Jump to content


Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Content Count

  • Avg. Content Per Day

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


shamrocker last won the day on October 21 2018

shamrocker had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

603 Excellent

About shamrocker

  • Rank
    Classic Account Holder

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. There is nothing to lose by submitting the directions questionnaire. You might as well also go as far as the witness statement and show them that you are only too aware of their shortcomings. If your partner is still too afraid of seeing it through, make them an offer of settlement. Even if they don't accept, you can still concede before the hearing. There's a fair chance they'll not even go as far as the hearing anyway. I was up against this lot myself and they never paid the hearing fee, so the case got stuck out. Hang in there. It's too soon to throw in the towel and pay out money that isn't deserved.
  2. Certainly seems legit...but you've received it ultra-quick after submitting your defence. I've not seen it done that quick before - but I do tend to only duck in and out of the forum. Completing it is easy enough.
  3. So... "No parking or waiting on access road". That reads as if it should be positioned at the entrance onto the private land (i.e. "you are entering onto private land - only do so if you agree not to stop on any access roads or you must pay £100") - then there would be prominent signs on the site stating "Access road", on those roads which they determine to be as such. This would give you an opportunity to stop and read the sign before entering onto the private land and thereby accepting an implied offer to drive over the access roads on the site, based on the terms outlined. This isn't the case, however. You're already on the site by the time the terms are presented to you, so you would be entitled to stop your vehicle on any non-permitted area for a reasonable amount while you inspect the offer and terms being made. Would 43 seconds be seen as reasonable - I don't think so. It's all a bit of a shambles in my view - but there's nothing new there. I'm just pointing this out as a different angle to potentially use in addition to what the other guys have said above. You can also twist it the other way and use the prohibitive argument, so definitely use both to undermine their position that a contract was entered into by the time they issued the charge. It also has nowt to do with an offer of parking, which is the supposed remit of the parking management company? I think your WS could do with a bit of refining, but you can always bung everything in now and then start condensing it later.
  4. Is there another sign above that last one you posted? It looks like the bottom of a sign directly above it.
  5. Is that where the car was parked? It doesn't look like the actual entrance to the site.
  6. You refer to an entrance sign in your draft WS. Is there a copy of the sign on here anywhere - or can you post a copy up for us to see?
  7. You do need to approach it on the expectation that it will end up in front of a judge. I'd much rather be in your position than theirs, that's for sure. It's all very predictable what they'll bring in support of their case anyway.
  8. Dodgy judges and dodgy defences often come hand in hand. Just make sure you understand the relevant arguments in defence and present them properly in your witness statement later. If you don't, you will very likely get one of those dodgy judges! You're only at the defence stage, so you'll have plenty of time to keep reading up and getting the key points clearer in your mind. It's really very straight forward, and you'll hopefully end up enjoying the thought of a potential visit to the court. They'll likely give up the ghost if you put a strong WS together anyway.
  9. You can't polish a turd! The best barrister in the land would struggle to win this claim ... if the correct arguments are used in defence. Don't over think it.
  10. EB - the OP is only doing their defence at this stage, not witness statement. Is your advice aimed at doing the WS?
  11. Have they stated the time that your period of parking commenced? They issued the ticket at 11:28, but what other times have they stated in support of the charge?
  12. the above doesn't really turn the screw on them and probably reflects a lack of your own understanding of this subject - sorry! Challenge: - The contract (i.e. the offer made, and associated terms) - prohibitive? Doesn't create a contract. - Could a contract have been entered into by the driver, according to both the terms on the signage and their own code of practice (i.e. was the driver given adequate time to consider the terms on the signage, and then accept them or decide to leave?) Not according to their NOK - do you have the original ticket? - The capacity in which they are pursuing you - i.e. driver or keeper. - To pursue driver, put them to strict proof to disclose evidence of their identity. - To pursue keeper, are they POFA compliant - the answer is 'no', due to non-compliant NOK. - Do they have locus standi? Refer to your CPR request and state that their lack of response gives you grounds to believe that they have no authority to enter into contracts for the land in question, and to issue claims related to the aforementioned contracts. - Lack of planning permission for signage - refer to CPR request again. That's the sort of angle I would take on it, but you'll need to work on the wording and post it up. It creates a few different hoops for them to jump through and covers a number of different bases. Basically throws their total lack of focus on a proper cause for action back at them and forces them to explain their position properly.
  13. I only asked the question because I'm assisting someone "off-site" with defending a claim by them. Lo and behold, Gladstones have complied (albeit "Without Prejudice save as to costs") and given until a certain date to pay a F&F reduced settlement. By that date, the claim should be stayed. I'm assuming it's a final throw of the dice. I did note on someone else's thread just a while ago that they've also complied with a CPR request - in part, at least. Anyway, sorry to digress from the OP's thread.
  • Create New...