Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Hi, In my last post I mentioned I had received an email from SS who were asking me to hand over the keys to my mother’s flat so they could pass them to the Law firm who have been appointed court of protection to access, secure and insure my mother’s property.  Feeling this, all quickly getting out of my hands I emailed ss requesting proof of this. I HAVEN’T HEARD BACK FROM SS.  Yesterday, I received an email (with attached court of protection order) from the Law Firm confirming this was correct (please see below a copy of this).  After reading the court of protection order I do have some concerns about it:   (a)   I only found out yesterday, the Law firm had been appointed by the court back in January.  Up until now, I have not received any notification regarding this.  (b)   Section 2   - States I am estranged from my mother.  This is NOT CORRECT    The only reason I stepped back from my mother was to protect myself from the guy (groomer) who had befriended her & was very aggressive towards me & because of my mother’s dementia she had become aggressive also.  I constantly tried to warned SS about this guy's manipulative behaviour towards my mother and his increasing aggressiveness towards me (as mentioned in previous posts).  Each time I was ignored.  Instead, SS encouraged his involvement with my mother – including him in her care plans and mental health assessments.   I was literally pushed out because I feared him and my mother’s increasing aggression towards me. Up until I stepped back, I had always looked after my mother and since her admission to the care home, I visit regularly.   .(c)    Sections -  4, 5 and 7  I am struggling to understand these as I don’t have a legal background.  I was wondering if there is anyone who might be able to explain what they mean.  It’s been a horrendous situation where I had to walk away from my mother at her most vulnerable because of; ss (not helping), scammer and groomer. I have no legal background, nor experience in highly manipulative people or an understanding of how the SS system operates, finding myself isolated, scared and powerless to the point I haven’t collected my personal belongings and items for my mother’s room in the care home.  Sadly, the court has only had heard one version of this story SS’s, and based their decision on that. My mother’s situation and the experience I have gone through could happen to anyone who has a vulnerable parent.    If anyone any thoughts on this much appreciated.  Thank you. ______________________________________________________  (Below is the Court of Protection Order)  COURT OF PROTECTION                                                                                                                                                                                   No xxx  MENTAL CAPACITY ACT 2005 In the matter of Name xxx ORDER Made by  Depty District Judge At xxx Made on xxx Issued on 18 January 2024  WHEREAS  1.     xxx Solicitors, Address xxx  ("Applicant”) has applied for an order under the Mental Capacity Act 2005.  2.     The Court notes (my mother) is said to be estranged from all her three children and only one, (me) has been notified.  3.     (Me) was previously appointed as Atorney for Property and Affairs for (my mother).  The Exhibity NAJ at (date) refers to (me) and all replacement Attorneys are now officially standing down.  4.     Pursuant to Rule 9.10 of the Court of Protection Rules 2017 and Practice Direction 9B the Applicant 2must seek to identify at least three persons who are likely to have an interest in being notified that an application has been issues.”  The children of (my mother), and any other appointed attorneys are likely to have an interest in the application, because of the nature of relationship to (my mother).  5.     The Court considers that the notification requirements are an important safeguard for the person in respect of whom an order is sought.  6.     The Court notes that it is said that the local authority no longer has access to (my mother’s) Property.  7.     Further information is required for the Court to determine the application.  IT IS ORDERED THAT  Within 28 days of the issue date this order, the Applicant shall file a form COP24 witness statement confirming that the other children of (my mother) and any replacement attorneys have been notified of the application and shall confirm their name, address, and date upon which those persons were notified.  If the Applicant wishes the Court to dispense with any further notification, they should file a COP9 and COP24 explaining, what steps (if any) have been taken to attempt notification and why notification should be dispensed with.   Pending the determination of the application to appoint a deputy for (my mother), the Applicant is authorised to take such steps as are proportionate and necessary to access, secure and insure the house and property of (my mother).   This order was made without a hearing and without notice.  Any person affected by this order may apply within 21 days of the date on which the order was served to have the order set aside or varied pursuant to Rule 13.4 of the Court of Protection Rules 2017 (“the Rules”).  Such application must be made on Form COP9 and in accordance with Part 10 Rules.              
    • Unless I've got an incorrect copy of the relevant regulation: The PCN is only deemed to have arrived two days after dispatch "unless the contrary is proved" in which case date of delivery does matter (not just date of posting) and I would like clarification of the required standard of proof. It seems perhaps this hasn't been tested. Since post is now barcoded for the Post Office's own tracking purposes perhaps there is some way I can get that evidence from the Post Office...
    • I would say You should accept it - I HIGHLY doubt you will  be able to claim for letters at trial ans they’re offering you that, which is higher monetary value than interest.   Also they raise a good point, getting interest at anything above 4% is lucky these days, yes judges give it, but rarily above 4%   Also you might find depending on the judge  you don’t get some costs if you take it all the way over £7.40 when court woukdnt award letters costs and thus meaning their award would be less than evris offer which was made    Up to you though but the wait will be 3-4mo for a trial date at least
    • Hi Folks, Been 162 days! Just by way of update. Today I received a text from Opos Ltd so no doubt Capquest are renting the debt out to anybody who fancies a nibble. Safe to say I will not be responding.
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
        • Like
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
        • Like
      • 161 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like
  • Recommended Topics

HXCPM/Gladstones claimform ANPR PCN - Overstay Lawson Rd Brighouse HD6 1NY *** Claim Dismissed Costs awarded***


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 1995 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

Thanks in advance for this site and all the posts and advice

You are all the reason we have decided to put up a fight.

 

Just for a context....

 

I have spent the last week reading everything I can possibly fit in to my brain on this subject and I just need some clarification on some points.

 

My family and I were away for 6 weeks (28 Nov 2017- 10 Jan 2018) in New Zealand

during that time my husband received a PCN (£60 early repayment) dated 29th Nov 4 days after the alleged incident (25th Nov) from HX Car Park Management Ltd.

The PCN was for overstaying a pre paid time that was paid for.

 

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.

 

He got another letter dated 12th Jan which was a 'Final Demand Notice' (£125).

 

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

 

I immediately wrote a letter (since he didn't have the time) (dated 19th Jan) telling them that he was not the driver and could provide proof of this if required, gave them a copy of flight ticket to show we were away and so couldn't respond to their letters and asked them to stop sending letters of a threatening nature and posted it recorded delivery.

 

Obviously I did not look at this amazing forum (or indeed any of the other ones we have since come across) first (more fool me).

We heard nothing for 2 months and then last week received an LBC from Gladstone Solicitors giving 30 days to cough up the now £160!

 

I have since looked at so many forums and legislation, including the Pre Action Protocol, POFA and have whittled down what I think we need to do now which is draft a letter to Gladstones asking for:

 

1. an explanation of the cause of action

 

2. whether they are pursuing the driver or keeper

 

3. whether they are relying on the provisions of Schedule 4 of POFA 2012

 

4. what the full 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

 

7. a plan showing where any signs were displayed

 

8. details of the signs displayed (size of sign, size of font, height at which displayed)

 

9. If they have added anything on to the original charge, what that represents and how it has been calculated.

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?

 

10. All photographic evidence showing where the car was parked when the (alleged) breach was made.

 

11. Images of the time displayed on the P&D machine at the material time.

 

12. Evidence that the time on the machine was correctly synchronised with GMT.

 

13. Details of the amount that was paid and the length of overstay (as these details were not in the NTK) so NTK does not meet the POFA 2012 on this basis.

 

They haven't stated that they are relying on the POFA in any of their letters and although they seem to have included most of the details required of them in the NTK as per the POFA they haven't been completely concise on all counts and the photos they provided do not have the car parked but is actually in motion on what looks like a main road.

 

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 and comments would be greatly appreciated.

 

Thanks!

Edited by dx100uk
spacing
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 177
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

OK, this is up to you. Whatever you do won't make any difference to Gladrags as they don't play by the normal rules like everyone else.

 

You can either ignore them and wait to see if they actually issue a claim. Or you can write to them and then wait to see if they actually issue a claim :lol: Gladrags won't really take any notice of what you write, if they're going to issue a claim (which they like to do) they'll issue it anyway. It's only really then that we can get our teeth in to whatever they've 'claimed'.

 

As the tickets are in your husbands name, I'm assuming that he is the keeper of the vehicle? Whoever was driving is immaterial, do not give Gladrags that information (or post it here).

 

 

The £160 that they're claiming is bunkum, that will go up if they actually make a claim, but before they can get their pay day, they have to win at court. With Gladrags 'form' of rubbish claims, it's very unlikely that they're going to be able to win a properly defended claim. So don't worry about that! :wink:

 

Have a look at this thread

 

If you have any of the letters you've received, it would be useful if you can scan them, remove any personal info (name & address, vehicle registration) and any PCN codes, QR or Bar codes, convert them to PDF format and upload them to the thread. That way we can start picking holes in things that will help in your defence should they decide that they'd like to lose their money in court.

 

 

But let's see where we stand and what you've received, and then we can suggest some wording for a 'jog on' letter to Gladrags & HX.

Please note that my posts are my opinion only and should not be taken as any kind of legal advice.
In fact, they're probably just waffling and can be quite safely and completely ignored as you wish.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks so much for this, We really do want to fight this as it’s completely unreasonable.

 

I will get on with filling out the ‘form’ above and posting pics of all the letters so far.

 

I think I will send them a reply to the LBCCC, it’s worth a shot...maybe they’ll not bother filing a claim...unlikely I know from what I’ve heard but at least we gave it a shot!

 

Thanks so much for your quick response.

Link to post
Share on other sites

post up your letter text here first for checking.

 

when doing your scanning

read upload

and post them to ONE multipage PDF only please

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

OK, if HX followed the protocols of the POFA then they CAN claim from the keeper

but chances are they havent got everything right so we need to see the NTK they sent on the 29th Nov and also the signage at the car park if it is possible to get there.

 

As you have a limited time to fire off a response before they issue a claim

( HX are fairly new to this game so have been issuing a good number that havent gone through the courts process yet so they arent losing money to make them more cautious).

 

As for the amount going up,

again this is covered by the POFA any claims against the keeper are set in stone by the NTK so they cant add their unicorn food tax.

They know this but rely on ignorance and bluff, many people thus pay up thinking that some other amount will be added ad infinitum.

 

So although your list is pretty good show us the NTK and see if they are sunk by their own words first and then you can save all of the rest for if and when they still decide to issue a claim as you can then add their unreasonable behaviour to your response to the court claim.

Edited by dx100uk
spacing
Link to post
Share on other sites

read upload should help

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok so here’s the pdf of all the letters he’s had so far. God I hope the upload worked!

 

Scrawled all over the photos to obscure them as wasn't sure what to do? Sorry!

 

They don't show the car is parked, it's actually in motion, we have no idea where the pics were taken.

Scannable Document on 18 Mar 2018 at 16-32-24.pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's remains 'nice' to see that HX, Gladrags and almost all these other bandits still don't quite understand the POFA and how it does not allow them to add all these extra charges.

 

Whilst it could be argued, tenuously (when it's made clear on the signage (with a specific amount)) that any additional fees for "debt collection" *might* be claimable. It's most certainly not, ever, claimable against the keeper if the keeper was not the driver.

 

So, while HX might be able to claim (even without a case) that the keeper owes the principle amount, in this case £100, the keeper most certainly does not owe £125 or £160.

 

 

That will be added to your defence witness statement if it goes as far as a court claim.

Please note that my posts are my opinion only and should not be taken as any kind of legal advice.
In fact, they're probably just waffling and can be quite safely and completely ignored as you wish.

Link to post
Share on other sites

their NTK is not POFA compliant so they are disbarred from claiming money from anyone.

so, you need to respond to the PAP letter before claim

 

I suggest something like the following:

Any debt to your client is denied as they have failed to show locus standi and failed to follow the protocols of para 6 and 9 ofthe POFA 2012 to create any liability by anyone in this matter. Also, as the demands made by your clients breach para 4(5) of the POFA and this means the contract is an unfair contract and is void under s62 of the Consumer Rights Act 2015.

 

 

Now additional fees can be added to the bill they send the DRIVER but never if they rely on the POFA the driver has to admit they owe money and then not pay it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

they are being rather evangelical at the moment because they believe every word that Will and John peddle them ( the IPC is owned by these 2 people).

 

Once they have lost a few court claims due to the sloppy preparation work and poor advice they receive from their solicitors (gladstones, owned by Will and John-see IPC for reference) they will be a little more cautious on how they try things on.

 

at the monemt all you can do is fire off the letter as a response t their LBA and see what they do.

 

I would think they will take it to court but you have more ammunition for your defence we havent mentioned yet

Link to post
Share on other sites

just pointing out that it is 2 peoples self interest to push these court claims as everyone else loses and they still win as they dont do this for free. It looks like they do a sort of no win no fee contingency basis that stays just the right side of Champerty and Maintenance as far as we can tell. Obviously the parking co's know what they have signed up to but I dont necessarily trust them to know the law on this as they cant get a simple sign right

Link to post
Share on other sites

Send the letter to Gladrags, but CC it to HX as well. It might give them pause for thought, and you can almost bet your life that Gladrags won't refer to their client (HX) for instructions as they should do, so without CCing them, HX won't know anything about the fact that they're about to lose money.

 

I firmly believe that where the LBC has not come from the principle (the PPC) then a copy of the reply should always be sent to the PPC so that they're fully aware of what's being done in their name and that you're up for the fight.

 

In some cases, once they know that they're not about to get a default judgement, they'll swallow it and cut their losses.

Please note that my posts are my opinion only and should not be taken as any kind of legal advice.
In fact, they're probably just waffling and can be quite safely and completely ignored as you wish.

Link to post
Share on other sites

yes, please do. always refer to yourslef in the third person so if they have written to you as a result of a NTK you say "the keeper" and not "I"

 

Reminds me of writing up chemistry experiments where you put something like "an exothermic reaction was thus observed" rather than "I burnt the lab down"

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ha ha! I hated chemistry!

 

Here's the letter sent....had to put 'I' in one or two para's :-0:

 

Gladstones Solicitors

The Terrace

High Leigh Park Golf Club

Warrington

Cheshire

WA16 6AA

 

19th March 2018

 

Your Ref:

 

Dear Sirs,

 

Thank you for your Letter Before Claim of 6th March 2018.

 

The alleged debt is disputed and will be vigorously defended. The Driver is not identified in your letter and your client has failed to meet the requirements of The Protection of Freedoms Act to pursue the Registered Keeper.

 

Your letter contains insufficient detail of the claim and fails to provide copies of evidence your client places reliance upon nor does it contain any mention of indeed what evidence your client intends to rely on.

 

This action on the part of your client is a clear breach of its pre-action obligations set out in the Practice Direction - Pre-Action Conduct and Protocols, with which as solicitors you must surely be familiar (and with which your client, a serial litigator of small claims, must also be familiar). As you (and your client) must know, the Practice Direction binds all potential litigants, whatever the size or type of the claim. Its express purpose is to assist parties in understanding the claim and their respective positions in relation to it, to enable parties to take stock of their positions and to negotiate a settlement, or at least narrow the issues, without incurring the costs of court proceedings or using up valuable court time.

 

Nobody, including your client, is immune from the requirements and obligations of the Practice Direction.

 

Please provide a Letter Before Claim which complies with the Practice Direction on Pre-Action Conduct and Protocols 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

7. a plan showing where any signs were displayed

8. details of the signs displayed (size of sign, size of font, height at which displayed)

9. If they have added anything on to the original charge, what that represents and how it has been calculated.

10. All photographic evidence showing where the car was parked when the (alleged) breach was made.

11. Images of the time displayed on the P&D machine at the material time.

12. Evidence that the time on the machine was correctly synchronised with GMT.

13. Details of the amount that was paid and the length of overstay (as these details were not in the Notice To Keeper) and so does not meet the POFA 2012 on this basis.

 

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

 

If your client does not provide 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 © and 16. I will draw to the court the fact that I have expressly requested this information.

 

The Notice to Keeper which has been served is not compliant with POFA 2012, since there can be no assumption made that the keeper was the driver thus cannot rely on POFA Schedule 4. The registered keeper cannot be held liable under any applicable law, nor can any assumptions be drawn (Henry Greenslade, Barrister and Erstwhile Lead Adjudicator of POPLA confirmed the position in law in the annual POPLA Report). Any debt to your client is denied as they have failed to show locus standi and failed to follow the protocols of paragraph 6 and 9 of the POFA to create any liability by anyone in this matter. Also, as the demands made by your clients breach paragraph 4(5) of the POFA this means the contract is an unfair contract and is void under s62 of the Consumer Rights Act 2015.

 

The Practice Direction also requests the claimant should set out a suitable form of ADR, your letter has failed to do this also.

 

Until your client has complied with its obligations and provided the above 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.

 

Please note, a refusal to comply with the Practice Direction will result in an immediate referral to the Solicitors Regulation Authority for breach of the Principles contained in the SRA Handbook.

 

I trust this will not be necessary and look forward to receiving a fully compliant letter.

 

 

Yours faithfully.

 

 

Used the resources on mse forum and tweaked it to suit. Hope it can maybe help someone else struggling with the same!

 

Will keep you posted on what comes back...look out for the screamng banshee if/when a claim comes through!!!

Edited by Chimichanga
Link to post
Share on other sites

That's one hell of an "up yours". I hope you wrote that in crayon! :razz:

 

However, I fear that it'll be completely lost on Gladrags, as they don't seem to conform to the same rules as everyone else and certainly won't understand any of the big words.

Please note that my posts are my opinion only and should not be taken as any kind of legal advice.
In fact, they're probably just waffling and can be quite safely and completely ignored as you wish.

Link to post
Share on other sites

at least you will be able to show it to a judge when you claim your costs for their unreasonable conduct under CPR 27.14.2(g) The muppets who run these parking companies shoud learn to think for themselves or pay the consequences. I hope that they do get clobbered, I have no sympathy for laziness

Edited by DragonFly1967
Added spacing
Link to post
Share on other sites

Just had a thought.

 

There’s no way that they can issue a claim and us not know about it is there?

 

There would definitely be something that comes through the post?

 

Having a slight panic that something might be missed

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...