Jump to content


Hx Parking/gladstones CCJ - Exceeded 1hrs Free - McDonald's Alma Leisure Park Chesterfield CCJ issued thanks to useless parking fines ltd ***Claim Dismissed***


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 556 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

Court received my papers via email they acknowledged which confirmed few weeks ago so with the court i am up to date whats going on with them. They have not sent any correspondence since they asked to send disagreement form which i promptly sent. Few days ago i rang the court again to ask if they have sent any correspondence since then which they confirmed that they haven't sent anything afterwards 

Edited by Digital_2012
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

@FTMDave ok here is the draft WS please check and correct if need some changes. Thanks

 

 

IN THE COUNTY COURT SHEFFIELD

 

CLAIM NO: xxx

 

HX PARKING LTD (CLAIMANT)

VS

Xxxx (DEFENDANT)

 

Date: 9th July 2022

 

Witness Statement

 

I, Mr xxx, of xxxx am the Defendant against whom this claim is made.

 

 I was the registered keeper of the vehicle xxxx.

 

 The facts in this statement come from my personal knowledge.

 

Where they are not within my own knowledge they are true to the best of my information and belief.

 

Although i am Litigant-in-Person, i respected the court's deadline of 29 June to serve and file my Witness Statement. Vice versa neither the Claimant nor their solicitor have sent me a Witness Statement or any documentation.

 

Therefore it is impossible for me to give a written response to their case by 13 July as required by the Court since there is nothing to comment upon.

 

I would respectfully request the court to not allow as evidence anything that the Claimant or their solicitor might later file and serve, as it would be in blatant disregard for the Court's directions.

 

Statement of Truth

 

I believe that the facts stated in this Witness Statement are true. I understand that proceedings for contempt of Court may be brought against anyone who makes, or causes to be made, a false statement in a document verified by a statement of truth without an honest belief in its truth.

Edited by Digital_2012
Link to post
Share on other sites

@FTMDave ok i have edited the ws please check again 

 

IN THE COUNTY COURT SHEFFIELD

CLAIM NO: xxx

HX PARKING LTD (CLAIMANT)

VS

Xxxx (DEFENDANT)

 

Date: 9th July 2022

 

Witness Statement

 

I, Mr xxx, of xxxx am the Defendant against whom this claim is made.

 I was the registered keeper of the vehicle xxxx.

 

 The facts in this statement come from my personal knowledge. Where they are not within my own knowledge they are true to the best of my information and belief.

 

Although i am an Litigant-in-Person, i respected the court's deadline of 29 June to serve and file my Witness Statement. Vice versa neither the Claimant nor their solicitor have sent me a Witness Statement or any documentation.

Therefore it is impossible for me to give a written response to their case by 13 July as required by the Court since there is nothing to comment upon.

 

I would respectfully request the court to not allow as evidence anything that the Claimant or their solicitor might later file and serve, as it would be in blatant disregard for the Court's directions.

 

Statement of Truth

 

I believe that the facts stated in this Witness Statement are true. I understand that proceedings for contempt of Court may be brought against anyone who makes, or causes to be made, a false statement in a document verified by a statement of truth without an honest belief in its truth.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

@FTMDavethanks here is the covering letter please check if all ok

 

 

Date: 12th July 2022

Dear Gladstone,

 

Re: Claim Number xxx/xxx.xxx /xxx , your client HX Parking.

 

in accordance with the court order of 8 April I enclose my "concise written response" to the Witness Statement the court ordered you to send me by 29 June.

 

My reply is incredibly concise given you've been too bone idle to bother complying with the court order.

 

I have already informed the court that you didn't send me a Witness Statement and have reiterated the same in this document.

 

Do people really pay you for legal "representation"? I could do better myself and I've never studied law in my life!

 

Good luck in explaining away your constant defiance of the Court's orders to the judge!

 

Yours,

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

UPDATE 

 

HI guys finally received  fleecers WS and exhibits will upload shortly 

 

While reading there WS i caught them up lies and one of the biggest lie was that McDonald's was only opened till 10pm but reality is that the McDonald's is opens 24 hours can see clearly in photographs 

 

 

 

Edited by Digital_2012
Link to post
Share on other sites

@FTMDave i was in the McDonald's for roughly 1 hour 50 mins as me and my friend were eating in.

 

I am preparing a draft of  concise response.will post soon i would also like to add opening times of McDonald's its 24 hours and fleecers say it was open till 10pm

Edited by Digital_2012
Link to post
Share on other sites

Here is the draft of concise written response. Please check

 

IN THE COUNTY COURT SHEFFIELD

CLAIM NO: XXX

 

HX PARKING LTD (CLAIMANT)

VS

XXX (DEFENDANT)

 

Date: 12th July 2022

 

Witness Statement

 

I, Mr XXX, of XXX am the Defendant against whom this claim is made.

 

I was the registered keeper of the vehicle XXX.

 

The facts in this statement come from my personal knowledge. Where they are not within my own knowledge they are true to the best of my information and belief.

 

1. The Court invited me to file a "concise written response" to the Claimant's Witness Statement by 13 July. i did so on 12 July.

 

Unfortunately I was unable to write much as I had received no Witness Statement from the Claimant.

 

2. The Claimant's Witness Statement did finally arrive dated 13 July and received on 15 July, a full 16 days after the Court's deadline of 29 June. I would respectfully ask the Court not to allow the Witness Statement as evidence. Even though I am an Litigant-in-Person, I respected the Court's deadline. Incredibly professional solicitors representing the Claimant did not.

 

3. Should the Court instead allow the Claimant's Witness Statement, I would ask that the following be considered as my "concise written response". I will refer to paragraphs in the Claimant's Witness Statement.

 

4. Para 4. I have shown the Court how the signage appears to a motorist visiting the site, and in particular McDonald's, around midnight. The Claimant has not. The reason is that there are no visible signs. All the Claimant has shown, I reiterate, is misleading close-ups of signs in daylight. I also reiterate that even if the driver had seen the signage - they did not - the mention of a £100 charge is literally the last word on the last line of a long board of text.

 

5. Para 6. It is certainly true that no-one would spend more than five hours in McDonald's. The driver spent 1 hour and 50 minutes, a reasonable time. What is unreasonable is to cut a 5-hour free parking limit during the day when the car park is full and parking spaces are at a premium, to 1 hour after midnight when the car park is mostly empty. There is no reason for this unfair term save to try to catch out cinema goers and late-night diners and thus issue PCNs. Ditto for the non-existent signage.

 

6. Para 8. The Claimant's solicitor can argue all they want that black is white and white is black, but nowhere in the contract is it stated that the Claimant can bring court claims under their own name. There is not even an attempt to quote such a passage because it doesn't exist.

 

7. Para 9. A biased, breakaway trade association does not decide what is lawful and reasonable. This is decided by legislation and the law in England & Wales. Both Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 and the government's Code of Practice published in February and based on the Parking (Code of Practice) Act 2019 disallow these extra charges over and above the £100 of the PCN.

 

8. Para 11. The Claimant again fails to show planning permission and does not deny that planning permission has not been obtained - lack of planning permission is a criminal offence under the Road Traffic Acts 1962 and 1991 and no contract can be performed where criminality is concerned.

 

Statement of Truth

 

I believe that the facts stated in this Witness Statement are true. I understand that proceedings for contempt of Court may be brought against anyone who makes, or causes to be made, a false statement in a document verified by a statement of truth without an honest belief in its truth.

Edited by Digital_2012
Link to post
Share on other sites

Now check again

 

 

IN THE COUNTY COURT SHEFFIELD

 

CLAIM NO: XXX

 

 

 

HX PARKING LTD (CLAIMANT)

 

VS

 

XXX (DEFENDANT)

 

 

 

Date: 16th July 2022

 

 

 

Witness Statement

 

I, Mr XXX, of XXX am the Defendant against whom this claim is made.

 

I was the registered keeper of the vehicle XXX.

 

The facts in this statement come from my personal knowledge. Where they are not within my own knowledge they are true to the best of my information and belief.

 

1. The Court invited me to file a "concise written response" to the Claimant's Witness Statement by 13 July. i did so on 12 July.

 

Unfortunately I was unable to write much as I had received no Witness Statement from the Claimant.

 

2. The Claimant's Witness Statement did finally arrive dated 13 July and received on 15 July, a full 16 days after the Court's deadline of 29 June. I would respectfully ask the Court not to allow the Witness Statement as evidence. Even though I am an Litigant-in-Person, I respected the Court's deadline, “Incredibly professional solicitors” representing the Claimant did not.

 

3. Should the Court instead allow the Claimant's Witness Statement, I would ask that the following be considered as my "concise written response". I will refer to paragraphs in the Claimant's Witness Statement.

 

4. Para 4. I have shown the Court how the signage appears to a motorist visiting the site, and in particular McDonald's, around midnight. The Claimant has not. The reason is that there are no visible signs. All the Claimant has shown, I reiterate, is misleading close-ups of signs in daylight. I also reiterate that even if the driver had seen the signage - they did not - the mention of a £100 charge is literally the last word on the last line of a long board of text.

 

5. Para 6. It is certainly true that no-one would spend more than five hours in McDonald's. The driver spent 1 hour and 50 minutes, a reasonable time. What is unreasonable is to cut a 5-hour free parking limit during the day when the car park is full and parking spaces are at a premium, to 1 hour after midnight when the car park is mostly empty. There is no reason for this unfair term save to try to catch out cinema goers and late-night diners and thus issue PCNs. Ditto for the non-existent signage.

 

6. Para 8. The Claimant's solicitor can argue all they want that black is white and white is black, but nowhere in the contract is it stated that the Claimant can bring court claims under their own name. There is not even an attempt to quote such a passage because it doesn't exist.

 

7. Para 9. A biased, breakaway trade association does not decide what is lawful and reasonable. This is decided by legislation and the law in England & Wales. Both Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 and the government's Code of Practice published in February and based on the Parking (Code of Practice) Act 2019 disallow these extra charges over and above the £100 of the PCN.

 

8. Para 11. The Claimant again fails to show planning permission and does not deny that planning permission has not been obtained - lack of planning permission is a criminal offence under the Road Traffic Acts 1962 and 1991 and no contract can be performed where criminality is concerned.

 

Statement of Truth

 

I believe that the facts stated in this Witness Statement are true. I understand that proceedings for contempt of Court may be brought against anyone who makes, or causes to be made, a false statement in a document verified by a statement of truth without an honest belief in its truth.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok here is another one

 

Date: 16th July 2022

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Witness Statement

 

 

 

I, Mr XXX, of XXX am the Defendant against whom this claim is made.

 

 

 

I was the registered keeper of the vehicle XXX.

 

 

 

The facts in this statement come from my personal knowledge. Where they are not within my own knowledge they are true to the best of my information and belief.

 

 

 

1. The Court invited me to file a "concise written response" to the Claimant's Witness Statement by 13 July. i did so on 12 July.

 

 

 

Unfortunately I was unable to write much as I had received no Witness Statement from the Claimant.

 

 

2. The Claimant's Witness Statement did finally arrive dated 13 July and received on 15 July, a full 16 days after the Court's deadline of 29 June. I would respectfully ask the Court not to allow the Witness Statement as evidence. Even though I am a Litigant-in-Person, I respected the Court's deadline. Incredibly, professional solicitors representing the Claimant did not.

 

 

 

3. Should the Court instead allow the Claimant's Witness Statement, I would ask that the following be considered as my "concise written response". I will refer to paragraphs in the Claimant's Witness Statement.

 

 

 

4. Para 4. I have shown the Court how the signage appears to a motorist visiting the site, and in particular McDonald's, around midnight. The Claimant has not. The reason is that there are no visible signs. All the Claimant has shown, I reiterate, is misleading close-ups of signs in daylight. I also reiterate that even if the driver had seen the signage - they did not - the mention of a £100 charge is literally the last word on the last line of a long board of text.

 

 

 

5. Para 6. It is certainly true that no-one would spend more than five hours in McDonald's. The driver spent 1 hour and 50 minutes, a reasonable time. What is unreasonable is to cut a 5-hour free parking limit during the day when the car park is full and parking spaces are at a premium, to 1 hour after midnight when the car park is mostly empty. There is no reason for this unfair term save to try to catch out cinema goers and late-night diners and thus issue PCNs. Ditto for the non-existent signage.

 

 

 

6. Para 8. The Claimant's solicitor can argue all they want that black is white and white is black, but nowhere in the contract is it stated that the Claimant can bring court claims under their own name. There is not even an attempt to quote such a passage because it doesn't exist.

 

 

 

7. Para 9. A biased, breakaway trade association does not decide what is lawful and reasonable. This is decided by legislation and the law in England & Wales. Both Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 and the government's Code of Practice published in February and based on the Parking (Code of Practice) Act 2019 disallow these extra charges over and above the £100 of the PCN.

 

 

 

8. Para 11. The Claimant again fails to show planning permission and does not deny that planning permission has not been obtained - lack of planning permission is a criminal offence under the Road Traffic Acts 1962 and 1991 and no contract can be performed where criminality is concerned.

 

 

 

Statement of Truth

 

 

 

I believe that the facts stated in this Witness Statement are true. I understand that proceedings for contempt of Court may be brought against anyone who makes, or causes to be made, a false statement in a document verified by a statement of truth without an honest belief in its truth.

 

  Quote Report

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...