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
    • Jillabean
    • By Jillabean 7th Apr 18, 6:29 PM
    • 20Posts
    • 4Thanks
    Jillabean
    Gladstones court case for parking in own residential bay
    • #1
    • 7th Apr 18, 6:29 PM
    Gladstones court case for parking in own residential bay 7th Apr 18 at 6:29 PM
    The defendant received a parking fine nearly 2 years ago for Es parking. The defendant was parked in their own allocated parking bay for their own property, with valid permit displayed in corner driver side window. The pictures taken from the parking inspector blatantly cut out the window the permit was placed. The defendant spoke to the owner of the company who told them they wouldn’t be able to take it any further due to the picture evidence and to send an email appeal and it would be dropped. The defendant did so and around 4 months later started to receive demand letters, which then turned into solicitors. Gladstones are the 3rd solicitors to represent them and the defendant has now recieved a claim form from the court. I have read through some previous threads on here but there is nothing like my case. Could anyone help please.
Page 2
    • Jillabean
    • By Jillabean 8th Apr 18, 1:50 PM
    • 20 Posts
    • 4 Thanks
    Jillabean
    So should I add in about the signage or just leave it out
    Should I add anything more to the above defence
    • bargepole
    • By bargepole 8th Apr 18, 2:02 PM
    • 2,262 Posts
    • 6,572 Thanks
    bargepole
    So should I add in about the signage or just leave it out
    Should I add anything more to the above defence
    Originally posted by Jillabean
    You need to understand that the signage has no relevance whatsoever.

    They could have erected 10-foot high signs, with the terms and conditions painted in dayglo orange, and lit by neon striplights at night.

    None of that gets over the central issue that your lease is the primary contract allowing you to park, without the need to have, or to display a permit, or to pay penalties to a third party for non display.

    The lease can only be varied by a properly executed Deed of Variation, in writing and signed by both parties. Signage does not constitute such a variation.

    End of story.
    Speeding cases fought: 24 (3 of mine, 21 for others). Cases won: 20. Points on licence: 0. Private Parking Court Cases: Won 32. Lost 10.
    • The Deep
    • By The Deep 8th Apr 18, 2:38 PM
    • 9,064 Posts
    • 8,761 Thanks
    The Deep
    Have you seen these?


    http://parking-prankster.blogspot.co.uk/2016/11/residential-parking.html

    https://www.parkingcowboys.co.uk/residential-parking/

    https://bmpa.zendesk.com/hc/en-us/articles/213801109-Parking-Control-Management-Roboclaim-Residential-site

    https://bmpa.zendesk.com/hc/en-us/sections/115000492465-Residential-parking-problems
    You never know how far you can go until you go too far.
    • Jillabean
    • By Jillabean 8th Apr 18, 2:44 PM
    • 20 Posts
    • 4 Thanks
    Jillabean
    Should I put in about the signs or not then
    Is there anything I should add to the above defence
    • Jillabean
    • By Jillabean 8th Apr 18, 2:48 PM
    • 20 Posts
    • 4 Thanks
    Jillabean
    Ok I will focus more on the lease thank you
    Just finding it difficult to put everything into words
    • Jillabean
    • By Jillabean 8th Apr 18, 2:50 PM
    • 20 Posts
    • 4 Thanks
    Jillabean
    I never thought they would have a case
    The pictures clearly show that the part in the window where the permit was has been cropped out
    • beamerguy
    • By beamerguy 8th Apr 18, 3:00 PM
    • 7,178 Posts
    • 9,501 Thanks
    beamerguy
    Jillabean

    Please also listen to Bargepole, he tends to see these
    vermin in court and then spits them out on the floor
    RBS - MNBA - CAPITAL ONE - LLOYDS

    DISGUSTING BEHAVIOUR
    • The Deep
    • By The Deep 8th Apr 18, 3:14 PM
    • 9,064 Posts
    • 8,761 Thanks
    The Deep
    in most of these cases the permit is irrelevant as the lease is what gives you permission to park.

    The lease is a legal document, the permit is a gesture of goodwill.
    You never know how far you can go until you go too far.
    • Jillabean
    • By Jillabean 8th Apr 18, 3:16 PM
    • 20 Posts
    • 4 Thanks
    Jillabean
    Thank you everyone for all your advice so far. I need to submit this tomorrow, any other advice of what to write will be really greatly appreciated.
    • bargepole
    • By bargepole 8th Apr 18, 3:17 PM
    • 2,262 Posts
    • 6,572 Thanks
    bargepole
    Should I put in about the signs or not then
    Is there anything I should add to the above defence
    Originally posted by Jillabean
    Which part of "the signage has no relevance whatsoever" did you not understand?

    If you start talking about signage, you open the door for the other side's advocate, and the Judge, to start making arguments about whether or not the signs were clearly displayed.

    None of that matters.
    Speeding cases fought: 24 (3 of mine, 21 for others). Cases won: 20. Points on licence: 0. Private Parking Court Cases: Won 32. Lost 10.
    • Jillabean
    • By Jillabean 8th Apr 18, 3:21 PM
    • 20 Posts
    • 4 Thanks
    Jillabean
    Which part of "the signage has no relevance whatsoever" did you not understand?

    If you start talking about signage, you open the door for the other side's advocate, and the Judge, to start making arguments about whether or not the signs were clearly displayed.

    None of that matters.
    Originally posted by bargepole

    sorry I didn't see the reply until after, still getting used to this site.
    • Jillabean
    • By Jillabean 8th Apr 18, 3:27 PM
    • 20 Posts
    • 4 Thanks
    Jillabean
    This is what I have so far


    Preliminary
    1. The Particulars of Claim lack specificity and are embarrassing. 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 evidenced allegations in the Particulars.
    2. The Particulars of Claim fail to refer to the material terms of any contract and neither comply with the CPR 16 in respect of statements of case, nor the relevant practice direction in respect of claims formed by contract or conduct. The Defendant further notes the Claimant's failure to engage in pre-action correspondence in accordance with the pre-action protocol and with the express aim of avoiding contested litigation.
    Background
    3. It is admitted that at all material times the Defendant is the registered keeper of vehicle registration mark xxxxxxx which is the subject of these proceedings.
    4. It is admitted that on xxxxx the Defendant's vehicle was parked at xxxxx
    Authority to Park and Primacy of Contract
    5. It is denied that the Defendant were in breach of any parking conditions or were not permitted to park in circumstances where an express permission to park had been granted due to being the leaseholder of xxxxxxxxxxx, whose tenancy agreement permits the parking of vehicle(s) on land in the individual bay. The Defendant avers that there was an absolute entitlement to park deriving from the terms of the lease, which cannot be fettered by any alleged parking terms. The lease terms provide the right to park a vehicle in the relevant allocated bay, without limitation as to type of vehicle, ownership of vehicle, and the user of the vehicle or the requirement to display a parking permit. A copy of the lease will be provided to the Court, together with witness evidence that prior permission to park had been given.
    6. The Defendant avers that the operator signs cannot (i) override the existing rights enjoyed by residents and their visitors and (ii) that parking easements cannot retrospectively and unilaterally be restricted where provided for within the lease. The Defendant will rely upon the judgments on appeal of HHJ Harris QC in Jopson v Homeguard Services Ltd (2016) and of Sir Christopher Slade in K-Sultana Saeed v Plustrade Ltd [2001] EWCA Civ 2011.
    7. Accordingly it is denied that:
    7.1. there was any agreement as between the Defendant or driver of the vehicle and the Claimant
    7.2. there was any obligation (at all) to display a permit; although in fact there was a valid permit on clear display, which the defendant believes has been purposely cropped out of the photographs issued by the claimant.
    7.3. the Claimant has suffered loss or damage or that there is a lawful basis to pursue a claim for loss.
    Alternative Defence - Failure to set out clearly parking terms.
    8. It is denied that the Claimant has standing to bring any claim in the absence of a contract that expressly permits the Claimant to do so, in addition to merely undertaking parking management. The Claimant has provided no proof of any such entitlement.
    9. It is denied that the Claimant has any entitlement to the sums sought.
    10. It is admitted that interest may be applicable, subject to the discretion of the Court on any sum (if awarded), but it is denied that interest is applicable on the total sums claimed by the Claimant.
    Last edited by Jillabean; 08-04-2018 at 7:15 PM.
    • Guys Dad
    • By Guys Dad 8th Apr 18, 4:06 PM
    • 10,400 Posts
    • 9,647 Thanks
    Guys Dad
    I would further put your permit where it was and take a photo replicating the warden's photo. Then take a series walking round the car clearly showing that from different viewpoints, the permit is perfectly visible. Include them in your evidence pack.
    • The Deep
    • By The Deep 8th Apr 18, 4:25 PM
    • 9,064 Posts
    • 8,761 Thanks
    The Deep
    It may be worthwhile, when you have won, asking the judge for unreasonable behaviour costs. Presumably you informed the PPC that you had a leasehold right to park there, but they took you to court anyway.

    https://www.bing.com/search?q=cpr+27.14+2+g&form=EDNTHT&mkt=en-gb&httpsmsn=1&refig=5bd1bdfa8f694f31b48ef694ea202f 21&PC=ACTS&sp=7&ghc=1&qs=SC&pq=cpr27.14&sk=SC6&sc= 8-8&cvid=5bd1bdfa8f694f31b48ef694ea202f21&cc=GB&setl ang=en-GB

    Also investigate whether they have breached you rights under the Data Protection Act. It is time these residential PCNs were firmly stamped on.

    Another way to inconvenience them is to issue a letter before claim.

    https://www.rocketlawyer.co.uk/documents-and-forms/letter-before-action.rlm?msclkid=5a7c2b559f261e4ec4e7719faba752a b&utm_source=bing&utm_medium=cpc&utm_campaign=BSN% 20-%20Letter%20before%20action&utm_term=free%20letter %20before%20action&utm_content=Exact%20-%20Letter%20before%20action
    Last edited by The Deep; 08-04-2018 at 4:27 PM.
    You never know how far you can go until you go too far.
    • Jillabean
    • By Jillabean 8th Apr 18, 5:00 PM
    • 20 Posts
    • 4 Thanks
    Jillabean
    I have printed pictures showing the one which the parking inspector took and then one taken by me at the exact same point showing the permit
    The joke of it is the parking inspector would have had to be looking directly at the permit to have taken the picture in the first place
    So corrupt
    • Redx
    • By Redx 8th Apr 18, 5:23 PM
    • 17,818 Posts
    • 22,465 Thanks
    Redx
    bear in mind that your evidence for the court goes in later in the process

    for the moment you are drafting your defence as a document that tells the initial judge that reads it if there is a case to answer, so legal arguments that a legally trained judge will decide upon, based on laws and legal precedents etc

    evidence and witness statements and copies of the lease etc are submitted to your local court a few weeks before the hearing

    and as stated already , LISTEN to what poeople like bargepole and johnnersh are telling you , we understand your frustration at what the parking chimp did, but if your lease gives you primacy of contract to park and says nothing about permits , use the heavy hitting ammo to blast your opponent, dont get bogged down in the nitty gritty side issues and corruption just yet , save that for your WS later

    we already know its a corrupt system, so do the MP,s that passed the PRIVATE PARKING BILL second reading unanimously on 02 feb 2018
    Last edited by Redx; 08-04-2018 at 5:27 PM. Reason: spelling
    Newbies !!
    Private Parking ticket? check the 2 sticky threads by coupon-mad and crabman in the Parking Tickets, Fines & Parking Board forum for the latest advice or maybe try pepipoo or C.A.G. or legal beagles forums if you need legal advice as well because this parking forum is not about debt collectors or legal matters per se
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 8th Apr 18, 6:36 PM
    • 56,275 Posts
    • 69,906 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    I have printed pictures showing the one which the parking inspector took and then one taken by me at the exact same point showing the permit.
    The joke of it is the parking inspector would have had to be looking directly at the permit to have taken the picture in the first place.
    So corrupt
    Originally posted by Jillabean
    He's not an inspector or a warden.

    Remove the VRN from the above draft, too much information!

    Show us the 'cropped' photo they took.

    BTW, you do not submit your photos with the defence. Your photos/evidence comes later.

    I would also send a SAR* to this Claimant, after you've submitted your defence, requiring ALL photos taken of this vehicle on that day and all data held about you and the vehicle/VRN.

    Personally I would in fact have the secondary argument about signage, as Johnersh suggests in his template. It is a secondary argument to the primary defence and seems a huge mistake not to even mention the signs so they are not even looked at, if the Judge decides you didn't have primacy of contract. You then have zero safety net and I feel uncomfortable with that.

    So, bargepole and I will have to agree to disagree on this specific aspect of defences, but I bow to the fact he attends court hearings and I don't.



    *Google it.
    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.

    • bargepole
    • By bargepole 8th Apr 18, 7:55 PM
    • 2,262 Posts
    • 6,572 Thanks
    bargepole

    Personally I would in fact have the secondary argument about signage, as Johnersh suggests in his template. It is a secondary argument to the primary defence and seems a huge mistake not to even mention the signs so they are not even looked at, if the Judge decides you didn't have primacy of contract. You then have zero safety net and I feel uncomfortable with that.

    So, bargepole and I will have to agree to disagree on this specific aspect of defences, but I bow to the fact he attends court hearings and I don't.
    Originally posted by Coupon-mad
    If the OP is unlucky enough to get a Judge who is so clueless that he/she doesn't recognise that the lease terms override any purported terms conveyed by the signage, then it's vanishingly unlikely that they would consider the signs to be incapable of forming a contract, especially as the OP would be familiar with the wording on a daily basis.

    If you read any of the persuasive Judgments on this aspect - Jopson v Homeguard, PACE v Noor, Link v Parkinson et al, the clarity, position and wording of the respective signs is not considered. The whole case turns on the lease contract, and whether the signs are capable of varying it.
    Speeding cases fought: 24 (3 of mine, 21 for others). Cases won: 20. Points on licence: 0. Private Parking Court Cases: Won 32. Lost 10.
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 8th Apr 18, 7:59 PM
    • 56,275 Posts
    • 69,906 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    I agree, but worry about the lack of safety net, as we know such Judges exist.
    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.

    • Guys Dad
    • By Guys Dad 8th Apr 18, 9:44 PM
    • 10,400 Posts
    • 9,647 Thanks
    Guys Dad
    I have printed pictures showing the one which the parking inspector took and then one taken by me at the exact same point showing the permit
    The joke of it is the parking inspector would have had to be looking directly at the permit to have taken the picture in the first place
    So corrupt
    Originally posted by Jillabean

    The way you have written that actually goes against your defence!

    I said to replicate the warden's photo that hides your permit, to match his, and then some from different angles showing the permit. If you take one from the same place that shows the permit, and his photo didn't, then that backs up the PPC claim.

    Can you see that???
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

129Posts Today

1,821Users online

Martin's Twitter