Not from my personal experience.

Had claims form CEL and DEAL that went to a CMO and they were ordered to put up or shut up.

Other thread on here have said the same thing.

It does seem to depend on the ocurt, some ask for a N244 and the money, some just add the letter to the case file so it doesnt get read until the judge goes through things the day before the hearing and then it often gets raised by the judge as a preamble to the hearing.

the OP certainly wont lose out by doing this.

Disagree...you cant add to a defence already submitted...and you wont be submitting any skeletons until the day of the trial.

 

Claim is going to allocation there wont be any CMCs

 

You could add it to your witness statement...but Orders are normally only acted on by way of an application N244...letters are disregarded.

Again, the POFA makes it clear who has liability.

the contract is with the DRIVER and it is for the aprking co to show who that is.

If certain conditions are met then they may claim off the keeper if they dont know who the driver is.

this has nothing to do with your insurance as anyone in the world can drive your car with your permission on third party insurance and some can drive it without permission and without insurance ( Crown Immunity for example so coppers and squaddies being the biggest groups covered by this under the right circumstances)

Thanks EB! I'm well aware that vehicles can be driven by persons other than those stated on the insurance policy, and this will be a point I'll raise, should it be necessary. I'm probably getting a bit ahead of myself here though.

You want to keep well away from slippery slope arguments, you stick to the law as it applies in this case and that is the POFA.

No keeper liability then they have to prove YOU were driving,

not that it probably was you because...

. Courts like evidence and they are obliged to provide some to support their claim.

it is in your interests to provide evidence that you dont owe them money but stick to things that are more solid such as the signage being garbage.

Judges wont have read the POFA so you have to guide them through it but it is always better to have something they do know about and that is a contract or at least a lack of one.

Thank you EB! Appreciated as always.

Hi.

Sorry to jump in.

I’m in this exact situation.

What’s the latest on your case.

Thank you

Start a new thread

Of your own please

Quick update on this.

Hearing is set for two weeks time, give or take.

The court ordered that witness statements should be exchanged mid-August.

Hearing fee was to be paid end of August.

I sent my WS off to the court and claimant, but am still waiting on the claimant's WS

- they're over 4 weeks late.

I emailed the court recently to enquire whether the claimant's WS had been filed and whether they've paid the hearing fee.

The answer to both was NO.

Any thoughts?

In the meantime,

I know of a case which originated from the same date and location, which was dismissed at a different court a few weeks ago.

The circumstances were different, in that the defendant admitted to being the driver (leased vehicle), and had also parked on a pavement, just a foot from one of the signs (claimant tried to take the high moral ground over parking on the pavement).

The judge dismissed it based mainly on the inadequate signage, and the road appearing to be a public highway.

I probably ought to introduce this within a supplemental WS - thoughts?

Looks like no show Sham....

Andy

then they cant continue and you should write to the court and ask for the case to be formally dismissed and for your costs due to the claimants unreasonable behaviour.

Your costs would be 5 hrs research and preparation time @£19ph and whatever your postage and stationery costs were.

As for the other case, you can quote this as being persuasive, the claim ref, court dtae and defendants name plus the precis you have given will be enough.

Chances are you wont ever have to need it as it look like they have bailed out to save themselves £25 fee and £50 for hring a proper solicitor for the hour

You may well not get the former but make a point of remimding the court that Gladdys do this all the time and it is an abuse of process and you might get lucky

Thanks Both!

I'll leave it until Monday and then phone the court to see if anything has changed. Will write to them after that.

FWIW - this bunch don't use solicitors for the hearing - they generally send an employee of the company, or the MD does it.

If you live near to them they do. get it shifted to Croydon and the train fare will bankrupt them

Just another update...

The claim has been struck out due to non-payment of the hearing fee. They obviously didn't fancy it. Happy days!

Thanks for your help and guidance with this - particularly EB and AO. It's been an enlightening journey, from not knowing anything about the subject, to knowing decent a amount.

I'll post my WS up later, so maybe some others can benefit from some of the arguments put forward.

Thanks again!

Sham

P.S. Should I now also submit a request for costs?

It is a numbers game for them,

they tried to play poker and you didnt fold.

their bluff was called so they dont win.

If they had played along for longer then they could have suffered a bigger loss by having to pay your expenses so they too a financial decision to just look for another game

Well done, Sham.

HB

Excellent thread title updated

Andy

Just emailed my costs request in to the court. Hope they'll accept it like that.

What's the score with possibly going after Millennium for breach of DPA? Is it worth doing?

Doubt you will get any costs....even though the claim is not allocated its obvious it is SCT...and therefore costs are not applicable.

There is no such thing as a trackless claim

great result though, another PPC tolchocked.

Doubt you will get any costs....even though the claim is not allocated its obvious it is SCT...and there for costs are not applicable.

 

There is no such thing as a trackless claim

Yes, it was small claims Andy - but also stated on the Notice of Allocation that failure by the claimant to pay the hearing fee by [date] would result in striking out and that they would be liable for costs incurred by the defendant. Let's see though.

A further development - today I received not one but two identical WSs from the Claimant, in the name of two different employees. Looks like they haven't given up as first thought. It's five days until the hearing - and only six weeks late!

What also landed on my doormat today was the order from the court, advising the strike out. It does mention that a party can apply to reinstate the case upon payment of the hearing fee, or apply to have the order set aside etc. What are the chances of that happening at this late stage, and considering how overdue they are with both WS and fee?

TBH as they dropped the matter so early on in the proceedings you will get nowhere with a request for costs.

What you can do is make a complaint to the Solicitors Regulation Authority about the conduct of Gladstones and make it clear that you believe that they have a long track record of encouraging and submitting baseless claims as part of a no win no fee arrangement with their IPC members and as such are severely compromising their duties to the court by furthering the interests of another business they own rather than their clients interests as solicitors.

It wont get them barred but if the SRA got enough complaints (they have had plenty and that is why the IPC had a change in their directors responsibilities a short while back) they might actually take action when Gladdys are seen to be even slightly in the wrong on a claim that goes all the way

Thanks EB. What are your thoughts on my post above yours? Did you see it?

OK, you should attend and take with you what you have and when you get there you see the Clerk to the Court and ask about the hearing and if it has been canceleld you ask to be allowed to speak to the judge as you werent notified of this by Gladstones and you wish to make a full costs recovery claim under CPR 27.14.2(g) for their unreasonable conduct. You them magic a schedule of your losses/expenses and ask fr them. Now you can claim travel, loss of income if applicable, postage and printing and 5 hours of LiP research and preparationd at £19.50 per hour. If you dotn ahev this down on a nice sheet of paper you wont get it.

If by some miracle they send someoen along to prosecute their claim challenge the credentials of that person under the Rights of Audience regs as they must be a solicitor or an employee of either MPS or Gladdys. What usually happens is a local law firm sends a paralegal along because that is the cheapest optiona nd Gladdys will ony pay £50 tops and a paralegal isnt allowed to be heard. Copy the relevant legislation and take it with you in case they try telling lies ( sorry, apply an incorrect understanding)

Thanks EB! The main point I was making, was that the claim has officially been struck out - confirmation from the court was delivered this morning. It states "therefore your attendance is not required".

The strike out was only done yesterday, after I emailed (again) and queried non-payment and no WS from the claimant. As if by magic, their WS (two of) arrives this morning, but they'd probably sent it without knowing about the strike out. They'll probably have received notification in the post this morning and will either have to suck it up or apply for reinstatement.

With five days to go until the hearing - bearing in mind their lateness (6 weeks late on WS - 3 weeks late on fee (if they do pay it)), can you see any way back for them at this stage? I know you can't specifically answer that, but what's your hunch?

As far as I'm concerned, the court have said my attendance is not required now, so I feel I ought to follow that advice until told otherwise. Thoughts?

MPS use in house staff for the hearings. They're obviously unsure which one they're sending, so sent two identical witness statements.

I dont see them having a hope in hell of getting anything more than a severe earwigging if they do show up BUT I would still turn up and explain that they look like the are continuing after they ahve been told to get lost so you want your costs for their unreasonable behaviour.

The last thing you want is an error to give them a judgement in their favour because when the court gets things wrong they say it is tough and you have to start again.

So court gives you wrong date? tough.

Court sends out wrong forms?

you are told you have filled them in wrong.

Court loses paperwork?

you should ahve known and sent them another copy by telepathy.

Plan for all eventualities.

Thanks EB - understood! I'll keep my ear to the ground in the meantime, but will take a spin down there on the day if need be.