ukpc/gladstone Letter Before Claim - 2017 residential parking - Jubilee Court, Bracknell

[LoyalRoyal97]

Hi, 

 

Hope someone is able to provide some advice, I have given as much information as I can think may be relevant.

 

Today I’ve received a Letter Before Claim from Gladstones Solicitors regarding a PCN from 09/11/2017. This is the first letter I have received but then I have moved house since that date so unsure if any previous correspondence may have been sent. 

The location of the PCN was where I was living at the time however with it being so long ago I am struggling to remember any specific details. I definitely had a permit however parking was extremely busy so I may not have been in a marked space. 

I have filled out the question template below, if anyone has any advice for me to contest that would be great. 

Thank you

 

1 The date of infringement? 09/11/2017

 

2 Have you yet appealed - no

 

Have you received a Notice To Keeper? (NTK) [must be received by you between 29-56 days] Not to my knowledge, only letter received is attached

 

What date is on it? N/A

 

Did the NTK provide photographic evidence? N/A

[scan up BOTHSIDES to ONE PDF of the PCN and your NTK - follow the upload guide]

 

3 Did the NTK mention Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (PoFA) [Y/N?]  N/A

 

4 If you appealed after receiving the NTK,

did the parking company give you any information regarding the further appeals process?

[it is well known that parking companies will reject any appeal whatever the circumstances]

N/A

5 Who is the parking company?

UK Car Park Management Limited

 

6. Where exactly [Carpark name and town] did you park?

Jubilee Court, Bracknell

Gladstones Letter.pdf

[Homer67]

Hang on for the experts, you have to reply to this but you must be specific in what you say.

 

It sounds like you would have had supremacy of contract so their private parking charge is not enforceable, but others will be along to ask you the right questions.

 

 

In the meantime do nothing.

Edited January 25, 2022 by Homer67
typo

[mantis shrimp]

Was Gladstones' letter sent to you at your present address?

[dx100uk]

You must reply within 30 days

 

simply search here for gladstone snotty letter. There are 100's

 

post up your version for checking.

 

Dx

[LoyalRoyal97]

Mantis - Yes, this arrived this morning at my current address

 

dx - Thank you, will search for a template and post here before sending

 

Appreciate the fast responses

 

Hopefully something like this works, this isn't my strong suit i'm afraid, any advice on edits greatly received!

Full disclosure, I have edited another that I found on this site.

 

Gladstones Solicitors Limited 

Unit B, 1st Floor

210 Cygnet Court

Centre Park, 

Warrington,

WA1 1PP

 

25th January 2022

 

Dear Will and John,

 

I am in receipt of your letter before claim dated 19th January 2022 regarding REF: (the ref number).

Your letter contains insufficient detail of the claim and fails to provide copies of evidence your client places reliance upon.

 

I would strongly advise you to cease and desist your communications, any further action on your part will be vigorously defended.

Your actions are a waste of costs and court time.

 

Yours Sincerely,

 

 

 

[mantis shrimp]

that is too brief. At the very very least you need to make it clear that you have not previously received any information or material from them or their client.

 

 

[dx100uk]

i wouldn't give away anything like not receiving previous stuff. still playing yours cards, or revealing you might not have any..yet..

 

however i agree its too brief.

[mantis shrimp]

Gladstones say their client is satisfied it has sufficient evidence to support court proceedings. I would ask to see that evidence, and point out that not providing it most certainly would not be in compliance with any pre-action protocol. The protocols require a claimant to give details of all facts and matters on which it intends to rely in bringing a claim.

 

 

[dx100uk]

as they always do.

 

not important at this stage

 

read a few of our PCN claimform threads.

 

dx

 

[LoyalRoyal97]

Thanks for your comments both, what are your thoughts on the below? Added a couple of sentences requesting evidence and referencing the pre-action protocols. 

 

Gladstones Solicitors Limited 

Unit B, 1st Floor

210 Cygnet Court

Centre Park, 

Warrington,

WA1 1PP

 

25th January 2022

 

Dear Will and John,

 

I am in receipt of your letter before claim dated 19th January 2022 regarding REF: (the ref number).

Your letter contains insufficient detail of the claim and fails to provide copies of evidence your client places reliance upon.

I am requesting to see the evidence in which you claim to hold, failure to do so will contradict the pre-action protocols. The onus is on you to supply this or provide a reasonable explanation as to why this is not available. (Section 5) 

 

I would strongly advise you to cease and desist your communications, any further action on your part will be vigorously defended.

Your actions are a waste of costs and court time.

 

Yours Sincerely,

[dx100uk]

as i said i would not be giving away any hints you might or might not possess anything in relation to the LOC

 

not requesting or doing something in a LOC plays zero part in any court claim should there ever ever be one.

you cant be reprimanded for not replying to a LOC however it always looks bad and puts a claimant on the backfoot should they ever fail to send one, as the pre action protocol scheme was specifically designed to detract speculative claims from parking companies, it got silly when figures reached some 750'000 in one year.

[FTMDave]

How about -

 

 

Dear Will & John,

 

Re: your reference XXXXX, vehicle registration XXXXX

 

cheers for your Letter Before Claim.  I rolled around on the floor in mirth at the idea you thought I would actually take such bilge seriously and then cough up.

 

Now you know and I know and now you know that I know all the reasons why these residential parking claims are utter pants.

 

Your thicko client, UKPM, have been hammered in court so many times in these cases, but if they haven't learnt their lesson and want another thrashing, fine, bring it on.

 

I see the government this week dropped tests for fully-vaccinated travellers returning to the UK, so if your client is daft enough to take me to court then I will delight in tolchocking them, then obtaining an unreasonable costs order under CPR 27.14(2)(g), spending it all on a foreign holiday, and then laughing at your client's expense while I down my aperitivi.

 

I look forward to your deafening silence.

 

COPIED TO UK CAR PARK MANAGEMENT LIMITED

 

 

Gladstone's and UKPM are well aware of where these letters originate from and that they would have a real battle on in court, so lately have always run away ... although of course there are no guarantees.

 

However, hang on through tomorrow and see what the other regulars think.

Edited January 26, 2022 by FTMDave
Typo, mixing up client & clients

[FTMDave]

The worrying aspect is that they could well run away ... then a few months down the line, knowing full well you'd moved, sue you at your old address, knowing you would lose by default.  Therefore I suggest sending the above letter off on Thursday if the other regulars don't disagree, then on Saturday another one to just UKPM

 

 

Dear UK Car Park Management Limited,

 

re: PCN no.XXXXX

 

please note that I no longer live at XXXXX but that my new address is XXXXX.

 

Yours,

[mantis shrimp]

Using language like "your thicko client" will not help you. Stay calm and measured. If a judge sees this letter, as he may well do, then language such as this will not help him form a sympathetic view of you.

 

also "bilge", "rolled around in mirth", "utter pants"; in fact most of the way you have put things.  Write like the grown up person you would like the judge to think you are.

Edited January 26, 2022 by mantis shrimp
combine posts

[mantis shrimp]

Sorry, I see that the draft letter that I have criticised was not written by @LoyalRoyal97.

[FTMDave]

Mantis, the PPCs go to great pains to try to pretend they are some sort of official body.  They call their invoices PCNs (parking charge notice) which, guess what, are the same initials as the councils' PCNs (penalty charge notice).  They have forms and deadlines, etc.

 

The point of a snotty letter is to show them they have been sussed as the scammers they are.  It is also to show them they are dealing with someone who would put up a real fight if the matter went to court so it's better they go after someone else more likely to cough up.

 

In the cases that do make it to court we have never seen the judge criticise the motorist in any way for writing a snotty letter.

 

The snotty letter strategy generally works.  Not always.  Not with all the PPCs.  But most of the time. 

[mantis shrimp]

I disagree strongly. The message can be conveyed in perfectly civil terms. But I have no wish to get into an argument about it. We have each made our views clear.

Edited January 26, 2022 by mantis shrimp

[lookinforinfo]

Mantis Shrimp you are right-the message can be conveyed in perfectly civilised terms. But that would lose the point. The  message would not then convey the fact that the motorist is aware of the weakness in the charge against them and they are happy to go to Court to defend themself so if UKPC want to continue going to court then bring it on. 

 

Quite a few times this has lead to the scammers discontinuing their case. Your civilised response would not have had the same effect. 

[Homer67]

Not impressed with Mantis Shrimp's responses, only 22 posts and he/she is giving inaccurate advice.

 

Admin should monitor Mantis Shrimp but I'm sure they already are aware, just to clarify for the OP, follow DX, FTMD and LIF's advice.

Edited January 26, 2022 by Homer67
typo

[mantis shrimp]

@lookinforinfo shows in his post how the necessary points can be made in a civil manner.

 

As for @homer67, he/she/it should understand that nothing that I have said is inaccurate. By all means monitor me.  Would you prefer to place greater reliance on a larger number of posts than their content?

Edited January 26, 2022 by mantis shrimp
spelling

[lookinforinfo]

I think you missed the point of my post Mantis Shrimp. EG "Your civilised response would not have had the same effect.".  

[mantis shrimp]

as you wish. I can only repeat what I said in post 17.

[honeybee13]

57 minutes ago, mantis shrimp said:

@lookinforinfo shows in his post how the necessary points can be made in a civil manner.

 

As for @homer67, he/she/it should understand that nothing that I have said is inaccurate. By all means monitor me.  Would you prefer to place greater reliance on a larger number of posts than their content?

 

You haven't said what experience you have in parking matters, as far as I can see. Part of the point about post count is that people can check back to see what advice that person has given and make their own assessment.

 

HB

[LoyalRoyal97]

Just to clarify, FTM's original response is the way to go? 

More than happy to be sending words of those effect just want to make sure it's the right avenue. 

Also, the follow up to UKPC is the right thing to do? 

 

Sorry to be a pain, want to make sure I get it right. 

Really appreciate everyone's time and replies.

[mantis shrimp]

No-one has asked. By all means PM me.

 

(That was to honeybee)

 

Edited January 26, 2022 by mantis shrimp
clarify