DEL Court Claim received

[Shelley181146]

No it's a not a disability issue just someone who is scared of court proceedings and wouldn't have a clue what to say, how to conduct themselves or anything.

[ericsbrother]

paper hearing then.

Disadvantage of that is many parking co's are less than honest with their statements of truth and try and hide important evidence because it doesnt suit their claim and you will never get the chance to question them about it. For example, redacted contracts, planning issues etc that they bluff their way through. or occasionally just downright lie about it.

[Shelley181146]

it appears that DR have continued with their claim and yes it will be paper format.

 

They refuse to mediate but are happy to accept any genuine payment proposals!

 

Any information we require from them has to be requested via the courts

as tHEy say our costs will be disproportionate.....

 

How should I proceed?

[ericsbrother]

this last sentence, is that on a court order or just scribble from DEC?

 

If a court order

you need to demand sight of all sorts of documents

such as their contract with the landowner,

copy of the planning consent for signage etc. CPR 31.14

 

 

They are hoping that their failure to send these docs will not be questioned.

 

Also, read up about the difference between a sign offering a contract and one of prohibition

or "forbidding offer" as their signs are the latter and that is why no breach of contract.

 

 

You will need to quote other cases and there are a few mentioned on the parking prankster's latest blog.

[Shelley181146]

It is DE who are saying if we want sight of any documents we must apply to the courts for it as they say 'our costs' are disproportionate!

 

That means we have to pay the courts presumably for this facility?

[Shelley181146]

This is how it was worded:

Good Afternoon

 

We act for the Claimant and have notified the Court of our Client’s intention to proceed with the claim.

 

Please find enclosed a copy of our Client’s completed Directions Questionnaire, which will be filed with the court upon their request. You will note we intend to request a special direction;

 

i. 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 Client’s 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. Not with standing this, our Client would be happy to listen to any genuine payment proposals that you wish to put forward.

 

Any evidence will be provided in our client's witness statement as and when it is requested by the court. If you would like this evidence sooner, we invite you to make an application to the court as our client believes the costs of complying with your request are disproportionate at this stage.

 

So, how do I request landowner contracts etc?

 

Are they bluffing or will this go through?

[AndyOrch]

Disclosure of documents relied upon follows allocation...wait for the court's directions.

 

Andy

[ericsbrother]

That is nothing to do with disclosure so make sure you have sent them the cPR 31.14

and complain to the court that they havent supplied the documents that they rely on to show they have locus standi

and that you believe that they do not have the authority to create contracts, take legal action in their own name or planning permission for their signage.

[Shelley181146]

A Notice of Proposed Allocation to the Small Claims Track has been received which states:

 

This is now a defended claim

The Defendant has filed a defence, a copy of which is enclosed. (It is NOT enclosed)

It appears that this case is suitable for allocation to the small claims track.

You must by xx xxx xxxx complete the Small Claims Directions Questionnaire (Form N180) and file it with the court office and serve copies on all other parties.

 

This looks to be an actual hearing and the questionnaire form encourages mediation which DE have already said they decline. Should we accept mediation to make DE look bad or not?

 

I have just sent the CPR 31.14 request to DE and will obviously wait with baited breath as I do not expect to receive anything back from them.

[dx100uk]

just make sure you return that form in good time

sign the court copy

don't sign the copy you send to the claimants solicitor.

 

 

dx

[AndyOrch]

Also make sure you read all the courts directions and what you must comply with by the dates stated.

 

Andy

[ericsbrother]

mediation is pointless in a case like this, it is designed to sort out problems like builders suing clients for money for work done and the client saying the work is substandard so they arent paying.

 

 

All you have to do is send back the questionnaire with the boxes ticked saying you are happy with the local court, you arent available on certain dates if known and anything else relevant such as disabiliteis to be taken into account.

[Shelley181146]

So it will be a hearing in court then?

If so, I need to be litigant friend.......

[ericsbrother]

I you have elected to go for a paper hearing they will tell you when and where it will be done in chambers.

Still allocated to a court though but not always your nearest one.

 

You will have to exchange papers by a set date and the thing you need to do is when you get DE's witness statement is try and find anything that is unture and use that to ask for the claim to be struck out as being untrue.

 

if it is minor then the judge will apply a weighting to the rest of theor evidence so you should rebut anything and everything that is dodgy, claims on signs, rights of management etc.

[Shelley181146]

DE opted for Small Claims Track and as explained earlier, the person to which this relates wont cope with Court process and has asked me to deal with this matter.

 

We have another identical case with these clowns and in response to their 'letter before action' we sent CPR 31.14 request to which they have replied that it does not apply to Small Claims Tracked cases. Is that true? If so, they won't respond to the one we have just sent in this instance.

[AndyOrch]

Until a claim is allocated ...it is in effect trackless but yes technically it does not apply to a SCT claim ...but the claimant will have to disclose anyway after allocation so don't worry...the main thing is sending one and showing that they are frustrating your attempts to seek clarity.

[ericsbrother]

small claims is supposed to cheap and pain free

but if you put in a CPR request and then tell the judge that you cannot offer a proper defence because they havent shown you these documents that they claim give them the right to sue how can you determine if they have a claim?

 

Judges hate having their time wasted so a letter to this effect to the court when you exchange documents will make it the first thing on their pile when they read the bundles.

 

If the judge says they arent necessary then you can appeal his decision as a matter of law and that will move it to a higher court and the whole thing becomes an order to disclose then (as well as much higher costs to the losing side).

 

That them means a precedent can be created and the judge wont like to be the one whose mistakes caused that so they generally order the other party to come up with the paperwork.

[Shelley181146]

I you have elected to go for a paper hearing they will tell you when and where it will be done in chambers.

Still allocated to a court though but not always your nearest one.

 

 

You will have to exchange papers by a set date and the thing you need to do is when you get DE's witness statement is try and find anything that is unture and use that to ask for the claim to be struck out as being untrue.

 

 

if it is minor then the judge will apply a weighting to the rest of theor evidence so you should rebut anything and everything that is dodgy, claims on signs, rights of management etc.

 

I revisited the site and the signage remains the same

- Residents only parking/Private property.

There are no signs which state they are contracted to manage the site or that a penalty charge will be applied.

I have taken new photographic evidence of signage.

 

Also, their administrative clown has refused to send documents requested under CRP31.14

and advised that it does not apply to small claims track.

 

They intend to continue with the court process and further evidence will be provided within their witness statement as and when it is requested by the Court.

 

Can I write to the court now and advise them that they are not supplying the documents as per #33?

[dx100uk]

there will never be a penalty charge...its a private car park.......

 

the claim is not yet assigned a track,

so the comment regarding 31:14 simply shows they don't have a clue what they are talking about.

much the same as restons do with debt claims they bring....

 

31:14 is a request...they don't have to comply

though the judge wont be too pleased with their total lack of understanding of the process of issuing a speculative claim

hoping for a non contested default rubberstamped judgement.........

[Shelley181146]

Received notification of transfer to local court so the 'special instructions' which Gladstones wanted isn't happening!

[Old Snowy]

Making an application under Part 31 may indeed be a request but both parties have an obligation to narrow issues and assist the court in achieving the overriding objectives. As has also been said elsewhere if the request was made before allocation then it is entirely valid as at that point all small claims cases are on the Multi-Track to which Part 31 (and Part 18) apply.

 

There is no reason why you cannot continue to press Gladstones to provide the information (though not too often) because the request was made appropriately. You might also like in a subsequent letter to remind them of the provisions of CPR r.27.14(2)(g) which allows for damages to be awarded in the event of unreasonable conduct.

 

Make sure you abide by any deadline set out in the Notice of Allocation (it isn't clear from your post whether what you have is a simple notification that the matter has been allocated to a specific court of whether what you have provides a hearing date) with regard to exchanging documents. This may well be hidden away in the small print so so go through it with a fine toothcomb. If the Notice gives a hearing date but no deadline for exchange of documents then the standard return date applies - not later than 14 days before any hearing.

 

This is entirely normal behaviour for Gladstones. The reason? Well there is good reason to believe that they run all such proceedings on a shoestring and probably - at this stage - have none of the evidence in their possession anyway.

 

As far as DE are concerned they have a history (to my personal knowledge) of operating on premises where there is mixed ownership and sometimes the enforcement "creeps" into the area they have no authority to work in. Carrying out a Land Registry search (cost = £3) may well be a useful exercise. In addition bear in mind that although it may well be being kept under the wraps there is a good chance that the PCN was issued from a self-ticketing set-up.

 

By all means write to the court and ask the letter be handed to a procedural judge - then pose the question. What happens is entirely a matter of luck. In some courts judges will leap all over things and issue Orders using their case management powers whilst in others the letter will simply be placed on the file. In some cases they will insist that you make a formal application. Cost = £100. I think the cost of a first-class stamp to estabish which route the court might follow is good value.

 

HTH

[ericsbrother]

If it looks to be a complicated issue the judge may order a directions hearing and then tell the parties what they should be providing as far as such paperwork goes

 

 

but generally if you write to the court and say that the claimant hasnt complied with the CPR31 request then that letter gets put on top of the pile and they will be asked why they havent complied when the heaing starts.

 

 

you will also be asked why you cant continue without it

so make sure that you can word this in a manner that shows that with the proof of authority you may well have paid up without the need to go to court if the other parts of their claim are not disputed (fat chance!) or without that authority they have no basis for claim ( more likely)

[Shelley181146]

Making an application under Part 31 may indeed be a request but both parties have an obligation to narrow issues and assist the court in achieving the overriding objectives. As has also been said elsewhere if the request was made before allocation then it is entirely valid as at that point all small claims cases are on the Multi-Track to which Part 31 (and Part 18) apply.

 

There is no reason why you cannot continue to press Gladstones to provide the information (though not too often) because the request was made appropriately. You might also like in a subsequent letter to remind them of the provisions of CPR r.27.14(2)(g) which allows for damages to be awarded in the event of unreasonable conduct.

 

Make sure you abide by any deadline set out in the Notice of Allocation (it isn't clear from your post whether what you have is a simple notification that the matter has been allocated to a specific court of whether what you have provides a hearing date) with regard to exchanging documents. This may well be hidden away in the small print so so go through it with a fine toothcomb. If the Notice gives a hearing date but no deadline for exchange of documents then the standard return date applies - not later than 14 days before any hearing.

Rec'd form N27 Notice of Transfer of Proceedings - no date attached just simply address of court and contact details.

 

This is entirely normal behaviour for Gladstones. The reason? Well there is good reason to believe that they run all such proceedings on a shoestring and probably - at this stage - have none of the evidence in their possession anyway.

 

As far as DE are concerned they have a history (to my personal knowledge) of operating on premises where there is mixed ownership and sometimes the enforcement "creeps" into the area they have no authority to work in. Carrying out a Land Registry search (cost = £3) may well be a useful exercise. Have tried to do this but cannot locate correct web page for £3.00 fee and as it is a car park and not a residence not too sure how I go about it? In addition bear in mind that although it may well be being kept under the wraps there is a good chance that the PCN was issued from a self-ticketing set-up.

 

By all means write to the court and ask the letter be handed to a procedural judge - then pose the question. What happens is entirely a matter of luck. In some courts judges will leap all over things and issue Orders using their case management powers whilst in others the letter will simply be placed on the file. In some cases they will insist that you make a formal application. Cost = £100. I think the cost of a first-class stamp to establish which route the court might follow is good value.

 

HTH

If the judge decides he wants a directions hearing who pays for this?

Can you post up a link to land registry please as I only get £19.95 or more on the webpages I am finding ;(

[AndyOrch]

No fee for a Directions Hearing...

 

Andy

[Shelley181146]

I have located the correct web page for the land registry - (blond moment earlier, sorry). Anyway, the post code which DE have stated in their NTK relates only to 2 residents each with 1 parking space and the properties are recorded as leasehold - how can I find out who the land owner is?