sue for any damages or trespass.

    2.5.2. No contract with the claimant: Any contract must have offer, acceptance and consideration both ways. There would not have been consideration from the Claimant to the motorist; the fee for parking benefits the landowners, not the Claimant. Therefore, there is no consideration from the motorist to PCM.
    2.6. In order to make informed decisions and statements in my defence as keeper of a vehicle, I will require copies of all paperwork, photographs relating to contraventions and pictures of all signs from the Claimant.

    2.7. The Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 does not permit the Claimant to recover a sum greater than the parking charge on the day before a Notice to Keeper was issued. The Claimant cannot recover additional charges. 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. Also any interest added due to claimant failure to provide the right address of the defendant need to be cancelled.

    2.8. The government have put in place a mechanism whereby liability can be transferred from driver to keeper, under the Protection Of Freedoms Act 2012, sch 4. The claimant has made the conscious decision not to avail themselves of this legislation and use a notice to keeper which fails to comply with 8.1, 8.2a, 8.2c, 8.2f, 8.8b, 9.2.a, 9.8b of the Act.

    2.9 On the other hand it is believed that the Claimant may seek to rely on a rather
    unique interpretation of the judgement in Elliott -v- Loake which is different from this case.

    2.10 This case can be distinguished from ParkingEye v Beavis [2015] UKSC 67 (the Beavis case) which was dependent upon an undenied contract, formed by unusually prominent signage forming a clear offer and which turned on unique facts regarding the location and the interests of the landowner. Strict compliance with the BPA Code of Practice (CoP) was paramount and Mr Beavis was the driver who saw the signs and entered into a contract to pay 85 after exceeding a licence to park free. None of this applies in this material case.

    2.11. On this basis I believe that the Claimant has not provided any reasonable cause of action and thus the claim should be dismissed in its entirety.
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 14th Mar 18, 5:26 PM
    • 56,275 Posts
    • 69,906 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    You could add information about Jopson v HomeGuard regarding a vehicle dropping off/loading/unloading for a few minutes at a block of flats and Charles Harris QC's definition of parking in that transcript (see that transcript hosted in the Parking Prankster's case law pages).

    In addition would you advise that I go to the site to take pictures of the signs and the area where loading and unloading takes place ( interestingly there are no double yellow lines here, as there are at most other locations around the site) ?
    Yes, sounds worthwhile, plus the letter from the company confirming explicit consent to load/unload at that site at the material time.
    PRIVATE PCN? DON'T PAY BUT DO NOT IGNORE IT TWO Clicks needed for advice:
    Top of the page: Home>>Forums>Household & Travel>Motoring>Parking Tickets, Fines & Parking - read the 'NEWBIES' FAQS thread!
    Advice to ignore is WRONG, unless in Scotland/NI.

    • MORB
    • By MORB 16th Mar 18, 6:59 PM
    • 46 Posts
    • 10 Thanks
    MORB
    Ok - will get on to that this weekend.

    @Johnersh - any more advice insights having seen what I intend to take along?

    Thanks in advance.
Welcome to our new Forum!

Our aim is to save you money quickly and easily. We hope you like it!

Forum Team Contact us

Live Stats

382Posts Today

6,358Users online

Martin's Twitter