Do you think I should wait and see if the court send me out a N159 form?

Or should I just photocopy the blank one gladstones sent me and fill it in.

I want to make sure I dot all my i's and cross all my t's,

would hate for them to say I didn't fill in a form and they're going to do it one papers.

I know I have to send a copy of the completed directions questionnaire to Gladstones too.

Yes, I sent it the week before it was due,

which was lucky as I went into premature labour just before the deadline,

so have spent the last 2 weeks in and out of the hospital visiting my little baby.

He came home today though, so I have this fun and games to continue with!

this week we received the Directions Questionnaire from Gladstones,

and then following that got our version of it.

The covering letter from Gladstones states:

"You will note we intend to request a special direction that the case be dealt with on the papers and without the need for an oral hearing.

This request is sought simply because the matter is in our clients opinion relatively straightforward and the costs incurred by both parties for attending an oral hearing would be disproportionate. We trust you agree.

You will note our client has elected not to mediate.

Its decision is not meant to be in any way obstructive and is based purely on experience,

as mediation has rarely proven beneficial in these types of cases.

Notwithstanding this, our client would be happy to listen to any genuine payment proposals you wish to put forward,"

At the back of the questionnaire they attached a sheet

Request for Special Direction

We kindly request that the court send the N159 form (attached) to the defendant for their consideration, and upon the defendant consenting to the case being heard on the papers alone, the Judge makes the following direction;

"The matter will be considered on paperwork without a hearing. The parties attendance is not required and the judge will determine the matter based upon the documents and evidence supplies and any written representations received." "

I am absolutely not willing to have it judged purely on papers,

and want to reply to this effect,

but there is nowhere on the Directions questionnaire to write this,

should I just put it in a covering letter?

Or should I wait and see if they send me a N159 form out from the Court?

I could easily photocopy the copy that Gladstones have sent.

Also, Gladstones have said if we don't agree to the papers only route

they will insist on having the hearing at their local court, not ours. Is that normal?

Northwest ITconsultant, I have read that you can claim for loss of earnings, here's the link to the Justice gov website, look at 27.14

https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part27#27.14

Hi Northwest IT Consultant,

as far as I'm aware if you win against them you can claim up to £90 for loss of earnings when you attend court, but I don't know how its allocated.

If you start a thread about your claim I'm sure someone will give you lots of advice like I've received, and I hope we can beat ES.

From all I've read they may not even proceed when they see the defence, but have a read of Parking Prankster and you'll see that Gladstones seem to enjoy going to court, even if they lose, because they get paid come what may by the parking company. I wish I could charge them by the hour for all the hassle its caused me!

this morning I received a response from Gladstones

saying they would not provide the documents requested

(Contract from Landowners with ES Parking,

proof of extinguishment of Gartside street,

planning permission for their signage)

as these will be in their clients witness statement.

"We trust that you agree that the costs that would be incurred in responding to your points at this stage would be disproportionate to the amount of the claim."

Erm, no. You need to provide this information for my defence too.

I'm actually suprised they responded at all, but I'm sure they'll be issuing a hefty charge to ES for that letter!

I currently have no plans to counterclaim, but believe me, depending on the outcome they won't have heard the last of me.

I am chasing up Gladstones today and Manchester Council about the status of the highway, and trying to get my defence written.

I know I have over a week left, but have been in hospital over the weekend, and may end up there again any time, so just want it sorting asap.

Well Manchester Council are being rubbish,

after submitting a request under Freedom of information act on 11th, they still hadn't got back to me, and so when I've just chased it up they've said they will respond soon,

but pretty much have referred me back to either paying £134 for a copy of the plans, or going viewing them in person, so 12 days waiting for nothing.

So irritating, they could just look at the plan and tell me over the phone, how hard would that be?!

It shows you they're playing the numbers game, Ginger.

 

Please don't call them fines though, only the police or a court can issue those.

 

HB

Definitely, and when you read Parking Prankster and see how much it costs them to go to court, Gladstones are the real winners, even if the claim is thrown out.

Sorry, I know it's not a fine, I'm just programmed to call it that!

That's peanuts, Parking Eye had 566,418 last year poor things.

Oh my goodness, that's ridiculous.

 

As I suspected ES Parking are a new company and have only started issuing PCNs this year.

 

According to http://www.bmpa.eu/companydata/E_S_Parking_Enforcement.html you should ignore them until it gets to a court claim - that is most unusual advice.

 

Apparently they have issued 6573 notices but none of them have got as far as a court hearing i.e. beyond the initial cliam.

Wow, 6573 tickets just in the first half of this year is, at the lowest estimate, going to be fines of around £400,000, and that's if they're £60 reduced fines paid in the first instance and don't increase to the £100 or more. Not bad for spurious claims! I wonder how many people contest the PCNs from them, and how many County Court claims they put in?!

that and the lack of planning consent for signage under the Town and Country Planning Act 2007

Gladdyd know they will be onto a loser so will probably not pay the allocation fee so keep aneye on the clock and ask for the claim to be struck out or at least stayed if they are more than a day late. Ignore their letter to you, deal only with the official lines of communication.

Ericsbrother, when you say keep an eye on the clock what do you mean?

I'm still waiting to hear back from the council and Allied London,

so haven't filed defence yet,

but if I haven't heard by next Monday I will be doing anyway (I still have time).

I may consider a trip over to the council offices to view the maps, even though its a complete pain. If I file my defence, when would I find out if they are going to actually go ahead with it?

I agree, they will have to demonstrate they have cause for action which means all of these points would have to be covered.

 

I too doubt that they will bother to pay the allocation fee. If they don't I would only allow the case to be stayed if they provide valid reasons and then I would request a deadline before the claim is struck out.

If they don't pay the allocation fee what will happen?

Will it just disappear, will I get a letter saying its been dropped?!

Well I decided to go with CPR18, we'll see what I hear back, more than anything it will help with the claim if they refuse to provide documents under either 18 or 31. I'm still waiting to hear back from Manchester Council and hope to hear from Allied London next week too.

I think the defence will be along those lines Beamengine.

Specifically for fast track

Read here all is explained

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?419198-You-have-received-a-Claim-What-you-need-to-do.-**UPDATED-December-2014**

By the same reasoning as CPR31 being only for non small claims though this hasn't yet been allocated a track, but this section does not rule out use in any track.

I can't find anywhere in CPR 18 where it says only fast track. CPR18 1.1 "

Before making an application to the court for an order under Part 18, the party seeking clarification or information (the first party) should first serve on the party from whom it is sought (the second party) a written request for that clarification or information (a Request) stating a date by which the response to the Request should be served.

The date must allow the second party a reasonable time to respond."

What about CPR 18? http://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part18/pd_part18

Beam Enginer, I found a Manchester Council Planning and Highways committee May 2014 document which refers to Gartside St as "the adopted

highway on Gartside Street", which suggests its run by the council, not the landowner.

Does this not mean that the MCOL claimant will fail to respond until the track is allocated and the date for filing the defence has passed?

Would a judge not simply wait until the track is allocated before making an order for disclosure?

Defendants are unlikely to opt to move away form the small claims track because of the risk of costs.

If I request these documents under 31:14 would this exempt them from being used in a small claims track?

Or as Beamengine suggests would this mean it wouldn't be considered small claims anymore once these are requested??

Surely Part 31 does not apply to the small claims track.

Scope of this Part

31.1

(1) This Part sets out rules about the disclosure and inspection of documents.

(2) This Part applies to all claims except a claim on the small claims track.

Hmm, didn't read that bit. Dx100?

What do people think about this letter, I'll post out to Gladstone tomorrow recorded delivery.

Dear Sir OR Madam

Re: ES Parking vs XXXXXXXXXXX

Claim Number: XXXXXXX

CPR 31.14 Request

On 5th August 2016 I received the Claim Form in this case issued by you out of the Northampton County Court.

I confirm having returned my acknowledgement of service to the court, in which I indicate my intention to contest all of your claim.

Please treat this letter as my request made under CPR 31.14 for the disclosure and the production of a verified and legible copy of each of the following documents pertaining to the claim being made.

1. A contemporaneous and unredacted copy of ES Parkings contract with the landholder that demonstrates that they have authority to both issue parking charges and litigate in their own name.

2. A copy of the extinguishment order submitted to the Magistrates Court, and documentation proving extinguishment of the public highway on Gartside Street.

3.A copy of the planning permission documents issued by the council for the parking signs in use.

You should ensure compliance with your CPR 31 duties and ensure that the documents I have requested are copied to and received by me within 7 days of receiving this letter. Your CPR 31 duties extend to making a reasonable and proportionate search for the originals of the documents I have requested, the better for you to be able to verify the document's authenticity and to provide me with a legible copy.

Where I have mentioned a document and there is in your possession more than one version of that same document owing to a modification, obliteration or other marking or feature, each version will be a separate document and you must provide a copy of each version of it to me. Your obligations extend to making a reasonable and proportionate search for any version(s) to include an obligation to recover and preserve such version(s) which are now in the possession of a third party.

In accordance with CPR 31.15© I undertake to be responsible for your reasonable copying costs incurred in complying with this CPR 31.14 request.

If you require more time in which to comply with this request you must tell me in writing. You must tell me before the time for compliance with this request has expired. In telling me you require more time you must tell me what steps you have taken and propose to take in order to comply with this request and also state a date by when you will comply with this request. In addition your statement must be accompanied with a statement that you agree to an extension of the time for me to file my defence. Your extension of time must be not less than 14 days from the date when you say you will have complied with my request and you must state the new date for filing my defence.

If you are unable to comply with this request and believe that you will never be able to comply with this request you must tell me in writing.

Please note that if you should fail to comply with this request, fail to request more time or fail to agree to an extension of time for the filing of my defence, I will make an application to the court for an order that the proceedings be struck out or stayed for non-compliance and a summary costs order.

I do hope this will not be necessary and look forward to hearing from you.

Yours faithfully

If I have interpreted the law correctly a highway can only be extinguished by the application of the council to a Magistrates Court. Before they can do that they must advertise in the London Gazette. I can find only two notices relating to Gartside Street in the London gazette in 2001 and 2002. There relate to stopping up portions of the street on a temporary basis to allow building work.

It would appear that the whole of the remains a public highway so ES Parking have no cause of action unless they have been authorised by the highway authority. What exactly do the signs say?

Given your circumstances you might even cite the Vento v South Yorkshire Police and claim £750 compensation for the distress which was set by the Court of Appeal as the starting point.

Thanks Beam Engine, you've done a lot of research, I really appreciate it.

Post 17 on this thread has a picture of the sign that is up, its picture 4 on the download.

If they do throw this out before small claims I will be writing to DVLA, Manchester City Council etc and may consider a claim.

I can't begin to count the number of hours of faffing about this has been, and thats not even including all the help I've received on here.

The latest revision to the masterplan dated 2014 states: "Allied London, the Council’s

development partners in the scheme"

It would appear from this that Allied London are the landowners and are working with the council to implement the development. That may explain the reluctance of the council to provide information on the status of the highway.

Try phoning Allied London and asking them if they have a contract with ES Parking, it will be a lot quicker than an FOI request!

You might also consider a counterclaim against ES Parking for distress caused by their pursuit of this invoice. If their claim is thrown out this would demonstrate that ES Parking did not have reasonable cause to obtain your personal details from DVLA and are therefore in breach of the Data Protection Act. How about £250 compensation for all of this?

I've just tried phoning Allied Londons Manchester HQ, but the number is out of action,

and so then I phoned the London offices, but just got an answer phone message,

so unlikely I'll hear back from them before Monday now.

I'll write up a CPR31:14 later and get it sent out recorded delivery tomorrow asking for unredacted contract with landowner, copy of the documents which prove extinguishment of the public highway, and planning permission for their signs.

you can only request details that are mentioned or intimated in their poc.

 

 

is that all they wrote just the one line?

The POC only says

"The claimant claims the sum of £152.30 for Parking Charges and indemnity costs if applicable including £2.30 interest..."

As an adviser for Citizens Advice

I would tend to agree with you unless they have someone who takes an interest in the activities of such companies who are only interested in extorting money.

 

I have just made a claim for distress caused by their inability to comply with DVLA's requirements.

Ginger

 

As you are defending the claim you should point out that you have asked for the landowner's details and you should question their right to claim that setting down is parking,

 

This would be a defence if it remains the public highway.

 

You should have time before the hearing to make a Freedom of Information request to the council highways about whether the rights of way were extinguished and when.

 

If you can discover the landowner you could also ask them, it looks as though a whole strip was developed with that part of the road intended as a pedestrian area to connect the two parts.

Having spoken to about 4 different people on the phone

I managed to speak to someone in the Highways department,

and have emailed him a request, under Freedom of information act, asking for the status of the road.

Thanks for your advice

You need to get a cpr31:14 running to Gladstone time is ticking

Just to be clear, do you mean requesting the details of the road being private or public, or for the details of the landowner DX100?

Thanks BeamEngine for having a look.

I was hoping to phone the council and ask them, but apparently you have to either go to the council offices and view the street documents for free, or pay £134 for them to send you copies.Unfortunately we don't live where this happened, and although its within driving distance (45 minutes away), that's at least a 1hr 30 minute round trip to find out if its a private road, but perhaps I will have to do it anyway.

Thanks for your input Ericsbrother. How could I find out where the private road starts? the sign was not seen by either driver or passenger when driving down the road.

Is there any point refering to BPA AOS as ES are an IPC member? The IPC Code of practise is much more wishy washy than BPA.

Okay, AOS done. any advice on defence?

I haven't done the form yet, wanted to know what to put before I went ahead and filled it in. I can't see a place on the paper form which says jurisdiction though.

Okay, here are some photos which show the area, the poor markings, the tiny sign.

Any advice on what to focus on in the defence DX100 and Ericsbrother?

ES Parking Notice Gartside st.pdf