Jump to content

  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • as i said unsure of what this 15% is about.   the FOS/FCA clearly describe how refund calcs show have been made the their relevant sites.   p'haps at this juncture it might be better to scan up to ONE multipage PDF their refund letters  another set of eyes is always belter.   please read our upload guide carefully      
    • I wouldn't bother with emailing Virgin's CEO.   In April I started a complaint about my BB connection which they repaired quickly but charged me to repair.   I was mostly ignored or promised resolution that never happened. So I complained by email to the CEO, twice, demanding written responses. On each occasion, a lowly call centre worker called and it was obvious they knew or cared little about my actual case.   Finally I got a written reply confirming the charge was dropped but not a penny offered in compo despite the issue taking months to resolve.   Virgin don't take CEO complaints seriously.
    • Dear All,   BN, BF, HB, - Thank you for your comments.    Yes sorry, i wanted to save some time by doing that as I wanted to carry out the posting ASAP OK, I have redacted the statement and it is attached here in the PDF doc.   Its our 2nd draft and I will fine tune it tonight / tomorow.   Thank you for putting me right.    Warm regards BF   Counterclaim-1.pdf
    • So according to this calculator my refund should be £4562.96 at the 8%.   This is in line with some of the management firms calculator on-line.   I have checked their letter again and they have paid from 1 Jan 1989 - 1 Jan 1994 only. They have refunded all the insurance premiums totalling £469.50 and the interest paid on the premiums to date of £257.90.  Additional interest of £1,436.36 after tax on top of refund as compensation.  Statutory rate of 8% from 1 Apr 1993 and at 15% before that.  They have not provided a breakdown of payments from 15% - 8%.  Only below:   £  469.50 - Refund of PPI premiums paid £  257.90 - Refund of interest charge on the premiums paid £1,795.44 - Statutory compensation -£      0.00 - Less any previous successful claim -£      0.00 - Less any previous refunds made directly as result of this policy -£       0.00 - Less any statutory compensation already paid -£   359.08 - Deduction from any statutory compensation interest for income tax at 20% _________ £2,163.76 - Total refund due   This will be the second time I am returning their calculations.  They made a decision last year and used a wrong date as they could not read the date and made up a date then it went to the back of the queue to be recalculated.  I had already queried the refund amount with them and they have moved the date again from the 22 Jan to 1 Jan!   Are they using a different calculator/principal why the figures are so far apart?  How am I going to show them this calculation without it going to FOS and sitting there for years to be assessed?   Can I also ask how to do the 15% calculation?  Thanks so much.  
    • Hi Burma.   You've been here for a while and I have to say I'm a bit disappointed that you're PMing this to various people off the main thread.   Advice by PM isn't what we advise here and I hope that you can post up your anonymised documents very soon.   HB
  • Our picks

    • Hermes lost parcel.. Read more at https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/422615-hermes-lost-parcel/
      • 49 replies
    • Oven repair. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/427690-oven-repair/&do=findComment&comment=5073391
      • 49 replies
    • I came across this discussion recently and just wanted to give my experience of A Shade Greener that may help others regarding their boiler finance agreement.
      We had a 10yr  finance contract for a boiler fitted July 2015.
      After a summer of discontent with ASG I discovered that if you have paid HALF the agreement or more you can legally return the boiler to them at no cost to yourself. I've just returned mine the feeling is liberating.
      It all started mid summer during lockdown when they refused to service our boiler because we didn't have a loft ladder or flooring installed despite the fact AS installed the boiler. and had previosuly serviced it without issue for 4yrs. After consulting with an independent installer I was informed that if this was the case then ASG had breached building regulations,  this was duly reported to Gas Safe to investigate and even then ASG refused to accept blame and repeatedly said it was my problem. Anyway Gas Safe found them in breach of building regs and a compromise was reached.
      A month later and ASG attended to service our boiler but in the process left the boiler unusuable as it kept losing pressure not to mention they had damaged the filling loop in the process which they said was my responsibilty not theres and would charge me to repair, so generous of them! Soon after reporting the fault I got a letter stating it was time we arranged a powerflush on our heating system which they make you do after 5 years even though there's nothing in the contract that states this. Coincidence?
      After a few heated exchanges with ASG (pardon the pun) I decided to pull the plug and cancel our agreement.
      The boiler was removed and replaced by a reputable installer,  and the old boiler was returned to ASG thus ending our contract with them. What's mad is I saved in excess of £1000 in the long run and got a new boiler with a brand new 12yr warranty. 
      You only have to look at TrustPilot to get an idea of what this company is like.
        • Thanks
      • 3 replies
    • Dazza a few months ago I discovered a good friend of mine who had ten debts with cards and catalogues which he was slavishly paying off at detriment to his own family quality of life, and I mean hardship, not just absence of second holidays or flat screen TV's.
      I wrote to all his creditors asking for supporting documents and not one could provide any material that would allow them to enforce the debt.
      As a result he stopped paying and they have been unable to do anything, one even admitted it was unenforceable.
      If circumstances have got to the point where you are finding it unmanageable you must ask yourself why you feel the need to pay.  I guarantee you that these companies have built bad debt into their business model and no one over there is losing any sleep over your debt to them!  They will see you as a victim and cash cow and they will be reluctant to discuss final offers, only ways to keep you paying with threats of court action or seizing your assets if you have any.
      They are not your friends and you owe them no loyalty or moral duty, that must remain only for yourself and your family.
      If it was me I would send them all a CCA request.   I would bet that not one will provide the correct response and you can quite legally stop paying them until such time as they do provide a response.   Even when they do you should check back here as they mostly send dodgy photo copies or generic rubbish that has no connection with your supposed debt.
      The money you are paying them should, as far as you are able, be put to a savings account for yourself and as a means of paying of one of these fleecers should they ever manage to get to to the point of a successful court judgement.  After six years they will not be able to start court action and that money will then become yours.
      They will of course pursue you for the funds and pass your file around various departments of their business and out to third parties.
      Your response is that you should treat it as a hobby.  I have numerous files of correspondence each faithfully organised showing the various letters from different DCA;s , solicitors etc with a mix of threats, inducements and offers.   It is like my stamp collection and I show it to anyone who is interested!
        • Thanks
        • Like

PPM/gladstone claimform vanished windscreen PCN - West Gate Plaza West Brom. *** WON - CASE DISMISSED ***

Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 927 days.

If you are trying to post a different story then you should start your own new thread. Posting on this thread is likely to mean that you won't get the help and advice that you need.

If you are trying to post information which is relevant to the story in this thread then please flag it up to the site team and they will allow you to post.

Thank you

Recommended Posts

you can just read out your WS.

The judge will normally ask the claimat to make their case first and then you can cross examine.


As they wont be sending the person who wrote their WS you should point out any errors and state that you would cross examine on this but you cant and if the bit you are questioning is patently false ask the judge to consider removing this from their evidence.


The judge may well have questions to ask them anyway depending on what he has read beforehand.


Then you will get to say your bit, they will cross examine, both sides will be asked to sum up and the judge makes a formal decision on record and says why he has reached that decision and quoting cases where appropriate.


Now, if their rep doesnt have the right of audience they cant cross examine or even answer any point you may wish to raise.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 134
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

That means I should print out their WS so I can see what they are saying compare to the WS they sent to me through email?


To make it clear,

I need to find out the person who will be there needs to be a qualified solicitor or barrister or a rep with claimant in person otherwise no one else are allowed to be the rep for claimant so they can’t say or argue anything I say and I would say this at the start before my WS?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am so relieved that the case has dismissed!!


I was only in the court room for approx. 1-2 mins, DJ only asked me weather the statement are true to my best knowledge and I confirm yes it is. And focused on the claimant party.

As my WS was set out clearly and claimant rep don't have any other prove so the keeper liability was not valid, so case is dismissed.


The claimant rep wanted to chat with me before we go in the court room and I said to him we can chat in the court room!


Inside the court room, first thing judge told the Rep. straight away the defendant WS state clearly there's no keeper liabity and rep understand it as he couldn't prove any other fact so he wanted to adjourn the case because he claimed he only received the bundle yesterday, (which is not true as I have the proof of postage which was signed for two weeks ago)


I didn't even have a chance to say it the judge refused straight away saying it will be a waste of time to all parties and court.


DJ then asked me how I travel there, I said drive approx. 80 miles one way, but then claimant rep argued that I could have chosen home court which is only 18 miles away from my home address, so my expenses were not granted by DJ.


But anyway the case is dismissed and I couldn't be any happier.


I would like a give a big thanks to all the site team which helped/ given advices!

Thanks you very much!


I hope you guys continues to help others and I given a small donations which hope to contribute to keep this site running!





My Witness Statement:


I NAME of Address being the defendant in this case will state as follow;


I make this Witness Statement in support of my defence in this claim.


With the limit of information / responses from Claimant, the matters set out below are within my own knowledge.


It is admitted that I was the registered keeper of the vehicle XXXX at the time of the event.


However I deny that I am liable to the claimant either as alleged in the Particulars of claim or at all.



It is not argued that the driver of the vehicle registration XXXX (‘the Vehicle’) incurred the parking charge(s) on 03/05/2017 although the validity of that claim is questioned below.


The Claimant has stated that the defendant was driving the vehicle and/or is the Keeper of the Vehicle. AND THE CLAIMANT CLAIMS £160 FOR Parking Charges/ Damages and indemnity costs of applicable, together with interest of £3.02 pursuant to s69 of the County Courts Act 1984 at 8% pa, continuing to Judgment at £0.04 per day.


Whilst it is not argued that I am the keeper of the vehicle, I was not the driver at the time of this event.


The claimant may argue that their claim for £160 is valid due to some condition on the signage that the driver has accepted. But as I was not the driver, I have accepted no such condition and no part of the POFA 2012. Schedule 4 (hereafter POFA) allows a Private Parking Company (PPC) such as the Claimant to transfer to the keeper any other charge than the original Parking Charge Notice (PCN). Therefore £100. Any claim made by the Claimant for any amount over and above that, bar the costs of bringing the claim which are recoverable in the event that the Claimant wins, must therefore be a penalty


However, the claimant in this case, either by act or omission has failed to create any keeper liability in line with the POFA and therefore has no cause of action against myself as the defendant.


No windscreen ticket (Notice to Driver (NtD)) was present on the vehicle when the driver returned to it and no NtD was given to the driver when he returned to the vehicle. This has been confirmed to me by the driver at the time.


In POFA. Section 7. Paragraph 4.b. It is clearly stated that a NtD must be issued, and affixed to the vehicle while it is stationary or handed to the driver.


(4)The notice must be given—

(a)before the vehicle is removed from the relevant land after the end of the period of parking to which the notice relates, and

(b)while the vehicle is stationary,

by affixing it to the vehicle or by handing it to a person appearing to be in charge of the vehicle.


In the absence of a NtD, POFA lays down very specific requirements for the PPC to transfer liability to the keeper of the vehicle.


It states in Section 8. Paragraph 2.c


(2)The notice must—

©state that a notice to driver relating to the specified period of parking has been given and repeat the information in that notice as required by paragraph 7(2)(b), © and (f);


Along with other requirements as can be seen on your copy of POFA. (Item 1 in your bundle).


As no NtD was ever given, then we must look to POFA Section 9. Paragraph 4.b.


(4)The notice must be given by—

(a)handing it to the keeper, or leaving it at a current address for service for the keeper, within the relevant period; or

(b)sending it by post to a current address for service for the keeper so that it is delivered to that address within the relevant period.


The relevant period where no NtD has been issued is 14 days, starting from the day after the parking event that caused the charge to be issued.


As the Claimant states that the event leading to the charge occurred on 3rd May 2017. A Notice to Keeper (NtK) must therefore have been delivered to my address on or before 18th May 2017.


No such NtK was received by me until 7th June 2017, or 35 days after the event. Therefore no keeper liability has been created.


Further. As it is claimed that the charge (Item 2 in your bundle) was issued at 22:11pm and images show the vehicle was running with lights on at 22:14pm. The Claimant is to put strict proof that they don’t know who the driver was or that they have not seen who was driving or that they were unable to issue a NtD at the time that the charge supposedly arose.


The Claimant has issued a Parking Charge Notice to the vehicle that has overstayed by only 9 minutes after the permitted period of parking has expired. Under the IPC code of practice for AOS member, on page 12 Para 15.2 (Item 3 in your bundle) which states:


‘Drivers MUST be allowed a minimum period of 10 minutes to leave a site after a pre-paid or permitted period of parking has expired.’


If a NtD was ever issued, which I contend is not the case, I deny that it is valid due to the Claimant being a Member of the International Parking Community (IPC) and therefore being subject to the IPC Codes of Practice for their Accredited Operator Scheme and having failed to comply with the same.


If there was a parking attendant at the site to take the pictures of the vehicle, then that same parking attendant should have spoken to the driver of the vehicle at the time to either issue an NtD or to mitigate the Claimants losses by asking the driver to leave. I would therefore argue that a matter of a minutes, once the driver was back with the vehicle would be de minimis.


On 19/08/2017 I informed the Claimant that I was not the driver at the time of the event and request the Claimant to drop the case as keeper liability has not been passed in accordance with POFA Paragraph 9.5.


Further to this I had no response from the claimant as per a CPR 31.14 request that was submitted before this case was allocated a track (Item 4 in your bundle), which asked for copies of any NtD, NtK and any other correspondence from Parking and Property Management Limited & Gladstone Solicitors to the Defendant that they intend to rely upon in court but Claimant declined to respond, along with other information which I required to negotiate with the Claimant.


Having received no reply I have had to cover all possible defences, causing significant distress and denying me a fair chance to defend the claim.


The Claimant’s solicitor is known to be a serial issuer of claims which arise from an automated template, with no due diligence. I believe that the Claimant’s conduct in pursing consumers through the small claim track, using an automated system is against the public interest and not something the courts should be seen to support.


I would humbly refer you to a Private Members Bill which is currently progressing through Parliament in which the Claimants Legal representatives are mentioned specifically. That can be found in Hansard dated 2nd Feb 2018. Second reading of the bill by Sir Greg Knight MP.


Some of the matters raised by MP’s in that debate regarding the shady tactics used by some PPC’s certainly make for alarming reading.


I have included some photographs of the location (Item 5 in your bundle).


There is no signage at the entrance. Taking a view from where the vehicle was parked there would have been only one sign visible to the driver but bearing in mind that it was dark at the time, it is unclear as to how visible this sign would have been as the sign is well away from any overhead or ambient lighting. The sign was certainly not obvious to me when I went to the area to take photographs.


This sign was also placed at well above eye level with terms / fees and conditions not prominent.


Therefore drivers are immediately placed at a disadvantage as the terms that they are supposedly agreeing to are not made clear.


This, once again, breaches the terms and conditions of the IPC in their CoP for AOS Members. On Page 22. Part E. Schedule 1. Signage (Item 6 in your bundle), it is clearly stated that:


Entrance signs should:

a) Make it clear that the motorist is entering onto private land.

b) Refer the motorist to the signs within the car park which display the full terms and conditions.


And goes on to say on Page 23 (also item 6):


Signs should, where practicable, be placed at the entrance to a site. Otherwise the signage within the site must be such as to be obvious to the motorist.


Whilst on the subject of signs. I believe that any signs on display fall under classes in Schedule 1 or Schedule 3 of The Town and Country Planning Regulation 2007.


Therefore, the Claimant is put to strict proof that at the time of the alleged event they had both advertisement consent and the permission from the site owner to display the signs.


With no proof from the Claimant, I have reasonable belief that the Claimant may have been and/or may be continuing to commit an offence and therefore, regardless as to all of the above, no contract could have been entered into as a contract cannot be formed as a consequence of an illegal or unlawful act.


Finally and further to all of the above, as it has been shown that the Claimant is not operating within the clear terms and conditions of the IPC CoP for AOS Members. I would draw your attention to the Claimants contract with the Managing Agent. Which is on Page 5 of the Claimants evidence pack.


Item 1 says that the Claimant: Is required to operate within an Accredited Trade Association's Code of Practice.


Which the Claimant has not done in this case.


I would argue therefore that the Claimant in this case, has operated outwith the clause in their contract with the Managing agent and has thereby rendered the contract unenforceable by their own actions.


The Defendant invites the court to dismiss the claim for the above grounds.


I believe that the facts stated in the witness statement are true and to my best knowledge.


signed and dated

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well done you. Good result. :thumb:


It just goes to show that, despite their claims, if you defend a claim from a PPC they can be (and very often are) defeated, which should be a lesson for everyone that receives one of these!



I'll amend your thread title to reflect your win :first:

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

Great result and a tolchock for Will & John.

We could do with some help from you.



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

Brilliant, utterly utterly brilliant, failed yet again!!! When will they ever learn?

Who ever heard of someone getting a job at the Jobcentre? The unemployed are sent there as penance for their sins, not to help them find work!



Link to post
Share on other sites
Here is a redacted copy of the Gladrags WS which Kikic has received via email.


I will leave Kikic to post up their final WS when they return to the thread.


They refer to the vcs judgement. The judge stated in there “The flaw in the reasoning is that it confuses the making of a contract with the power to perform it. There is no legal impediment to my contracting to sell you Buckingham Palace.”


The judge was mistaken. There may not be any legal impediment to him, a private individual, contracting to sell something he doesn’t own or have the right to sell, but that’s not the case for a company such as a PPC. A number of laws would apply to prevent any such contract being legally valid.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You *should* do yes. Might take a few days though.

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
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?

  • Create New...