EPS ANPR PCN - ignored LOC now Claimform - - 29 sec stay! - Shoulder of Mutton , Birmingham ***Claim Discontinued***

[kfdh1962]

thanks dx.

 

CPR31:14 has been sent off to the solicitors, unsigned and sent  recorded delivery 

 

I will take a read on a few other parking threads as you suggest and also read additional information on the previous links .

 

In respect to the defence ill come and take further guidance on that from you all.

 

Thanks again everyone for your advice 

[kfdh1962]

good evening all, 

 

just popping up a post to update you all. 

 

first of all, no response has yet been received  from Gladstone's Solicitors to my CPR31.14 request sent on July 12th 2022, i was picking up the vibe  that i probably would not get any response to that request and so not to wait on it 

 

Having been away for a short family break holiday i am now focusing on getting the defence submitted ahead of the August 9th deadline

 

As suggested i spent some time looking back through the link that was shared and also reading some other threads

some time reading back through the link that was shared earlier in this thread. 

 

if my understanding is correct then a broadly generic defence is submitted , tailored where possible, and then flesh things out at the witness statement stage 

 

here is the draft i have so far.....

 

The Defendant contends that the particulars of claim are vague and are generic in nature which fails to comply with CPR 16.4. The Defendant accordingly sets out its case below and relies on CPR r 16.5 (3) in relation to any particular allegation to which a specific response has not been made.

 

1. It is admitted that Defendant is the recorded keeper of the vehicle. The Claimant is not in a position to state if the Defendant was the driver at the time

 

2. It is denied that the Defendant ever entered into a contract to breach any terms and conditions of the stated private land.

 

3. Further it is denied that the Claimant’s signage is capable of creating a legally binding contract.

 

4. In any case it is denied that the Defendant broke the terms of a contract with the Claimant

 

5. As held by the Upper Tax Tribunal in Vehicle Control Services Limited v HMRC [2012] UKUT 129 (TCC), any contract requires offer and acceptance. The Claimant was only contracted to provide car park management services and is not capable of entering into a contract with the Defendant on its own account, as the car park is owned by and the terms of entry set by the landowner. Accordingly, it is denied that the Claimant has authority to bring this claim. 

 

6. The Claimant is attempting double recovery by adding an additional sum not included in the original offer There are no contractual costs and interest cannot be accrued on a speculative charge.

 

7. Not withstanding the above on 12/07/2022, the Defendant made a request pursuant to CPR 31.14 for the Claimant to disclose the necessary evidence in support of their claim. To this date the claimant has failed to respond to said request.

 

8.  The Particulars of Claim is denied in its entirety.  It is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief at all.

 

 

 

The issue of deminimus is applicable in by particular situation , do i need to speak to that in my defence in any way or leave that for the witness statement

 

Other  than the claim paperwork ,   i am not currently able to locate any of the original letters sent by euro car parks (but i am still looking) so i was hoping that they would comply with my CPR31.14 request 

 

 

would appreciate some guidance on the above draft

 

thanks in advance

[dx100uk]

No far too detailed.

 

If you go back to the claimform sticky you filled in and scroll down......

 

Dx

[FTMDave]

1 hour ago, kfdh1962 said:

first of all, no response has yet been received  from Gladstone's Solicitors to my CPR31.14 request sent on July 12th 2022

Good, so later down the line in your Witness Statement you can point out that they have failed to provide important legal permissions.

 

1 hour ago, kfdh1962 said:

Other  than the claim paperwork ,   i am not currently able to locate any of the original letters sent by euro car parks (but i am still looking) so i was hoping that they would comply with my CPR31.14 request

If they don't then you can SAR them.

 

That's for later though.  It's defence time now.  Dx is spot on, look at the link mentioned, there you will find our short, generic defence.

[kfdh1962]

thank you for the guidance DX and FTMDave , so using the information from the sticky as indicated the  defence will be as below  :-

 

The Defendant contends that the particulars of claim are vague and generic in nature which fails to comply with CPR 16.4.  The Defendant accordingly sets out its case below and relies on CPR r 16.5 (3) in relation to any particular allegation to which a specific response has not been made.

 

1.  The Defendant is the recorded keeper of [details of vehicle)].

 

2.  It is denied that the Defendant entered into a contract with the Claimant.

 

3.  As held by the Upper Tax Tribunal in Vehicle Control Services Limited v HMRC [2012] UKUT 129 (TCC), any contract requires offer and acceptance.  The Claimant was simply contracted by the landowner to provide car-park management services and is not capable of entering into a contract with the Defendant on its own account, as the car park is owned by and the terms of entry set by the landowner.  Accordingly, it is denied that the Claimant has authority to bring this claim. 

 

4.  In any case it is denied that the Defendant broke the terms of a contract with the Claimant.

 

5.  The Claimant is attempting double recovery by adding an additional sum not included in the original offer. 

 

6.  The Particulars of Claim is denied in its entirety.  It is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief at all.

 

[brassnecked]

Looks OK, at this stage less is more.

[kfdh1962]

thanks all, i will go ahead and submit the more generic defence to MCOL today  

[dx100uk]

well by the 9th no rush

[kfdh1962]

defence was submitted , received a letter from the courts acknowledging receipt of defence , also received an e mailed letter from Gladstones confirmed their intention to proceed and inviting me to pay.

 

I also received  a separate communication responding to my CPR request and sending the requested information including the PCN .

 

Will properly redact all and post up later 

[brassnecked]

Oh no you gave Gladdys your email, not good, that allows them at final stage to send you stuff at 23:59:59 the day before a hearing that they have sent to the court giving you no time to respond.  email them followed up by a letter posted with Free Proof Of Posting that you accept correspondence In Writing only and any emails from them are now blocked and will bounce. 

[kfdh1962]

3 hours ago, brassnecked said:

Oh no you gave Gladdys your email, not good, that allows them at final stage to send you stuff at 23:59:59 the day before a hearing that they have sent to the court giving you no time to respond.  email them followed up by a letter posted with Free Proof Of Posting that you accept correspondence In Writing only and any emails from them are now blocked and will bounce. 

 

i had put my e mail address on the MCOL , i hadn't twigged that i could/should withhold that , will do as you suggest re sending that letter , thank you for the direction 

[dx100uk]

Wouldn't have got it from mcol no 

They can't see your full details.

 

Must be from previous Comms? 

 

Just send one email stating email is not to be used for anything to do with our mutual court claim 

 

Dx

[kfdh1962]

It's very strange....my only previous comms with Gladdys was my CPR 31.14 request , that was made in writing and did not have my e mail details on so really have no idea how they have that if they cant see that detail on the MCOL. 

 

In any event have done as suggested and notified them now that all communications sent by post only 

 

 

 

[dx100uk]

Oh well. They've got it. Time to cut off that mode of Comms 

 

Really surprised they are going to court over 29secs when there is at least a 10 mins universal grace period.... strange..they must simply have thought you had moved as you did not reply to the loc 

 

Shock coming 

 

Don't forget a sep costs list when it comes to WS time.

 

Dx

[brassnecked]

has to be Gladdys assumed a nice backdoor default, even they aren't stupid enough to try it on for 29 seconds.   Or are they?  Would be surprised if they don't bail out and cancel when they get a proper WS in response to their usual bilge.

[kfdh1962]

i have notified Gladdy's of the requirement for all future correspondence to be sent by post and blocked them. 

 

in the 2 e mails i received , one had a copy of their N180 directions requesting allocation to small claims track , ticking to agree to mediation , inviting me to settle etc. The other was response to the CPR31.14 request 

 

That contained copies of all of the pcn letters and letter before action, copy of the contract between euro parking and shoulder of mutton together with copies of signs and a map showing signage locations. proof of planning permission not provided (but they stated it is available if court requests it)..

 

Reading their contract, against the section entitled "free stay period" , it clearly states that non patrons have a 5 minute grace period and that charges only apply if that is breached . Time stamps on the pictures confirm just 29 seconds between start and end

 

There are issues around signage as well, which the maps sent to me nicely demonstrate.

 

i will post up the parking charge letter as requested previously once redacted and anything else anyone thinks would be useful to see and will read up again on witness statements. 

 

Thank you all for your help so far 

 

 

[dx100uk]

pop everything you have that is not already uploaded here in one mass PDF

 

dx

 

[brassnecked]

Looks like gladdys might bail on this one hopefully. Mediation non starter you don't owe diddly squat for 29 seconds, so no debt to haggle over.

[FTMDave]

3 hours ago, kfdh1962 said:

Reading their contract, against the section entitled "free stay period" , it clearly states that non patrons have a 5 minute grace period and that charges only apply if that is breached . Time stamps on the pictures confirm just 29 seconds between start and end

This is very, very interesting.  Yes, as dx says, please upload the lot.

 

3 hours ago, kfdh1962 said:

proof of planning permission not provided (but they stated it is available if court requests it)..

Yeah, right

[dx100uk]

post hidden

you need to remove the ref number on several images still.

what is the status of the claim on mcol?

 

dx

 

[lookinforinfo]

Do you not have the original PCN? If so posting it up could help strengthen your case.

[kfdh1962]

case status summary  on MCOL  is defence received and date , DQ filed by claimant on 19/08/2022, DQ sent to to me on 19/08/2022

 

will take care of those reference numbers i missed and repost all the documents 

[dx100uk]

 

 

 

3 copies

yes to mediation (unless you filed our Statute Barred Defence OR this is a claim for a Private Parking Ticket)

1 wit you

Suitability for determination without a hearing? no

the rest is obv

1 to the court

1 to sols (omit phone/sig/email)

1 for your file

 

dx

[kfdh1962]

the claim is for parking on private land , land belonging to a pub so then its no to mediation is that correct ?

 

 

[brassnecked]

No to mediation you either owe it or not, Mediation simplistically is about haggling over what you are willing to pay them to settle it so say someone owed say 2K, they might mediate f and agree a  a Tomlin Order that stops a CCJ if a payment arrangement made and kept to.