Jump to content


BankFodder BankFodder


PPM/gladstone claimform - residential windscreen PCN - no permit - TRS Apartments

style="text-align:center;"> Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 566 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

Hi Everyone!!


Please see below brief details of the case to date.


In August 2017 my aunt and I had gone to visit a family friend who lived in a private apartment complex.


She was the driver and is registered keeper of the vehicle.


It was late at night (i.e. 10pm) and the family friend assured us that it would be fine to park our car in the private car park for the flats.


When we returned to the car we noticed a parking charge notice stuck to the screen.

My aunt was really disappointed as we could have easily parked on the street for free.


I had once previously written to a private parking company on a 'without prejudice' basis and had offered to settle the PCN for £10.


As it had worked before I thought it would work again.


So I told my aunt that I'll write to them and offer to settle the PCN on her behalf.

I did so but the parking company did not accept the offer and wrote back to me stating that my appeal was unsuccessful.

So then I let it be.


I then received a notice from them in September 2017 which I ignored.

After which I received a Letter Before Claim from Gladstones Solicitors in November 2017.


I responded to the LBC stating that the alleged debt is disputed and any court proceedings will be vigorously defended. I also brought to their notice that their LBC was defective and did not comply with Para 3 of the Pre-Action Protocol for Debt Claims under the Civil Procedure Rules 1998. I asked them to send me a compliant LBC.


I did not receive a reply to my letter so in December 2017

- I decided to respond to their LBC online by stating that I disputed the debt as I did not want to be out of time of the 30 day reply period.

I did not receive any further correspondence from Gladstones.


I then received a County Court Claim Form in March 2018.

I acknowledged service and then filed a defence within the time period.


I then received a Notice of Proposed Allocation to the Small Claims Track at the beginning of April 2018.

I then filed form N180 DQ within the time limit.

I then received a Notice of Transfer of Proceedings at the end of April 2018.



I received a Notice of Allocation to the Small Claims Track (Hearings) in May 2018.

No date for the hearing was fixed or specified in the document.


However, it did state that

- "each party shall deliver to every other party and to the court office copies of all documents on which he intends to rely at the hearing within 21 days of the service of this order".


As I was flying abroad the next day I was not able to send any documents to the court or the claimant. I have only returned back to the UK yesterday.


I have received a witness statement from the Claimant along with Exhibits.

I still have not received any further correspondence from the court regarding the date of the hearing.




1) Am I out of time to file a Witness Statement and other evidence? or will I have time until 14 days before the hearing date when it's fixed?


2) It appears that the Claimant is also out of time in filing their Witness Statment - the date of the letter from the court was 23 May 2018 and the letter enclosing the claimant's witness statements which I received is dated 20 June 2018.


If we add 2 business days for deemed service and then add 21 days then the date by which the Claimant should have served their WS should have been 18th June 2018

Is that correct?


3) What should be my plan of action going forward?

Should I serve my WS and documents regardless as the date of hearing as not yet been fixed?

If so, can someone help me with drafting one?


My main argument is that I was neither the driver or the registered keeper of the vehicle so that claim is against the wrong defendant.


I have attached all the relevant documents and correspondence for reference.


I would greatly appreciate if someone can advise me on what I should do in the current circumstances.


Thanks in advance.


Further documents...


Further Exhibits attached to the Claimant's WS...


Please see below the Defence that I had submitted:


1. The Defendant denies any liability whatsoever to the Claimant.


2. The Defendant denies being the driver and/or registered keeper of the vehicle at the time of the incident.


The Defendant is not therefore liable for the claim and invites the court to give summary judgment pursuant to CPR Rule 24.2 against the Claimant as having no real prospect of success and there being no other compelling reason why the case should be disposed of at trial.


3. Notwithstanding paragraph 2 above, if the Claimant is intending to pursue this claim against the Defendant on the basis that the Defendant is the registered keeper then the Claimant has failed to show that the conditions for recovering this charge under Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 have been met.


The Defendant disputes that any of the conditions necessary for a claim to be pursued against the keeper of the vehicle have been met.


4.a) Notwithstanding paragraph 3 above, no evidence has been provided to show a valid Notice to Driver was given to the driver in accordance with Paragraph 7, Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012.


5. It is believed that the Claimant has no standing to bring this claim. The Claimant has failed to establish their legal right to bring a claim either as the landholder or the agent of the landholder.


Strict proof is required that there is a chain of contracts leading from the landowner to the Claimant. Thus, the Defendant disputes that the Claimant has the authority to issue parking charges on the land in their own name and that they have any locus standi to bring this case.


6. If the driver on the date of the event was considered to be a trespasser, and not allowed to park on the land, then only the landowner can pursue a case under the tort of trespass, not the Claimant, and as the Supreme Court in the ParkingEye Ltd v Beavis [2015] UKSC 67 has stated, such a matter would be limited to the landowner themselves claiming for a nominal sum.


7. The Claimant might argue that the Supreme Court’s decision in Parking Eye v. Beavis is applicable. The Defendant will argue that the present case meets none of the conditions that the Supreme Court stated were required for a parking notice to be exempt from the well-established principle that penalty charges cannot be recovered.


The main difference is that the Supreme Court determined that, in a retail park, there was a public interest in ensuring a turnover of visitors that justified a disincentive to overstay.


there is clearly no such interest in a third party such as the Claimant in this case in attempting to impose conditions in a residential car park where there is no turnover of visitors and the vehicle was not parked in pay-and-display car parking.


8. The Defendant also disputes that the Claimant has incurred £50 solicitor cost and interest. The Particulars of Claim are spectacularly deficient and woefully inadequate to show a cause of action.


9. The Claimant has not complied with CPR Rule 16.4. The Particulars of Claim contains no details and fails to establish a cause of action which would enable the Defendant to prepare a specific defence.


It just states “parking charges” which does not give any indication of on what basis the claim is brought. There is no information regarding why the charge arose, what the original charge was, what the alleged contract was nor anything which could be considered a fair exchange of information. The Defendant therefore asks that the court strike out the Particulars of Claim pursuant to CPR Rule 3.4(2)(a).


10. Finally the Claimant's Letter Before Claim dated 13th November 2017 did not fully comply with the Pre-Action Protocol for Debt Claims.


The Defendant responded to the Letter Before Claim on 08 December 2017.

However, the Claimant did not give the Defendant at least 14 days' notice of their intention to start court proceedings pursuant to paragraph 8.2 of the said Pre-Action Protocol and issued proceedings without notice.


Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

notice to driver? if they rely on para 9 of the POFA they dont need to.


You havent said what correspondence you received and when

. Did they slap a ticket on the car or rely on photographic evidence of parking and serve a NTK within 14 days of the date of the event?


What did the NTK say,

it has to include key phrases or they cant claim a bean from anyone.

Read and digest the POFA and make sure that you add copies top your evidence bundle as this is important.


Also their sign says parking permitted for certain people but not allowed for others. This then makes things a matter of trespass, not a contractual condition.


You cant agree to be bound to a contract if the only way of forming it is to break it!

this makes their signage either prohibitive in nature ( parking is permitted for x and y but not z) or at best confusing ( you agree to pay them for breaking a contract that cant be formed as you arent one of the chosen ones)


. These points need to be rammed home.

add this to point 6 or make it 2 separate points.


Also use the paucity of signage and lack of lighting at 10pm and argument about whether there was actually a contract offered as it would be impossible to be expected to find and read this sign in the pitch black.


For this you need images of the ENTRANCE to the land from the public highway so you can say that there was no real notice of being offered a contract brought to your attention.


it is not for you to go wandering round a housing estate late at night looking for such things just in case they were there. The PPC should have adequate signs at the entrance.


Again there is persuasive cases to quote so look on the parking prankster's blog and copy them and refer to them in WS but take full copies in your bundle so the judge doesnt say that you have failed to show this evidence


All of the bits about not sending you a letter in a specific form will get you a reduction in the amount awarded but you will still lose if you emphasise this to the detriment of the bits that really matter.


Now, what about planning permission

- no PP then no contract

, this can be added to point 1 in your defence.


point 7.

you wont argue it unless you put something down on paper to support your side so copies of the relevant parts of that judgement, copies of other persuasive cases, copies of other cases where Gladdys have had their heads bitten off for failing to do things properly etc.


Also look at why they are claiming additional costs.

they are claiming you owe £100 as a contractual condition.

they cant add to this as they can realy only claim extra costs for a breach of contract and that isnt applicable.


Consider buying a packet of fags in a shop.

You pay up and when you get outside you realise they are the wrong brand.


You ask for a refund and the shopkeeper agrees.

You cant ask for and extra £50 because you didnt have the mistake rectified before you left the shop


As for your point 2 who was the keeper at the time then?

Just denying something that can be proven to be true wont help you persuade the court that anything else you say is reliable.

point 5,


change this to say that you believe that they have no locus standi because they have failed to produce documentation that shows they have a contract with the landowner etc.


If they are reliant upon a contract with a managing agent then you need to argue that contract doesnt show all of the links in a chain that goes back to the freeholder.


you also should have asked the person you were visiting for a copy of their lease to see what it says about parking or use of common areas.


chances are the parking co has no right to interfere with the leaseholders quiet enjoyment and that includes harassing their visitors.


Now, on the day neither Gladdys nor the PPC will be there in person,

they rent a local solicitor to do the work


It is common for them to send a paralegal along but in your case this should be challenged as they werent involved in the initial claim

(they dont work for gladdys) so have no right of audience.


you take a copy of the relevant law on that and ask that whoever turns up either gives their SRA roll number to prove they are a solicitor or ask that they cannot speak as they have no rights of audience.


You then challenge the witness statement of the PPC and say that you want it struck out because you wish to cross examine its author and they arent there and without a legal voice to answer it is worthless.


many judges will apply the law but some will allow both the mouthpiece and the papers to be considered.


be polite but say that you disagree and would rather have an adjournment until such time the witness is able to attend to be cross examined and see what the judge wants to do.


They wont like the time being wasted and who gets it in the ear will depend on who they have decided is going to win so if they think the claim is pants then it will be a summary dismissal of their claim due to a lack of a witness to prosecute the claim etc.

Edited by dx100uk

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Can you place all those uploads in one multipage pdf please


Thread title amended

Edited by Andyorch
Thread title amended


Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for your reply ericsbrother.


They slapped a ticket on the screen. As I had written a letter to them on a 'without prejudice' basis trying to negotiate a settlement on behalf of my aunt. I did not mention who the driver or suggested that I was the keeper of the vehicle in my letter. So they just assumed I was the keeper and sent me a NTK.


They wrote in the NTK that 'We have received your details following a transfer of liability naming you as a keeper of the vehicle'. This is incorrect - they have made an assumption on the basis of my letter sent to them that I was the keeper and that I have admitted to the transfer of liability from the driver to myself. Can I challenge this with the judge in court? And ask the claimant to show evidence which proves that such transfer of liability took place.


Furthermore, please see points 7 and 8 of the Claimant's WS. In point 7 the claimant states that the notice was sent to the Defendant in accordance of with the POFA. If this statement is correct the then the Claimant should have relied on para 11 of Schd 4 POFA and got the details of the registered keeper from the DVLA and sent the NTK to them.


In point 8 - the claimant claims that the Defendant appealed the charge and provided an address for service and response to the appeal. My letter was not an appeal it was an offer to settle. Can the claimant argue this point - that I have assumed liability on behalf of the driver and/or keeper?

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

had to hide your uploads

pages 1, 2 ,6 ,11, have ref numbers or mcol passwords showing.


where are their exhibits from their WS?


Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites
Can the claimant argue this point - that I have assumed liability on behalf of the driver and/or keeper?


They'd argue that the sky was pink with green spots if they thought it'd win them the case. In other words, they can argue whatever they like, but that doesn't make it correct.

We could use your help




Please note that my posts are my opinion only and should not be taken as any kind of legal advice.


If I've helped you at all, please feel free to click on the little star under my posts and leave feedback :)

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for pointing it out. I will blackout the details and reupload




had to hide your uploads

pages 1, 2 ,6 ,11, have ref numbers or mcol passwords showing.


where are their exhibits from their WS?

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Please see attached..



Thanks for pointing it out. I will blackout the details and reupload

claim docs.pdf

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

you ask the DVLA who accessed you keeper details and when. You can use this against them as there is no transfer of liability to the keeper

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?

  • Create New...