Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like

CMS/Gladstones claimform - windscreen PCN rental car - QUEEN STREET APARTMENTS (Leicester)


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2286 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

Hello all. New to this forum, just going to copy and paste the template with my answers.

 

Name of the Claimant: Comprehensive Management Services LTD

claimants Solicitors: Gladstones Solicitors Limited

 

Date of issue: 25/09/2017

Date of Acknowledgement - 13/10/2017

Date to file defence - 27/10/2017

 

Particulars of Claim:

1.The driver of the vehicle registration ... (the 'Vehicle') incurred the parking charge(s) on 04/06/2017 for breaching the terms of parking on the land at QUEEN STREET APARTMENTS

 

2.The Defendant was driving the Vehicle and/or is the Keeper of the Vehicle.

 

3.AND THE CLAIMANT CLAIMS

£160 for Parking Charges / Damages and indemnity costs if applicable, together with interest of £2.91 pursuant to s69 of the County Courts Act 1984 at 8% pa, continuing to Judgment at £0.04 per day.

 

What is the value of the claim?

£162.91 + £25 Court fee + £50 Legal representative's costs = £237.91

 

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 ? Comprehensive Management Services LTD.

 

Were you aware the account had been assigned – did you receive a Notice of Assignment? Not sure what "Notice of Assignment" is, I did receive a PCN & a "Letter Before Claim".

 

 

Full Story

- I pay £50 PCM (in addition to rent) to Queen Street Apartments for parking in the car park in question. This is for my can.

 

- As my car had suffered crash damage, and was stationary in the car park,

I picked up a rental car (listed in POC) on Saturday 3rd June at 14:46.

I have proof of this.

It's worth noting that as this was a rental, I was the temporary keeper of the vehicle, but not the owner.

 

- Once arriving at the car park in question with the rental car,

I went immediately to the administration office of my building where parking permits are issued.

They have previously provided me temporary permits for rental cars in the past, free of charge.

 

- Unfortunately, the office was closed at this time, and as far as I am aware, there is no other way to attain a permit.

 

- As soon as the Queen Street Apartments staff were back in the office on Monday,

I immediately obtained the parking permit (it was too late, I already had the parking ticket).

I still have the parking permit as proof.

 

- My defence is that I did everything I possibly could have done in order to comply with the regulation, but was unable to do so.

As a resident of Queen Street Apartments who pays for a spot in this car park,

I was well within my rights for my car to be there

- even though a parking permit was not present.

 

I appealed the parking fine with the Independent Appeals Service (using my PCN number),

and it was rejected on the basis that they are "only able to look at the lawfulness of the charge and not at any mitigating circumstances".

 

Gladstones Solicitors then sent me a "Letter Before Claim".

I responded that I am unwilling to pay on the basis of [what I wrote above].

Now, they sent me the claim form.

 

I would appreciate any advice on how to proceed.

While I am happy to fight this (pending your advice),

it is a concern that if this goes to court, and I lose,

I may have to pay out several thousand pounds in legal fees

- at least I read that this is a possibility.

 

I have yet to respond to, or acknowledge, the claim form,

although I have until 13/10/2017 to do so.

 

 

I am not sure if it is worth me defending this,

or if I should just pay the money they are requesting?

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 59
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

If you lose - which you won't - you'll have to pay very limited costs because this is a small claims action. Certainly not thousands of pounds! In Gladstone's claim they are asking for £75 costs.

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

its is NOT A FINE

and they canr claim '£1000's in legal fees' if you defend

simply follow the std practice

 

 

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

 

should be easy to defend you have supremacy of contract

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

What does the lease say about parking?

I'm sure your lease with the owners out trumps any contract they have with Mr rip-off parking clowns ltd

 

The only reference to parking I have in my rental documentation is that "rental payments are £xxx.xx inc car". However, I do not have my tenancy agreement and have requested a copy of this.

 

If you lose - which you won't - you'll have to pay very limited costs because this is a small claims action. Certainly not thousands of pounds! In Gladstone's claim they are asking for £75 costs.

 

That's extremely comforting to know. Thank you.

 

 

@DX100UK

 

Thanks for such a detailed post, I sincerely appreciate that.

 

Will follow your instructions, get the letter posted tomorrow, and let you know how it goes.

 

Thanks again.

 

Peter.

Link to post
Share on other sites

you need to acknowledge the claim or you lose by default.

This then gives you another fortnight to put in a skeleton defence.

 

The particulars of claim are their usual roboclaim and contain no detail as to how this came about or in what capacity they are suing you-the driver and keeper are 2 very different people in this case so which are you according to them?

 

That will allow you to ask for the claim to be struck out under civil procedure regs but generally request for this dont get read until the same time as all of the material relating to the case itself so you cant rely on the not having a claim to get it knocked back, you have to prepare for the worst.

 

To this end can we see pictures of the signage and redacted copies of the ticket and NTK as they are likely to be so wrong they cant create a contractual obligation in the first place.

 

the circumstances to describe also mean that this isn't a contractual matter, if you have to show a permit and the methods of obtaining one are not available the amount claimed is not a consideration for parking but a penalty set to deter parking and that is still unlawful as it is outside the decision of Beavis.

 

Also if you cannot lawfully park there then that is not an offer of a contract but a prohibition so trespass by yourself. That is nowt to do with the parking co as only the landowner can make that decision, (no licence to offer contracts).

 

In short there is no reason for the claim but as the lawyers who advise these parking co's are only in it to make money and stuff their obligations as SRA members and owners of the Trade Association the parking co's belong to.

Edited by honeybee13
Paras
Link to post
Share on other sites

simply no legal requirement

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

That is Gladdys letter of claim, not an NTK.

Also the NTD slapped on your vehicle makes it clear that they are acting on behalf of the landowner, not in their own name so you cant owe them a penny and Gladdys arent acting for the landowner.

 

 

When we see the signage I am confident that it will contain enough fatal flaws as to be worthless as an offer of a contract.

this means that when we pick out the relevent bits you can give them a good kicking

 

the correct legal term is locus standi and means the right to be there.

They cannot act on behalf of someone else.

 

You wil need to send Gladdys a CPR 31.14 request for sight of the contract between CMS and the landowner that assigns the right to enter into contracts with the public and to make civil claims in their own name.

( see other thread for a longer version of what to write)

 

 

As their ticket indcates they dont have this right Gladstones telling you that they dont have to produce aything under CPR31 for small claims track will actually be their undoing !

 

Your defence is now becoming clearer in my mind,

no locus,

they are not the creditor,

no contract offered ( probably prohibition rather than contract),

none adherence to POFA so cannot claim keeper liability and whatever the signs get wrong whick is likely to be the amount claimed is thus an unlawful penalty rather than a contractual sum.

 

There will be more that you will go into detail if the need arises (including the lack of NTK, non adherence to the new rules for LBA's and other procedural matters)

 

 

I suspect that they will bottle it at the last moment after they realise that you arent going to be scared into paying up.

Gladstones can dupe their IPC members into using their "lose yourself a fortune" service once so as this is a new outfit to fall for their soft soap I suspect that they wont drop it as soon as they get notification that you are defending, which is when they should run away as it is cheaper for them at that point.

 

Bring on the signs. make sure that you photograph the entrance to the land from the public highway as well, no signs there is nearly always a killer for them regardless of how many and how good their other signs are

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the thorough response, and apologies for my delayed reply.

 

A CPR 31.14 request has been sent through to Gladstones, and as it was tracked, I know they received this today (17/10).

 

If the document I previously uploaded is not a NTK, then I have not had one.

Apparently, I'm not 100% clear on what this document is ..

 

I have taken pictures of the signs, but I am unable to upload them,

I get an error message that simply says: "Please do not" .. :!:

 

Can I upload to a media sharing site and post the link instead?

Link to post
Share on other sites

read the upload guide

PDF please

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

Forgot they had to be PDF'd, apologies.

 

The "IMPORTANT" sign is on the black gate, which is technically at the entrance, but as the gate is always open, you wouldn't see it unless you're looking around for it. However, this sign is also on the far brick wall, as is the Comprehensive Management Services sign.

Link to post
Share on other sites

the sign says only certain people permitted but then says trespassers are allowed if they pay.

Well , that means either permission is needed or you have permission.

 

The wording fails to make sense so are they saying you can park there or not

as it prohibits people who dont have a permit from parking

so perhaps the people with permits have to pay the consideration.

 

you cannot adhere to the conditions of the signage so not a contract and the money claimed is thus a penalty

Link to post
Share on other sites

you wont,

they never respond because that kills their claim most of the time.

 

Gladdys are the IAS so they are happy to lie and ignore the court protocols to benefit their clients and more importantly, themselves.

 

They dont do this for free,

they charge the parking co win or lose but appear to take a cut if they win.

 

This means that they have a dishonest interest in prosecuting these claims but do so badly as a stop loss becasue they dont want to spend a lot of time on them as they know they are mostly garbage

Link to post
Share on other sites

urm you did file your defence on the 27th didn't you?

 

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

you should get an ack letter from the court soon then.

 

what defence did you file please on MCOL?

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

MCOL or by paper?

If MCOL then just log back in and see if anything has progressed.

Paper copy to Gladdys if you havent already.

 

Ignore anything they have to say about procedures, you follow the instructions of the court.

 

I did, and I was told that I would have a response the next day. However, I have not heard anything, positive or negative.
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
you should get an ack letter from the court soon then.

 

what defence did you file please on MCOL?

 

The defence were exactly the points we discussed here; as a summary:

 

- No way for me to obtain a permit.

- No clarity on who is being sued, owner or keeper.

- The parking charge notification is effectively a penalty to deter parking, which is unlawful.

- Signs unclear

- No response to CPR 31:14 request.

Link to post
Share on other sites

go check MCOL

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...