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
    • psycho101
    • By psycho101 12th Feb 18, 1:10 PM
    • 6Posts
    • 0Thanks
    psycho101
    Assistance requested - LBC received
    • #1
    • 12th Feb 18, 1:10 PM
    Assistance requested - LBC received 12th Feb 18 at 1:10 PM
    Hi there I wonder if you can help me. I wish I had come across this forum earlier - nevertheless, I am now at 'Letter Before Claim' stage, issued by Gladstone's solicitors.

    Here's my info:
    - I received a PCN issued by CPM (UK Car Park Management) - apparently the car was parked in an area requiring a permit
    - I replied with appeal within 5 days as I was the keeper of the vehicle and to whom the PCN was sent (albeit my wife was the driver). I then received a reply 9 days later to say that I could not appeal, only the driver could. My wife then wrote pretty much the same appeal and sent it off the next day.
    - The appeal was not upheld. Moreover, the fine went up from 60 to 100 as the 14 day period for a lower charge had expired! (Even though 9 of these 14 days the initial appeal had sat with CPM, who were clearly stalling for time to this end)
    - I then appealed with the IAS, who rejected my appeal.

    My appeals were based upon 3 things - (i) The car was parked at nightfall - the signs were not visible - there was no illumination of the area nor of the signs. So never knowingly entered a contract. Even the photo that has been taken and sent to me, it is difficult to make out that there are any signs, and the photo is clearly taken with flash (you can see the flash reflection in the car tail lights). (ii) The area was completely deserted, no other cars parked in the area (it was a Sunday evening in December, all the nearby businesses were closed - so no detrimental impact on any landlord/tenant of the land) (iii) The car was parked there for less than 10 minutes

    For the IAS appeal, I also shared photos which I had taken of the area, but this time without flash, showing the area to be totally dark after nightfall with no signs visible. I don't believe the IAS really took this into account when knocking back my appeal. (In another thread, I see that the IAS is referred to as a 'kangaroo court' - I'm inclined to agree!)

    I then had debt collector letters sent by DRP (Debt Recovery Plus). I simply emailed them saying I wouldn't be paying, stating the reasons why. They sent me 4 more letters after this.

    I then received letters from Gladstones Solicitors saying I would be taken to court. The fine had now been increased by an additional 60 for time spent recovering the charge, which is 'pre-determined'.

    Gladstones did allow me to complete that Pre-Action Protocol if I believed I had a reason for the fine to be invalid. So I did this stating once again all of the reasons.

    I have now received an email from Gladstones saying they see no reason to address the comments made within PAP form, as these have all been rejected in the appeal heard by CPM and IAS. I have now been issued 31 days to pay all of the amount, or legal proceedings will begin and further costs sought.

    I see on another thread, you mention POPLA - I haven't yet done anything through them.

    In essence, given the reasons on the appeal (signs weren't visible after nightfall owing to no illumination / no detrimental impact as the area was deserted) I don't believe I should have to pay anything. Certainly not this amount, where the charges have increased owing to the actions of CPM.

    My question is: what is the best course of action for me now?
Page 1
    • KeithP
    • By KeithP 12th Feb 18, 1:23 PM
    • 7,656 Posts
    • 7,350 Thanks
    KeithP
    • #2
    • 12th Feb 18, 1:23 PM
    • #2
    • 12th Feb 18, 1:23 PM
    My question is: what is the best course of action for me now?
    Originally posted by psycho101
    Your best course of action is to read post#2 of the NEWBIES FAQ sticky/pinned thread.

    In there you will find comprehensive guidance on how to deal with the inevitable court case, starting with the Claim Form from the County Court Business Centre in Northampton.
    .
    • psycho101
    • By psycho101 13th Jun 18, 1:33 PM
    • 6 Posts
    • 0 Thanks
    psycho101
    • #3
    • 13th Jun 18, 1:33 PM
    • #3
    • 13th Jun 18, 1:33 PM
    A quick question if I may: I have now been sent the Claim Form from the County Court Business Centre in Northampton. I have read the 'guide to MCOL & how to acknowledge service' in the Newbies thread and am prepared to do this and start the process of mounting a defence.

    However, the Claim form in my case is not addressed to a specific person - it simply says our surname on the letter. The surname is correct and it may be because I am the registered keeper, but my wife was the driver at the time and we have the same surname. (This is something that they unfortunately know, as you can see above, I have made errors I realise in initially appealing/responding to the company, the IAS,DRP and to Gladstones at PAP & LBC stage).

    But... if there is no individually named defendant on the Claim Form (just surname), how should this be approached when it comes to the acknowledgement of service?
    • Castle
    • By Castle 13th Jun 18, 2:10 PM
    • 1,764 Posts
    • 2,383 Thanks
    Castle
    • #4
    • 13th Jun 18, 2:10 PM
    • #4
    • 13th Jun 18, 2:10 PM
    Does it state title such as Mr Surname?
    • psycho101
    • By psycho101 13th Jun 18, 2:40 PM
    • 6 Posts
    • 0 Thanks
    psycho101
    • #5
    • 13th Jun 18, 2:40 PM
    • #5
    • 13th Jun 18, 2:40 PM
    No - simply Surname
    • nosferatu1001
    • By nosferatu1001 13th Jun 18, 2:42 PM
    • 2,714 Posts
    • 3,365 Thanks
    nosferatu1001
    • #6
    • 13th Jun 18, 2:42 PM
    • #6
    • 13th Jun 18, 2:42 PM
    WHat is written on the V5?? Any reason they could have missed this?

    Trouble is, if you dont acknoweldge the idiots at teh CCBC will just default the claim, they wont understand such tricky concepts as "which person is this aimed at?"
    You could exploit this by pickign the defendant you would prefer to defend. Their screw up , their mess to unpick...
    • psycho101
    • By psycho101 13th Jun 18, 3:08 PM
    • 6 Posts
    • 0 Thanks
    psycho101
    • #7
    • 13th Jun 18, 3:08 PM
    • #7
    • 13th Jun 18, 3:08 PM
    Sorry, pardon the ignorance, I'm not sure what a V5 is !?

    However, on the letter before claim, interestingly they address it to 'Mr' then wife's first name and surname.

    Ok, so would I be right to assume that the preferable defendant would be myself (registered keeper but not driver) as this would allow me to use POPLA defence?
    • Quentin
    • By Quentin 13th Jun 18, 3:22 PM
    • 35,814 Posts
    • 20,062 Thanks
    Quentin
    • #8
    • 13th Jun 18, 3:22 PM
    • #8
    • 13th Jun 18, 3:22 PM
    Throughout here you are advised not reveal who was driving.


    You need to edit your OP to remove details of who was driving


    The PPCs monitor here and can use posts here against you


    (Google V5!)
    • nosferatu1001
    • By nosferatu1001 13th Jun 18, 3:22 PM
    • 2,714 Posts
    • 3,365 Thanks
    nosferatu1001
    • #9
    • 13th Jun 18, 3:22 PM
    • #9
    • 13th Jun 18, 3:22 PM
    Vehicle reg doc. Couldnt you possibly have just googled that, rather than asking?

    It was slightly tongue in cheek. I would wait a little for other suggestions.
    • psycho101
    • By psycho101 13th Jun 18, 3:36 PM
    • 6 Posts
    • 0 Thanks
    psycho101
    OK, so it's my name on V5. (Keeper, not driver in this instance)

    Gladstones and UKCPM already know who was driving, as this was erroneously disclosed when appealing (admitting mistake here - I did this before discovering MSE advice threads). But the point is that the Claim form simply has surname as defendant.

    Tongue in cheek advice aside, I'm interested in the best way to complete the acknowledgement of service given this mistake on what has been sent to me?
    • nosferatu1001
    • By nosferatu1001 13th Jun 18, 5:22 PM
    • 2,714 Posts
    • 3,365 Thanks
    nosferatu1001
    That's the problem
    It hasn't been sent to you. It isn't your claim form. There isn't anyone with that identify - not one individual anyway

    No one can acknowledge it

    Not formally, anyway. However I'm not sure the staff at the CCBC will be trained to know what to do. And against which credit file would a default go on? No idea

    Give the CCBC a call ASAP tomorrow. State you have a claim form with no mr, mrs and just a surname. Ask how this can be acknowledged as you don't know the defendant is supposed to be and shouldn't have to guess
    • psycho101
    • By psycho101 14th Jun 18, 9:58 AM
    • 6 Posts
    • 0 Thanks
    psycho101
    Thanks for the help so far.

    So I called CCBC as suggested. Interestingly the first advice was to fill in the form myself to defend/dispute claim on the basis that no individual defendant named.

    I challenged this, on the basis that no individual should be expected to fill it in, and if a claim against an individual would subsequently be raised by Gladstone's an individual defendant would not necessarily want this to be the only point of defence.

    They agreed in the end, and the advice changed to sending all of the forms back to them blank, with a covering note to say that this cannot be responded to as there is no individual defendant named.

    I plan to keep this covering letter short and sweet, and unsigned (simply perhaps, 'the residents of x address')

    I am sure this is not the end of course. But do let me know if there is anything I am doing that is a mis-step at this point?

    Thanks,
    Last edited by psycho101; 14-06-2018 at 10:05 AM.
    • Umkomaas
    • By Umkomaas 14th Jun 18, 10:11 AM
    • 17,980 Posts
    • 28,449 Thanks
    Umkomaas
    Make sure you keep copies of all the documents you are returning to the CCBC. They might be needed further down the line to prove, for example, the robo nature of the G's operation and their lack of any due diligence, consequently wasting your and the court's time and resources.
    We cannot provide you with a silver bullet to get you out of this. You have to be in for the long run, and need to involve yourself in research and work for you to get rid of this. It is not simple. We will help, but can't do it for you.

    Give a man a fish, and you feed him for a day; show him how to catch fish, and you feed him for a lifetime.
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

3,954Posts Today

8,472Users online

Martin's Twitter
  • We all knew we'd win in the end. Never in doubt! ....walks away whistling

  • Yeeesss. Phew. Wow. Uh. Oy yoy yoy

  • It's interesting that 80% of the crowd are young women... According to the close ups we keep seeing anyway.

  • Follow Martin