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
    • Chimichanga
    • By Chimichanga 16th Mar 18, 10:52 AM
    • 29Posts
    • 3Thanks
    Chimichanga
    LBCCC - Gladstones Solicitors
    • #1
    • 16th Mar 18, 10:52 AM
    LBCCC - Gladstones Solicitors 16th Mar 18 at 10:52 AM
    Hello helpers!
    I just wanted to double check that i'm doing the right thing, I would really appreciate your comments/advice.
    I have spent the last week reading everything I can possibly fit in to my brain on this forum about what to do...I'd like to give you a quick background to my situation if I may.
    My family and I were away for 6 weeks (28 Nov 2017- 10 Jan 2018) in New Zealand and during that time I received a PCN (£60 early repayment) dated 29th Nov 4 days after the alleged incident (25th Nov) from HX Car Park Management Ltd. Needless to say we didn't see this or the next 'Outstanding Parking Notice' (£100) dated 28 Dec until we returned home on on 10th Jan. I got another letter dated 12th Jan which was a 'Final Demand Notice' (£125). At this point I freaked out completely, as you do, checked my diary and saw that I was not even the driver since I was work 40 miles away that day. I immediately wrote a letter (dated 19th Jan) telling them that I was not the driver and could provide prof of this if required, gave them a copy of my flight tickets to show we were away and so couldn't respond to their letters and asked them to stop sending me letters of a threatening nature and posted it recorded delivery. Obviously I did not look at this amazing forum first (more fool me). I heard nothing for 2 months and then last week received an LBC from Gladstone Solicitors giving me 30 days to cough up the now £160! I have since looked at everything on here, including the Pre Action Protocol and have whittled down what I think I need to do now which is draft a letter similar to the one that I have seen here (sorry won't let me post a link as a newbie) by Loadsofchildren123. Is this the right thing to do? And may I post a copy of my drafted letter on here for you guys to check it's ok if you wouldn't mind that is?

    My brain is swimming with everything I have read and I can't decide what the next best course of action should be. Your help is greatly appreciated.
    Thanks!
Page 3
    • KeithP
    • By KeithP 13th Apr 18, 12:19 PM
    • 9,238 Posts
    • 9,446 Thanks
    KeithP
    No need to use the forms.
    .
    • Chimichanga
    • By Chimichanga 13th Apr 18, 3:43 PM
    • 29 Posts
    • 3 Thanks
    Chimichanga
    That's great everyone thank you.
    • Alastair Brown
    • By Alastair Brown 21st May 18, 8:14 PM
    • 4 Posts
    • 0 Thanks
    Alastair Brown
    if Gladstones want money let them seek court assistance. Don't worry about it.
    Alastair
    • Chimichanga
    • By Chimichanga 6th Jun 18, 12:00 PM
    • 29 Posts
    • 3 Thanks
    Chimichanga
    Should we be worried???
    Thank you Alastair Brown.

    Since the second letter requesting all items which G's will be relying on in court everything has fallen silent. It's been approx 6 weeks since the last letter was sent to them.

    Is there anything we can do at this point to make this go away or do we just have to sit tight and wait for Gladys to decide what they're doing?

    Have been cautiously prepping defence whilst waiting.....
    • beamerguy
    • By beamerguy 6th Jun 18, 12:08 PM
    • 8,444 Posts
    • 11,112 Thanks
    beamerguy
    Thank you Alastair Brown.

    Since the second letter requesting all items which G's will be relying on in court everything has fallen silent. It's been approx 6 weeks since the last letter was sent to them.

    Is there anything we can do at this point to make this go away or do we just have to sit tight and wait for Gladys to decide what they're doing?

    Have been cautiously prepping defence whilst waiting.....
    Originally posted by Chimichanga
    You just wait ....

    "Gladys to decide what they're doing?"

    Not sure Gladstones know what they are doing
    at the best of times .... it's all very mickey mouse stuff
    RBS - MNBA - CAPITAL ONE - LLOYDS

    DISGUSTING BEHAVIOUR
    • nosferatu1001
    • By nosferatu1001 6th Jun 18, 12:43 PM
    • 3,429 Posts
    • 4,263 Thanks
    nosferatu1001
    Respond to them stating that, as they have failed to follow the PAP and delivered all documents within 30 days, you now consider the matter closed

    As such you require them to cease proicessing your data within 21 days, except to deal with this request, and to confirm such.
    • Chimichanga
    • By Chimichanga 6th Jun 18, 1:57 PM
    • 29 Posts
    • 3 Thanks
    Chimichanga
    Ok will draft a letter today.

    Thank you nosferatu1001 and beamerguy.
    • Chimichanga
    • By Chimichanga 13th Jun 18, 11:28 AM
    • 29 Posts
    • 3 Thanks
    Chimichanga
    Court Claim Letter
    Good morning all!

    Well a not so good morning here unfortunately. It may have been a pipe dream, but i'd silently hoped that G's would drop this....how foolish to think that I hear you say, lol.

    Today a claim form was received.....grrrr......the MCOL will be sorted today.

    Once I have drafted the defence is it ok for me to post it on here for a quick once over by someone with a tad more experience than myself?

    Having researched all of the various defence drafts on the forum, I'm struggling to decipher what I need to include in this defence. As far as I can see the relevant points to this particular claim (registered keeper was not the driver of the vehicle) are that this is a serial litigant of robo claims and that the registered keeper cannot be assumed to be the driver - NtK does not meet POFA. Do any other points really need to be included in the defence? eg the signage, the correct fee not being paid etc? If the keeper was not in fact the driver are any of the points valid in the defence?

    Want to make sure this draft is a completely relevant defence and does look more like we're taking a shot in the dark and hoping something will stick.

    Any help is much appreciated, thanks so much!
    Last edited by Chimichanga; 13-06-2018 at 12:37 PM. Reason: missed out a point
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 13th Jun 18, 12:38 PM
    • 61,573 Posts
    • 74,439 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    Yes we prefer to help review all defences. Many hands make light work!
    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.

    • Chimichanga
    • By Chimichanga 13th Jun 18, 2:46 PM
    • 29 Posts
    • 3 Thanks
    Chimichanga
    Draft Defence
    Ok so I have tried to keep this as relevant to this particular situation as possible.

    I'm unsure as to whether other points (signage, landowner contracts etc) are relevant in this case? As such have limited the defence points to POFA not being met and PAP not being met. Please advise if i'm completely off track here.

    DEFENCE:

    I am XXXXXX, the defendant in this matter. I currently reside at XXXXXX. I am the Registered Keeper of the vehicle XXXXX

    1. It is denied that the defendant was the driver of the vehicle on 25/11/2017. The claimant is put to strict proof.
    1.1 The Claimant has provided no evidence (in pre-action correspondence or otherwise) that the Defendant was the driver. The Defendant avers that the Claimant is therefore limited to pursuing the keeper in these proceedings under the provisions set out by statute in the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 ("POFA").
    1.2 Before seeking to rely on the keeper liability provisions of Schedule 4 POFA the Claimant must demonstrate that:
    1.2.1. There was a ‘relevant obligation’ either by way of a breach of contract, trespass or other tort; and
    1.2.2. That the Claimant has not followed the required wording as described in the Act to transfer liability from the driver to the registered keeper. It is put that the Claimant has not complied with the relevant statutory requirements.
    1.3. To the extent that the Claimant may seek to allege that any such presumption exists, the Defendant expressly denies that there is any presumption in law (whether in statute or otherwise) that the keeper is the driver. Further, the Defendant denies that the vehicle keeper is obliged to name the driver to a private parking firm. Had this been the intention of Parliament, they would have made such requirements part of POFA, which makes no such provision. In the alternative, an amendment could have been made to s.172 of the Road Traffic Act 1988. The 1988 Act continues to oblige the identification of drivers only in strictly limited circumstances, where a criminal offence has been committed. Those provisions do not apply to this matter.
    2. The Claimant has at no time provided an explanation how the parking charge has been calculated, the conduct that gave rise to it or how the amount has escalated from £100 to £240.76. This appears to be an added cost with apparently no qualification and an attempt at double recovery, which the POFA Schedule 4 specifically disallows.
    2.1 The Protection of Freedom Act Para 4(5) states that the maximum sum that may be recovered from the keeper is the charge stated on the Notice to Keeper. In this instance that amount is £100.
    3. The Particulars of Claim lack specificity. The Defendant is prejudiced and is unable to prepare a full and complete Defence. The Defendant reserves the right to seek from the Court permission to serve an Amended Defence should the Claimant add to or expand his Particulars at a later stage of these proceedings and/or to limit the Claimant only to the unevidenced allegations in the Particulars.
    4. The Claimant is in breach of it's pre action obligations as set out in the Practice Direction. No information or documents have been provided to the Defendant despite requests from the Defendant on two separate occasions.
    5. The Defendant denies the claim in its entirety, voiding any liability to the Claimant for all amounts due to the aforementioned reasons.
    5.1 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. These types of ‘roboclaims’ go against public interest, demonstrats a disregard for the dignity of the court and are unfair on unrepresented consumers. The Defendant has reason to believe that this is a claim that will proceed without any facts or evidence supplied until the last possible minute. A significant detriment to an unrepresented Defendant.
    5.2 The Defendant asks that the court gives consideration to exercise its discretion to order the case to be struck out under CPR Rule 3.4, for want of a detailed cause of action and/or for the claim having no realistic prospects of success.
    6. If the court is not minded to make such an order, then when Directions are given, the Defendant asks that there is an order for sequential service of witness evidence (rather than exchange) because it is expected that the Claimant will use its witness statement to provide the sort of detail which should have been disclosed much earlier, and the Defendant should have the opportunity to consider it, prior to serving evidence and witness statements in support of this defence.

    STATEMENT OF TRUTH
    I confirm that the contents of this Defence are true.

    Your thought/feedback is much appreciated.
    • KeithP
    • By KeithP 13th Jun 18, 4:09 PM
    • 9,238 Posts
    • 9,446 Thanks
    KeithP
    Don't forget to do the Acknowledgement of Service sometime this week. No rush, but must be done within 19 days of the date of issue on the Claim Form to give you an extra 14 days to file a Defence.
    .
    • IamEmanresu
    • By IamEmanresu 14th Jun 18, 7:02 AM
    • 3,268 Posts
    • 5,486 Thanks
    IamEmanresu
    Many hands make light work!
    Is that to provide the OP with illumination?
    If you want to win - avoid losing first. Here are a few examples
    1. Failing to Acknowledge or Defend https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.php?t=5760415
    2. Template defences that say nothing https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.php?t=5818671&page=5#86
    3. Forgetting about the Witness Statement
    • Chimichanga
    • By Chimichanga 14th Jun 18, 12:21 PM
    • 29 Posts
    • 3 Thanks
    Chimichanga
    I take it I've missed something (or many things) IamEmanresu?
    • nosferatu1001
    • By nosferatu1001 14th Jun 18, 12:41 PM
    • 3,429 Posts
    • 4,263 Thanks
    nosferatu1001
    LIGHT work
    • Chimichanga
    • By Chimichanga 14th Jun 18, 2:53 PM
    • 29 Posts
    • 3 Thanks
    Chimichanga
    A little slow on the uptake today. The stress is getting to me!
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 14th Jun 18, 3:00 PM
    • 61,573 Posts
    • 74,439 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    It's to encourage that light-bulb moment when posters realise they can win!
    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.

    • Chimichanga
    • By Chimichanga 15th Jun 18, 6:55 AM
    • 29 Posts
    • 3 Thanks
    Chimichanga
    Morning everyone.

    Could someone please advise if the 'defence' above is on the right track.

    Would really appreciate it

    Thanks.
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 15th Jun 18, 11:56 AM
    • 61,573 Posts
    • 74,439 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    I think you need more detail in your defence. Here you told us in your OP, more than you've said in your defence, and that's not right, you need to say it like it was:

    My family and I were away for 6 weeks (28 Nov 2017- 10 Jan 2018) in New Zealand and during that time I received a PCN (£60 early repayment) dated 29th Nov 4 days after the alleged incident (25th Nov) from HX Car Park Management Ltd. Needless to say we didn't see this or the next 'Outstanding Parking Notice' (£100) dated 28 Dec until we returned home on on 10th Jan. I got another letter dated 12th Jan which was a 'Final Demand Notice' (£125).

    At this point I freaked out completely, as you do, checked my diary and saw that I was not even the driver since I was work 40 miles away that day.

    I immediately wrote a letter (dated 19th Jan) telling them that I was not the driver and could provide prof of this if required, gave them a copy of my flight tickets to show we were away and so couldn't respond to their letters and asked them to stop sending me letters of a threatening nature and posted it recorded delivery.
    Originally posted by Chimichanga
    Also no need for your address here, and you can simplify this intro, and put it into the third person:
    I am XXXXXX, the defendant in this matter. I currently reside at XXXXXX. I am the Registered Keeper of the vehicle XXXXX

    1. It is denied that the defendant was the driver of the vehicle on 25/11/2017. The claimant is put to strict proof.
    should be just point #1, split into two, perhaps:

    1. The Defendant admits that he was the registered keeper of the vehicle referred to in the claim, but denies that he was driving.

    1.1. The fact that the Defendant was not the driver was communicated to the Claimant in a letter the Defendant posted by a tracked/signed for method, following receipt of a 'Final Demand' soon after the Defendant had returned from a family holiday in New Zealand for 6 weeks (28 Nov 2017- 10 Jan 2018).
    I would say you do need to cover what you think the contravention is alleged to have been and deny liability or any driver contravention, and mention that the signs there are sparse/not as clear and plentiful as the simple signs in the Parking Eye v Beavis case.
    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.

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

195Posts Today

1,552Users online

Martin's Twitter