Gemini Parking PCN claimform - Olympic Park

[jonnymango]

Cheers, yep, know I have to respond to this asap

[honeybee13]

On behalf of Mrs O'Frog and myself, we aren't all chaps.

 

HB

[dx100uk]

can you please complete this.

 

[jonnymango]

1 hour ago, honeybee13 said:

On behalf of Mrs O'Frog and myself, we aren't all chaps.

 

HB

Apologies to you and Mrs O'Frog for the unwittingly casually sexist generic greeting!

[honeybee13]

Thank you.

 

HB

[jonnymango]

As requested dx...

 

Service of Claim has been acknowledged online and defend all selected.

 

Name of the Claimant : Gemini Parking Solutions London Limited, 13-17 High Beech Road, Loughton, Essex, IG10 4BN

claimants Solicitors: Gladstones Solicitors Limited, The Terrace, High Legh Park, Warrington Road, high Legh, WA16 6AA

 

Date of issue – 12th March 2019

 

Date to submit defence = April 12 (33 days in total) -

 

What is the claim for – the reason they have issued the claim?

 

1,"The driver of the vehicle with the registration XXXXXXX (the 'Vehicle') parked in breach of the terms of parking stipulated on the signage (the 'Contract') at Logan Close - Logan Close East Village Development London E20, on 24/09/2017 thus incurring the parking charge (the 'PCN').

 

2.The driver of the vehicle agreed to pay the PCN within 28 days of issue yet failed to do so.

The Claimant claims the unpaid PCN from the Defendant as the driver/keeper of the Vehicle.

 

3.Despite demands being made the Defendant has failed to settle their outstanding liability.

 

4.THE CLAIMANT CLAIMS £100 for the PCN,

£60 contractual costs pursuant to the Contract and PCN terms and conditions, together with statutory interest of £17.73 pursuant to s69 of the County Courts Act 1984 at 8.00% per annum, continuing at £0.04 per day."

 

What is the value of the claim? Amount claimed £177.73 + Court Fee £25.00 + Legal Representatives cost £50.00 = Total Amount £252.73

 

Has the claim been issued by the Private parking Company or was the PCN assigned and it is the Debt purchaser who has issued the claim ? Claimant is the Private Parking company, Claim form is signed by Will Wareing as Claimant's Legal Representative

 

Were you aware the account had been assigned – did you receive a Notice of Assignment?  It's not been assigned has it? - Back in December 2017 I received a letter from Debt Recovery Plus Ltd demanding £160, and then nothing until the Letter Before Claim from Gladstones acting on behalf of Gemini in November 2018

 

thanks

[ericsbrother]

well clearly the driver didnt agree to pay the charge or if they did then why are they suing you and not the driver. they should have said the driver became liable but that is Gladstones for you, lazy and incompetent.

 

now the amount they can legally claim from the KEEPer is the original £100 but again they dont let that inconvenience them generally this wont bother you because the liklihood of them winning the claim is slim but you will be pointing out this attempt to chisel more money than could ever be due in your WS at the appropriate time.

 

So go to moneyclaim and either start a new account or use the new  beta online simple claim filing system.

It has a couple of glitches but I managed to plough through it.

 

Once you have acknowledged the claim you have another 14 days to submit an outline of your defence.

You can use something straightforward like

 

"there was no offer of a contract by the claimant to the defendant at the time so there is no cause for action" or something like that.

 

If you get no response from the CPR 31.14 request for documents you are going to send to Gladdys (see common topics for same) then you can add that you dont believe they have the authority to enter into contracts or make civil claims as they have failed to produce evidence of that authority

[dx100uk]

please note your corrected def filing date above.

 

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 start 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 [if one is not listed send to the claimant]

 

type your name ONLY

no need to sign anything
.
you DO NOT await the return of paperwork.
you MUST file a defence regardless by day 33 from the date on the claimform [1 in the count]
 

[jonnymango]

Thanks EricsBrother and Dx, much appreciated as always.

 

could you please cast your eye over the attached and give it the nod to go off to Gladstones. 

 

Also, further to EB's line about the defence statement, "there was no offer of a contract by the claimant to the defendant at the time so there is no cause for action" or something like that." are there any links to a full typicala letter similar to the one for the CPR Request?

 

 

Gladstones Solicitors CPR31-14 Req Redacted.pdf

[ericsbrother]

no because every situation is different.

If you want me to write you a bespoke letter I only charge £500 a word.

 

YOU know what they say is the breach (or maybe the contractual term) YOU have read hundreds of posts on parking and digested the POFA until you can regurgitate it perfectly and YOu have read a load of case law to know what is wrong with their argument. If that isnt true you pull your finger out. as a hint they are claiming for breach of contract so again is that the case?

 

the wording on the sign wil determine whether  what yu did is a contractual condition (ie park on a spotted circle and you owe us £100) or was it a breach such as being charged £100 for parking slightly over a line because you have to park within them

 

as for cpr 31.14, I wouldnt bother with the first para, just put  Re:gemini Parking Solutions v johhnymango case ref:xx11yy22

they arent going to reply anyway

[jonnymango]

haha! cheers Ericsbrother. 

[dx100uk]

16 hours ago, jonnymango said:

Thanks EricsBrother and Dx, much appreciated as always.

 

could you please cast your eye over the attached and give it the nod to go off to Gladstones. 

 

Also, further to EB's line about the defence statement, "there was no offer of a contract by the claimant to the defendant at the time so there is no cause for action" or something like that." are there any links to a full typicala letter similar to the one for the CPR Request?

 

 

Gladstones Solicitors CPR31-14 Req Redacted.pdf 40.83 kB · 3 downloads

you send the cpr as is..there is no need to adapt anything bar your details

 

your defence is not a letter its a 2 or 3 line text file you upload to mcol website.

 

you've got the basic correct for it already.

 

 

 

[jonnymango]

Thank you dx. I had a quick look yesterday and will have a proper look at the defence filing section on MCOL this evening. cheers.

 

CPR letter will go in the post recorded delivery today.

[jonnymango]

Morning all, been away for a couple of weeks so I am just about to file my defence (today or tomorrow latest).

 

Based on the wisdom imparted in this thread and the links provided I am proposing the following statement, which I would be grateful if you could advise on its suitability in this case:

 

"The signage present at the parking location states permit holders or pay by phone. This does not constitute an offer of a contract, has no mention of any monies being due to the claimant, and doesn’t carry a list of core terms for the driver to consider, let alone mention any monies being owed for breaching such non-existent terms.

 

A CPR 31.14 request made via recorded delivery, for information relating to the claim including proof of authority from the landowner to enter in to contract with the motorist has gone ignored and the claimant has failed to provide evidence of that authority and the authority to enter in to contracts and make subsequent civil claims."

 

Thanks in advance

[shamrocker]

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.

[jonnymango]

Thanks Shamrock, I'll try again....
 

"I am challenging the validity of this claim for the following reasons:

 

1: The initial NTK is not POFA compliant. It states that Gemini act for an un-named client and does not name themselves as creditor.

 

2: The signage present at the entrance to the street and adjacent to parking pays does not indicate any charges, tariffs, penalties, or times of operation of restrictions, and does not constitute an offer of a contract.

 

3: The NTK states the driver of the car became liable for the charge, and the claim is against the driver of the vehicle. No evidence has been offered by the claimant as to the identity of the driver of the vehicle on that day. They are pursuing me solely as the registered keeper.

 

4: Information requested by a CPR 31.14 request made via recorded delivery, for information relating to the claim including proof of authority from the landowner to enter in to contract with the motorist has not been provided, and the claimant has failed to provide evidence of that authority and the authority to enter in to contracts and make subsequent civil claims, and to provide evidence of planning approval for their signage."

 

Further advice welcomed please, thanks.

[ericsbrother]

Sorry but this is where you chuck the kitchen sink at it rather than making vague bullet points with no supporting evidence.

 

What you are writing is roughly your side of events and referring to the evidnec you can provide so that will include their signage, any evidence or lack of authority for them to offer anything, their paperwork if that doesn't create a liability, the POFA where the vital phrases have been missed by the parking co or the timescales missed.

 

then you pick holes in the wording and substance fo their claim, for example,

contractual sum or breach of contract

- they are different.

are they claiming from you as driver or keeper, cant assume they are one and the same.

 

What about the amount claimed?

it will invariably include unicorn food tax so if they are saying keeper ia liable they are limited to asking for the amount shown on the NTK and you should make this clear as it helps damage their assertion that driver and keeper liability are the same thing

 

As they havent responded to your CPR request for documents you can start off with that but it isnt a golden bullet, you have to show somehting of your own.

 

Understand that a court hearing replaces trail by combat so you cant turn up to a sword fight without a sword just because they havent sent you a piece of paper.

 

So start again at the beginning with the actual event and refer to yourself as defendant and not driver/keeper or mention anyone else.

 

i will reread the thread and pen some more later but in the meanwhile look back at what you have as evidence you can take with you and try and work out how it all stitches together.

 

You have had months to think about this and you have bee reminded to read up on it but you dotn appear to have taken any serious notice of past cases or advice.

[shamrocker]

EB - the OP is only doing their defence at this stage, not witness statement. Is your advice aimed at doing the WS?

[jonnymango]

Thanks Eric, I appreciate all of the above, I am somewhat surprised that this advice about the depth of information required to be submitted now is contrary to yours and DX100's previous advice that..

 

"Once you have acknowledged the claim you have another 14 days to submit an outline of your defence.

You can use something straightforward like "there was no offer of a contract by the claimant to the defendant at the time so there is no cause for action" or something like that."

and

"your defence is not a letter its a 2 or 3 line text file you upload to mcol website."

 

I'll revisit, but would very much appreciate the benefit of your experience.

 

thanks

 

[ericsbrother]

yes it was.

My mistake in thinking we had progressed further

 

If it outline defence then I would make bullet points.

 

1. The NTK fails to create ANY liability under the POFA as it states that Gemini are merely agents of an unnamed third party and are  not the creditor. therefore they have no locus standi in this matter

 

2. the defendant is the keeper of the vehicle and the claimant have failed to create a keeper liability in this matter. It is put to strict proof that they show a cause for action against the defendant

 

3 the signage doesn not create a contract and makes no mention of any charges or conditions that could lead to a claim for monies due to a breach of any contractual conditions.

 

4 The defendant does not belive that the claimant has a contract with the landowner that assigns them the right to enter into contracts with the public and to make civil claims in their own name as they have failed to show sight of such a contract under a CPR31.14 request for documents.

 

dont  add flowery detial by saying I sent a CPR by recorded delivery or use the term INITIAL NTK, they can only send one and it give them wriggle room

[jonnymango]

Thanks EricsB, you put the wotsits right up me there before!

 

Am I ok to copy-paste your version in to my defence statement?

[ericsbrother]

of course but please correct the typos.

I have MS so my co-ordination is rubbish

[jonnymango]

Thank you. Will do, and really appreciate your time and efforts.

[dx100uk]

think ive got them all EB  

regards

 

dx

 

[jonnymango]

Defence submitted. Thank you, and I'll be back as soon as I hear anything further.

 

On that note, what am I likely to hear next from anyone?