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
    • StubbornGoat
    • By StubbornGoat 13th Feb 19, 10:16 PM
    • 122Posts
    • 115Thanks
    StubbornGoat
    One Parking Solution PCN + Gladstones - Parked for 8mins, LBC for £208!
    • #1
    • 13th Feb 19, 10:16 PM
    One Parking Solution PCN + Gladstones - Parked for 8mins, LBC for £208! 13th Feb 19 at 10:16 PM
    Last month, I received a letter from Gladstones demanding £208 for an unpaid PCN. Having no knowledge whatsoever of this PCN, I emailed them the following letter:

    ================================================== =========================

    To whom it may concern,

    I have received your Letter Before Claim and would like to respond.

    Your letter (which is the first I have ever heard of the charge) contains insufficient detail of the claim and fails to provide the photographic evidence. It does not even say what the cause of action is. Nor does it contain any mention of what evidence your client intends to rely on, or enclose copies of such evidence.

    Your client must know that on 01 October 2017 a new protocol is applicable to debt claims. Since proceedings have not yet been issued, the new protocol clearly applies and must be complied with.

    Your letter clearly breaches both the requirements of the previously applicable Practice Direction - Pre-Action Conduct (paragraphs 6(a) and 6(c)) and the new Pre-Action Protocol for Debt Claims (paragraphs 3.1(a)-(d), 5.1 and 5.2. Please treat this letter as a formal request for all of the documents / information that the protocol now requires your client to provide. Your client must not issue proceedings without complying with that protocol. I reserve the right to draw any failure of the Claimant to comply with the protocol to the attention of the court and to ask the court to stay the claim and order your client to comply with its pre-action obligations, and when costs come to be considered.

    Nobody, including your client, is immune from the requirements and obligations of the Practice Direction. Therefore I require your client to comply with its obligations by sending me the following information/documents:

    1. An explanation of the cause of action
    2. Whether they are pursuing me as driver or keeper
    3. Whether they are relying on the provisions of Schedule 4 of POFA 2012
    4. What the details of the claim are (where it is claimed the car was parked, for how long, how the monies being claimed arose and have been calculated, what contractual breach (if any) is being claimed)
    5. A copy of the contract with the landowner under which they assert authority to bring the claim
    6. A copy of any alleged contract with the driver

    I am clearly entitled to this information under paragraphs 6(a) and 6(c) of the Practice Direction. I also need it in order to comply with my own obligations under paragraph 6(b).

    If your client does not provide me with this information then I put you on notice that I will be relying on the cases of Webb Resolutions Ltd v Waller Needham & Green [2012] EWHC 3529 (Ch), Daejan Investments Limited v The Park West Club Limited (Part 20), Buxton Associates [2003] EWHC 2872, Charles Church Developments Ltd v Stent Foundations Limited & Peter Dann Limited [2007] EWHC 855 in asking the court to impose sanctions on your client and to order a stay of the proceedings, pursuant to paragraphs 13 ,15(b) and (c) and 16. I will draw to the court the fact that I have expressly requested this information, yet your client has yet to provide it.

    Until your client has complied with its obligations and provided this information, I am unable to respond properly to the alleged claim and to consider my position in relation to it, and it is entirely premature (and a waste of costs and court time) for your client to issue proceedings. Should your client do so, then I will seek an immediate stay pursuant to paragraph 15(b) of the Practice Direction and an order that this information is provided.

    Regards,


    ================================================== =========================

    They have now responded with the following:

    ================================================== =========================

    Thank you for your correspondence, our reply to which is set out below.

    We believe our Letter Before Complaint is compliant with the most up to date version of the Pre-Action Protocol (Ďthe Protocolí) however and without concession, we would be grateful for clarification as to your position with respect to non-compliance with the same.

    It is noted that you have not provided an account of your version of events as is required by the Protocol.

    Please find below our responses to your numbered questions below;

    1. The motorist entered into a contract to park on the land pursuant to the signs with our Client. The contract allowed the motorist to park in accordance with the signs or, for a charge of £100, allowed the motorist the privilege to park outside of the conditions as stated on the signs. As the driver on the day of the charge parked otherwise than in accordance with the signs, they accepted a charge of £100. Payment of the charge has not been forthcoming within the relevant timeframe and as such, the contract has now been breached and further costs incurred as a result of the breach in having to facilitate the recovery of the debt. Our Clientís Accredited Trade Association also states that an additional fee may be applied upon the matter being referred for enforcement.

    2. Your details were provided as the registered keeper of VRN XXXXXXX when a request was made to the DVLA. On the enclosed correpsondence you were provided with the opportunity to nominate a driver. As we are yet to receive any nomination; our Client is pursuing as the keeper. Our client accepts that it may not have been you driving the vehicle when the parking charge was issued however as you have failed to correctly nominate who was driving (full name and address) our client will continue to pursue you pursuant to Schedule 4 (4)(1) of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 ('the Act') which states:

    'The creditor has the right to recover any unpaid parking charges from the keeper of the vehicle.'

    If you nominate the driver by providing us with their full name and address prior to a claim being issued we will forward this to our client.

    3. Our Client has complied with the provisions under POFA 2012.

    4. Please see enclosed evidence.

    5. Our clientís position is that the contract entered into is between itself and the motorist to which it acts as the Principal. Any other contract is therefore superfluous when considering liability. In the event a Court order specifies that a document to this effect must be provided, the Claimant will comply.

    6. Please see enclosed evidence, a sign can be found in the photographs.

    In the event payment isnít made in the next 30 days further legal action will be taken.

    Yours sincerely,

    Gladstones Solicitors


    ================================================== =========================

    In the evidence they enclose, it does indeed show my wife unknowingly (due to poor signage) parking the car in a pay and display space, getting out, walking away from car, returning with a coffee, getting in the car and driving off.

    The time stamps on the photos they have sent us show she parked up at 3:06pm and having jumped out to grab a coffee, returned to the car at 3:14pm

    One Parking Solution Ltd sent the PCN to an old address, but Gladstones have sent a new letter to current address demanding £208 as I failed to respond to original letter (I never received).


    My thoughts:

    - There are photos which show I clearly am NOT the one driving the car
    - Their photo timestamps show the car was parked for approx EIGHT minutes, which makes £208 charge ridiculous.
    - The signage is also ridiculous (so high up, tiny text, no mention of £100 fine) see images below

    https://i.postimg.cc/Dz6y0t2g/image1.png
    https://i.postimg.cc/zBfDg0v1/image2.png
    https://i.postimg.cc/KzsGrB33/image6.png




    What options do I have?

    Any help will be appreciated.

    Many thanks

    SG
Page 4
    • Woppyman72
    • By Woppyman72 12th May 19, 2:28 PM
    • 63 Posts
    • 171 Thanks
    Woppyman72
    No, I wish Iíd had that idea!
    But it illustrates nicely how badly placed they are (I can make the photos available if helpful to this case...might need to blur faces as two 13 year olds smoking!).

    Iíve also noted that two of the directors of OPS were prosecuted by the Magistrates Court in Feb 2017 for running a limited company (in the security business) whilst it was declared insolvent.

    These companies are not defending the rights of landowners at all and as in case above are often not even operating within the boundary of the legal system. Something Socrates might want to ponder on.
    • StubbornGoat
    • By StubbornGoat 29th May 19, 3:26 PM
    • 122 Posts
    • 115 Thanks
    StubbornGoat
    Ok so unfortunately the FOI request came back negative. They said:

    Freedom of Information Request

    Thank you for your e-mail of 01 May requesting information under the terms of the
    Freedom of Information Act 2000 (FOIA).

    You asked:

    Please show me the dates and details (with copy documents and emails,
    suitably redacted of names) for any DVLA Audits (failed or passed) and
    all communications with One Parking Solutions or the BPA, relating to
    the signs at the Broadwater site, postcode BN14 9BY, between 1.1.17 to
    date.


    The information you have requested is not held. The DVLA does not hold information
    in relation to specific car parks.

    It is within the Accredited Trade Association’s (ATA’s) remit to consider and audit
    signage in place at specific sites.

    The information which follows concerns the procedures for making any complaint
    you might have about the reply. Please quote the reference number of this letter in
    any future communications about it.

    Yours sincerely

    Robert Toft
    Head of Data Protection Policy & Freedom of Information Team


    I can't seem to find the details of the ATA to request a FOI from them? hmm

    Thoughts?

    Thank you
    SG
    • KeithP
    • By KeithP 29th May 19, 3:39 PM
    • 17,898 Posts
    • 21,807 Thanks
    KeithP
    I can't seem to find the details of the ATA to request a FOI from them?
    Originally posted by StubbornGoat
    The ATA are The British Parking Association.

    Only public bodies have to respond to a Freedom of Information request.

    The BPA is not such a body.
    .
    • StubbornGoat
    • By StubbornGoat 7th Jun 19, 12:21 PM
    • 122 Posts
    • 115 Thanks
    StubbornGoat
    Received a reply from GS...

    Good afternoon,

    You emailed on on 30 April 2019, requesting for us to hold the case as you were seeking debt advise.

    It is been over 30 days, and we have not received a response from you.

    If no payment or substantive response is made within 14 days from the date of this email, our Client may request for us to issue proceedings without any further notice.

    Yours Sincerely


    Is it worth trying to offer a "substantive response"? They don't seem to be bothered with anything I have said up to now.

    Thanks for the help

    SG
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 7th Jun 19, 11:14 PM
    • 76,543 Posts
    • 89,883 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    Wind them up with a reiteration of your case, and what you told them before, and ask if they read any of your previous communications or are they just in robo-claim mode?
    PRIVATE 'PCN'? DON'T PAY BUT DON'T IGNORE IT UNLESS IN SCOTLAND OR NI
    TWO Clicks needed Look up, top of the page:
    Main site>>Forums>Household & Travel>Motoring>Parking Tickets Fines & Parking - read the NEWBIES THREAD
    • Woppyman72
    • By Woppyman72 14th Jun 19, 6:57 PM
    • 63 Posts
    • 171 Thanks
    Woppyman72
    Not sure how you are getting on, but as I have an in-flight POPLA claim at the same site I thought I would share this with you. Might give you some added ammunition if this gets taken further.

    I have cheekily used a site map Gladstones sent you to prove their claim, that helps my defence. Please feel free to use any of my material to help yours in return

    https://www.dropbox.com/s/fm06bsqe6fsmqux/POPLA%20Appeal%20xxx.pdf?dl=0
    • beamerguy
    • By beamerguy 14th Jun 19, 7:31 PM
    • 12,540 Posts
    • 17,475 Thanks
    beamerguy
    Received a reply from GS...

    Good afternoon,

    You emailed on on 30 April 2019, requesting for us to hold the case as you were seeking debt advise.

    It is been over 30 days, and we have not received a response from you.

    If no payment or substantive response is made within 14 days from the date of this email, our Client may request for us to issue proceedings without any further notice.

    Yours Sincerely


    Is it worth trying to offer a "substantive response"? They don't seem to be bothered with anything I have said up to now.

    Thanks for the help

    SG
    Originally posted by StubbornGoat
    HAHA, you have received a response FROM the most incompetent legal operating in the UK

    "If no payment or substantive response is made within 14 days"

    OK the Gladstones boys, send me a real Letter before Claim giving me 30 days, not 14 days and don't forget to include proof of your claim and costs. AND ... if you add a fake amount to any claim, the court will be informed of your ABUSE OF PROCESS

    THAT IS THE bottom line Gladstones, maybe see one your "green horns" in court

    Tell you what StubbornGoat, Gladstones are not a legal you would want to employ ...... so incompetent
    RBS - MNBA - CAPITAL ONE - LLOYDS

    DISGUSTING BEHAVIOUR
    • Woppyman72
    • By Woppyman72 14th Jun 19, 8:44 PM
    • 63 Posts
    • 171 Thanks
    Woppyman72
    i can’t imagine One Parking Solution being too pleased when they see my POPLA appeal based on a site map supplied by Gladstones. Like you say incompetent.
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 14th Jun 19, 10:38 PM
    • 76,543 Posts
    • 89,883 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    Nice POPLA appeal link which should help this OP at WS & evidence stage.

    I love this point and the Google map showing Broadwater St East is another road!:
    PCN details do not match the same site. PCN says the charge relates to Broadwater Street West, the CCTV image is displaying Broadwater Street East, which is a distinctly separate road.
    I know it well, used to work in that area.

    PRIVATE 'PCN'? DON'T PAY BUT DON'T IGNORE IT UNLESS IN SCOTLAND OR NI
    TWO Clicks needed Look up, top of the page:
    Main site>>Forums>Household & Travel>Motoring>Parking Tickets Fines & Parking - read the NEWBIES THREAD
    • StubbornGoat
    • By StubbornGoat 29th Aug 19, 9:00 AM
    • 122 Posts
    • 115 Thanks
    StubbornGoat
    Not sure how you are getting on, but as I have an in-flight POPLA claim at the same site I thought I would share this with you. Might give you some added ammunition if this gets taken further.

    I have cheekily used a site map Gladstones sent you to prove their claim, that helps my defence. Please feel free to use any of my material to help yours in return

    https://www.dropbox.com/s/fm06bsqe6fsmqux/POPLA%20Appeal%20xxx.pdf?dl=0
    Originally posted by Woppyman72
    Hi Woppy,

    Just coming back to this. Glad you're getting use out of what they sent me. How are you getting with your case?

    FYI Your Dropbox link doesn't work?

    SG
    • StubbornGoat
    • By StubbornGoat 29th Aug 19, 9:07 AM
    • 122 Posts
    • 115 Thanks
    StubbornGoat
    And here's me thinking they did a runner as they knew they had no case

    I've just received a reply from GS regarding this PCN...

    Thank you for your correspondence.

    We are not instructed to discuss the site in general only the charge, we are therefore unable to comment as to why changes to the site have been made.

    It is not a requirement for our Client to disclose their DVLA audits, this is not relevant to the charge.

    We refer to to 6.4 of the BPA Code of Practice which states the BPA are not there to settle disputes between a motorist and the parking operator regarding their right on the land. We confirm our Client monitors and complies with the Code of Practice at all times.

    With regard to the signs, the grace period previously discussed permits motorists to exit their vehicle and consider the terms on the sign within the same period. You parked your vehicle at the site and left with the opportunity to consider the signs, therefore our client concluded that you had agreed to the terms and were then bound by them pursuant to your performance.

    We believe we have made our Client's position clear, we will now hold the file for 60 days to allow for payment of £160 to be made. In the absence of payment after this time we may be instructed to issue proceedings without further notice.

    Kind Regards


    I feel this is one last punt to try and get me to pay... but they must know they have no chance whatsoever seeing as they clearly have CCTV proving I wasn't driving!

    Anyway, do you think I should just ignore their email or just re-iterate my points again -

    There's a big part of me that want's to go to court again, eh Coupon Mad? Let's go see the big bloke from the OPS
    • nosferatu1001
    • By nosferatu1001 29th Aug 19, 1:43 PM
    • 5,679 Posts
    • 7,255 Thanks
    nosferatu1001
    I would respond back, refuting their assertion that you parked, you drove etc.
    If they continue to make such claims, you require them to demonstrate proof of this without delay - as part of the overriding objectives they are obliged to do so.
    • StubbornGoat
    • By StubbornGoat 2nd Sep 19, 7:54 AM
    • 122 Posts
    • 115 Thanks
    StubbornGoat
    How does this sound? I'm not sure whether to leave in or take out the part about costs...

    Dear X,

    You imply that it was me that was driving. However as you can tell from the CCTV images, it is clearly not me. I am a man. The person in the images is a woman. I may be the registered keeper of the vehicle, but I was not the driver.

    Also, the grace period cannot start from when the car first enters the road as the terms are on the back of a give way sign and therefore the driver has not yet been given any opportunity to be made aware of those terms. Not only that but by your own words you concede that the sign is "not wholly readable" (even when standing closer to the sign and standing outside the car), so how is the grace period supposed to start whilst the driver is sat low down and in a moving car?

    I'm afraid my position on this has not and will not change.

    To avoid any ambushing of costs, should your client wish to proceed with court, I will be claiming all costs including and not limited to:

    - Loss of earnings/leave, incurred through attendance at Court
    - Return mileage from home address to Court
    - Parking near Court
    - All stationary and postage for Printing of letters, Statement of Defence and Witness Statement.
    - Time spent on Reading Documents
    - Time spent on Writing and Drafting documents
    - Time spent in all correspondence regarding this PCN

    This will all be done officially through the right channels. I just want to give your client the opportunity to retract their claim.

    Yours Faithfully.
    • waamo
    • By waamo 2nd Sep 19, 8:07 AM
    • 7,887 Posts
    • 10,758 Thanks
    waamo
    I would leave it in about costs. They can't claim they've been ambushed if it's brought up in court then.
    This space for hire.
    • StubbornGoat
    • By StubbornGoat 2nd Sep 19, 8:19 AM
    • 122 Posts
    • 115 Thanks
    StubbornGoat
    I would leave it in about costs. They can't claim they've been ambushed if it's brought up in court then.
    Originally posted by waamo
    That was my thinking too.
    • Le_Kirk
    • By Le_Kirk 2nd Sep 19, 8:58 AM
    • 6,614 Posts
    • 6,655 Thanks
    Le_Kirk
    Putting on my pedantic grammarian hat, correct the following: -
    Not only that but by your own words you concede that the sign is "not wholly readable" (even when standing closer to the sign and standing outside the car), so how is the grace period supposed to start whilst the driver is sat low down and in a moving car?
    to: -
    Not only that but by your own words you concede that the sign is "not wholly readable" (even when standing closer to the sign and standing outside the car), so how is the grace period supposed to start whilst the driver is sat sitting low down and in a moving car?
    • Fruitcake
    • By Fruitcake 2nd Sep 19, 10:48 AM
    • 40,617 Posts
    • 90,183 Thanks
    Fruitcake
    From Gladrags,

    With regard to the signs, the grace period previously discussed permits motorists to exit their vehicle and consider the terms on the sign within the same period.


    From you,

    Also, the grace period cannot start from when the car first enters the road ...


    I would change this to something like,

    You have freely admitted that the relevant grace period starts from when the driver exits the vehicle, not when the vehicle enters the car park, yet your claim is based on the duration that the car was in the car park, not from when you now say the grace period begins ...

    I'm afraid mMy position on this has not and will not change.
    Last edited by Fruitcake; 02-09-2019 at 10:57 AM.
    I married my cousin. I had to...
    I don't have a sister.

    All my screwdrivers are cordless.
    "You're Safety Is My Primary Concern Dear" - Laks
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 2nd Sep 19, 10:52 AM
    • 76,543 Posts
    • 89,883 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    Good for you, Stubborn Goat, again!

    Give them a ball park figure or attach a draft costs schedule which is 'subject to some fluctuation' depending upon their response and the hours you need to spend pre-hearing.
    PRIVATE 'PCN'? DON'T PAY BUT DON'T IGNORE IT UNLESS IN SCOTLAND OR NI
    TWO Clicks needed Look up, top of the page:
    Main site>>Forums>Household & Travel>Motoring>Parking Tickets Fines & Parking - read the NEWBIES THREAD
    • Fruitcake
    • By Fruitcake 2nd Sep 19, 11:00 AM
    • 40,617 Posts
    • 90,183 Thanks
    Fruitcake
    Good for you, Stubborn Goat, again!

    Give them a ball park figure or attach a draft costs schedule which is 'subject to some fluctuation' depending upon their response and the hours you need to spend pre-hearing.
    Originally posted by Coupon-mad
    Additional miscellaneous costs as required to continue my defence, including Parking on the court date perhaps?
    I married my cousin. I had to...
    I don't have a sister.

    All my screwdrivers are cordless.
    "You're Safety Is My Primary Concern Dear" - Laks
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 2nd Sep 19, 11:05 AM
    • 76,543 Posts
    • 89,883 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    And Coupon-mad's attendance expenses if he really wants to push it! Doubt we'd get it but the Judge at Worthing was absolutely on the ball when SG & I went to his last case.
    PRIVATE 'PCN'? DON'T PAY BUT DON'T IGNORE IT UNLESS IN SCOTLAND OR NI
    TWO Clicks needed Look up, top of the page:
    Main site>>Forums>Household & Travel>Motoring>Parking Tickets Fines & Parking - read the NEWBIES THREAD
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

2,453Posts Today

7,424Users online

Martin's Twitter