Jump to content


WY/Gladstones claimform - PCN Glassy Bar 95 Legrams Lane Bradford BD7 1NH **WON+COSTS**


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 1511 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

Hi,

 

Went to a wedding last year?

I honestly cannot even remember how long ago it was.

There was insufficient parking space at the venue and my vehicle was parked in an empty cash and carry car park just down the road.

We did not see any signs/ information informing me this was private property/ charges etc.

 

I have attached a google street-view image of the area in question

- the signage is very small and I can confirm on the day

- a vehicle was parked in front of the sign

- big enough that myself and 4 other members of my family walked straight past it and did not notice it.

The vehicle was parked approximately where the silver car is in the image.

 

I received a parking charge notice on return to the vehicle and numerous parking charge notices via mail

- I followed advise from a basic google search which advised to ignore.

I now realise this was a mistake.

 

Received the following letter through the post today.

 

I have stupidly thrown away all previous correspondence and cannot even remember the date of the incident.

 

Am I outside of the period in which to appeal?

What action would you advise?

 

Many thanks in advance

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 109
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Don't worry about this for the moment. That letter that you've got from "Gladstones" is NOT from Gladstones! The letter on Gladrags headed paper is from Debt Recovery Plus (DRP). You are well within your rights to complain to the Solicitors Regulatory Authority about that.

 

It is quite safe to ignore DRP, they are a DCA that have absolutely no power to do anything other than to send you begging letters. Had you kept all of their letters, you'll have noticed a pattern...

 

Original letter from the parking company (PPC) (let's say £100 as that's about usual)

2nd letter from the PPC also for £100.

1st letter from DRP, now £160

2nd letter from DRP, also £160.

3rd & final letter from DRP with a "Reduced Payment Offer", probably about £129.

 

Now yet another letter, also from DRP but this time dressed in a party frock for £149.

 

You should be aware that the letter above is carefully worded for maximum intimidation but stays (though only just) on the right side of the law. It's a whole lot of "if's", "but's" and "may's" but doesn't say "will" anywhere.

 

As you've ignored everything up until now, the only thing that you can do is continue to ignore it, unless it gets to the stage of a Letter Before Action. DO NOT ignore one of those whatever you do. If you do get a LBA, come back here and we'll walk you through it

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

the letter you have is from the owners of the IPC who happen to have a part time job as the country's worst solicitors is just a demand in the capacity as a debt collector

(anyone can do this, no qualifications neede andan ability to write in english a positive disadvantage)

 

asking you to pay an unlawful claim to another debt collector who has no authority to claim anyhting anyway.

 

Now,

what might happen is that Gladdys write again at the behest of WY parking and demand some other equally unjustified amount but this time threatening court action.

 

They like losing money for their clients with shoddily prepared and presented claims so although it is a royal PITA not an unsurmountable object.

 

As we expect you to get that next letter then you had better be getting some pictures of the signage that you have identified and pictures similar to the one posted that show the land from the public highway.

 

What is needed is some sense of scale so how big are the signs,

how many,

where and how big are the letters on the signs

as they are supposed to legible from a distance that you would be if sat in the driving seat of your car to read them.

 

What the signs say may well sink any claim

but they rely on speculation and statistics,

85% of people do not defend a court claim

so it doesnt matter what twaddle they write

most go rubber stamped unread.

Dont be one of them.

Link to post
Share on other sites

can you pop your picture and letter up in PDF please

 

 

dx

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

  • 2 months later...

instructed not will

 

 

did you get those photos done?

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

Hi dx100uk, Thank you for your reply.

 

No I havent taken any photos yet, please could provide some guidance on what sort of photos/ quantity/ quality?

 

I will arrange to get these done next time I am up there.

 

Street view pictures

Pics.pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites

Regarding the pictures,

it is evident there is no warning regaring any offers of any contracts at the entrance to the land so cant be said that an offer was made and accepted.

The members of the IPC do not use the POFA to create a keeper liability so any claim will be against the driver,

who you have not identified so it is for them to show proof of who was driving at the time.

 

I would respond to Gladstones at this juncture along the following lines:

 

Dear sirs,

any debt to your client is denied as no offer of a contract was ever made to the driver of the vehicle at the time so it stands there was none to breach.

 

As the pair of bandits Will and John at the IPC claim they have personally vetted all of the signage at the site then you will have no need to inform your client that they are clearly in breach of the ATA CoP on this as they will be aware of that already.

 

Your client will also be aware that adding unspecified additional charges to the alleged debt is unlawful under both consumer and contract law and civil procedure rules so they wont need telling to explain how they arrived at the figure of £150.

 

Your client will also know that there is no keeper liability in this matter and I put it to strict proof they show as to who was the driver at the time.

 

A stupid response citing Elliott v Loake or CPS v AJH films will cut no ice, we all know what judges say about that particuler confection.

 

Unless you WANT your client to lose money pursuing this matter you should advise them to reconsider engaging your services to further their claim as it stands no chance of success and will only end up as another heroic failure for Gladstones solicitors on the Parking Prankster's blog.

 

That should be enough to show that any action would then be unreasonable under Civil Procedure Rules You might be tempted to send a copy directly to WY parking as well as to gladdys

 

No point being nice or polite, that wont help you.

A copy of this letter will be useful should you end up in court as it will help you get a full cost recovery order

Link to post
Share on other sites

:behindsofa::behindsofa: i'd go research that if I were you ..quietly..

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

  • 2 weeks later...

Further to not getting a simple yes/no answer to my previous question

- not being sure whether to send the response advised by ericsbrother

- I didn't send a reply.

 

Yesterday I RECEIVED A COURT CLAIM FORM

 

Name of the Claimant WY Parking Enforcement Limited

Date of issue – 9th August 2017

 

Date to acknowledge = 25nd August 2017

date to submit defence = 8th September 2017

 

What is the claim for –

 

 

1)The driver of the vehicle registration (the 'Vehicle') incurred the parking charges(s) on 29/10/2016 for breaching the terms of parking on the land at Glassy Bar 95 Legrams Lane Bradford BD7 1NH

 

2}The defendent was driving the vehicle and/or is the keeper of the vehicle.

 

3)AND THE CLAIMANT CLAIMS

£150 for parking charges/ damages and indemnity costs if applicable, together with interest of £8.39 pursuant to s69 of the county courts act 1984 at 8% pa, continuing to judgement at £0.03 per day.

 

• What is the value of the claim?

Amount claimed £158.39

Court fee £25

Legal representative's fee £50

Total amount £233.39

 

Please can you advise on the correct action to take?

Edited by 1mm3
Link to post
Share on other sites

Go on to MCOL, register acnowledge the claim. and tick DEFEND ALL DX and the team will be along with much better focused advice soon.

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

 

The bailiff: A 12th Century solution re-branded as Enforcement Agents for the 21st Century to seize and sell debtors goods as before Oh so Dickensian!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi all,

More detailed pictures attached showing the approximate area where the vehicle was parked and detailed pictures of the sign.

 

I can confirm there is no signage on entry to the car park other than that on the right hand side on the wall.

 

The only signage on the left hand side is on a fence (which is in a poor state of repair and falling backwards, causing the sign to be even more difficult and lower to see).

 

As can be seen in the first (google streetview) pictures even a medium sized vehicle would block the sign nevermind a large vehicle.

 

Based on the information I have given: do I have a realistic chance of defending the case?

 

I would rather pay the £250 odd and save myself the headache of filing defence/ turning up in court/ possible further costs if Im going to lose anyhow

 

I will await your replies before responding on MCOL

 

Also someone removed my previous attachment of the scanned claim form?

pictures.pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites

pop up on the MCOL website detailed on the claimform.

.

register as an individual

note the long gateway number given

then log in

.

select respond to a claim and select the AOS box.

.

then using the details required from the claimform

.

defend all

leave jurisdiction unticked.

click thru to the end

confirm and exit MCOL.

.

get a CPR 31:14 request running to the solicitors

.

don't sign anything

.

to the solicitors

[Your address]

.

[Their address [solicitors]

.

[Date]

.

Dear Sir or Madam,

.

Re: (Claimant's name) v (Your name) Case No:

.

CPR 31.14 Request

.

On (date) I received the Claim Form in this case issued by you out of the (Name) 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 / the] document(s) mentioned in your Particulars of Claim:

.

1. the contract between [parking company name] and the landowner that assigns the right to enter into contracts with the public and make claims in their own name,.

.

2.proof of planning permission granted for signage etc under the Town and Country Planning Act 2007

.

3.copies of the notice to driver, notice to keeper and any other correspondence from [insert Claimant Name] & [insert Solicitors Name} to the defendant that they intend to rely upon in court.

.

You should ensure compliance with your CPR 31 duties and ensure that the document(s) I have requested are disclosed at your earliest convenience..

.

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.

.

Further, where I have requested a copy of a document, the original of which is now in the possession of another person, you will have a right to possession of that document if you have mentioned it in your case. You must take immediate steps to recover and preserve it for the purpose of this case.

.

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 are unable to comply with this request within 14 days and believe that you will never be able to comply with this request please confirm in your response.

.

You are reminded that as this case is yet to be allocated to a track, CPR31:14 does apply, a refusal to comply because you 'think' at this stage you dont have too will be used against you in any filed defence.

.

Yours faithfully

.

TYPE YOUR NAME DO NOT SIGN IT

 

.......................

 

 

there are no extra costs in small claims

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

We will never know if you had sent EBs letter what would have happened

but it would have let them know they had no chance of winning

and a good chance of getting financially hammered by the Judge had they done so.

 

Their case is already fatally flawed. EB said on post 9

 

1]no offer of a contract at the entrance so there is no contract for you to breach

2]no POFA so they cannot sue you as the keeper

3] the addition of extra charges is unlawful which makes the total demanded null and case over

Link to post
Share on other sites

you have got this BECAUSE you didnt respond.

 

The detail of the response was not important,

85% of all county court claims go undefended so they are playing a numbers game and believe that you will fall into that vast percentage of people who hide their head in the sand.

 

Now you have to do something so as said,

you acknowledge the claim,

preferably online

and send a CPR 31.14 request to Gladdys and give them 14 days to respond.

 

As you have acknowledged the claim (any delay will completely screw this method up)

you will be able to include their lack of response to the CPR request in your defence to show that they have not shown a cause for action againt you,

the defendant because they have no claim against you as the keeper of the vehicle but only the driver and you demand "strict proof" as to who that was.

 

They will obfustate on this point

but there are several examples of their claims being chucked out summarily because they havent doen things properly and you will be producing examples of this.

 

At the moment a short bullet point defence is all this it required and we will help you with the rest of that when you need to get it writen up, in about 3 weeks time. Keep an eye on the clock.

 

Also as Gladdys are useless it may be worth telling their clients about their past performance and suggest they drop the matter or they will be paying you not only your full costs as theirs is a hopeless claim improperly executed but also for the breach of the DPA for obtaining your keeper details when they had no cause to as the POFA doesnt apply and you will be seeking damages for this breach, as other intended victims of gladdys/IPC clients have been forced to pay.

 

Once they realise that court is not a one way street they may very well instruct Gladys to pack it in and if they dont questions about Champerty should be asked.

That will be all for after the defence is filed and they tel the court they wish to continue.

 

Gladdys may well tell you their client is going to do this and that before you get anything from the courts,

do not respond to them directly,

they want to trick you into agreeing either a settlement or a hearing on the papetrs where thye have the opportunity to lie with impunity.

 

They dont want open court because they lose all properly defended claims

Link to post
Share on other sites

You are lucky that the parking company is a member of IPC.

If the members follow the IPC guide lines they will always lose in Court since their Code of Conduct breaches the Law in several places.

 

 

It just goes to show how inept the DVLA are especially as they claim they are "rigorous and robust" in protecting the motorist.

Tweedledee and Tweedledum-maybe that should be Tweedledumb for them both.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Doesn't matter whether BPA or IPC, both clubs for the cowboys. now follow the advice given and all should be well. There is sufficient evidence to kill their claim in court and get you some costs back.

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

 

The bailiff: A 12th Century solution re-branded as Enforcement Agents for the 21st Century to seize and sell debtors goods as before Oh so Dickensian!

Link to post
Share on other sites

months ago you were asked for photos of the site, signage etc.

 

 

Have you actually bothered to do this?

IF not you get down there pronto and take pctures of

the entrance to the land and

any signage visible from the public highway,

the place where you parked and

any signage on the site.

 

 

A picture of every different sign will be needed but not a picture of signs that say the same.

Note the size of the signs and the size of the writing

Link to post
Share on other sites

my apologies, I thought there was more to be seen.

 

The lack of signage at the entrance and a sign 2 storeys up the side of a building isnt something that one would immediately notice so they will have a struggle with that.

 

The wording fo the signage is not an offer of a contract to park but a prohibition and also it is confusing so not creating a contract.

 

For example, it says about payments but does not offer any method of paying nor contact details as it refers to paying for a pcn, not parking.

 

Therefore not a genuine offer of parking.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

My defence needs to be filed by next week Friday 8th September if I am correct.

 

Over 2 weeks have passed since my CPR request and I have heard nothing from Gladstones/ WY Parking.

 

Should I write to court requesting them to strike it out?

Link to post
Share on other sites

you can as a separate issue,

you argue that under CPR 16.4 they have failed to show a cause for action against the defendant.

 

Also point out all the detail that is missing,

ie whether this is a claim for breach of contract or money due under a contractul agreement.,

 

how they arrived at the amount they are claiming when the contract amount is £90 (or whatever) and also whether the statement of truth is signed by claimant or someone else (often that person has no knowledge so cant sign it)

 

You also include their lack of written authority in your defence so you say something like :-

"the claimant has failed to show any assignment of authority from the landowner to enter into contracts and to make legal claims in their own name by way of answering a CPR 31.14 request.

The defendant believes that no such written authority exists and thus the claimant has no locus standi."

 

this is likely to at least get a judge to ask the question

but if the papers get read well before the hearing date a Case Management Hearng or order may well be sent out

 

Read up on the reasosn why gladdys get slated for their rubbish roboclaims and use it to your advantage.

 

 

Quote other hearings as well, they are not binding but can be "persuasive".

Link to post
Share on other sites

Please can someone give me some guidance what to write/ layout for the court strike out request?

 

Wont this lead to a N244 and a further £255 cost (potentially costing up to 488.39 depending on judge lottery). That extra £255 is not something i am willing to risk.

 

Can I not simply point out that they have failed to comply with my CPR 31.14 request and make it look better in courts eyes OR Should I just file my defence as planned?

 

Also: just to clarify, IF this goes to court and I lose, will this go on my credit file? I would rather pay the £255 and keep my clean credit file than play the judge lottery

Link to post
Share on other sites

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...