PePiPoo Helping the motorist get justice Support health workers

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

Letter before Claim from Gladstones Solicitors - Seymour Grove Retail Park
raddoc
post Tue, 13 Nov 2018 - 18:52
Post #1


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 23
Joined: 13 Nov 2018
Member No.: 100,924



Hello,

I received a parking charge notice for £100 in the post from a company called ES Parking Enforcement from July 2018.

Parking at the site (a car park on Seymour Grove Trafford Manchester) is free but the alleged contravention is for "leaving the site". There are a few shops facing the car park, an Iceland, a newsagent and an Aldi (which has since closed down). It is not clear that it is a contravention to 'leave the site' if visiting the parade of shops directly adjacent to the car park. The signs are quite high up on the photographs that they have sent and would be quite difficult to read. The actual 'Site' is not defined either.

Their website shows additional photos and they do show an occupant getting out of the car and walking in the direction of the adjacent takeaway and also outside the takeaway entrance.

I appealed to ES Parking and then to IAS on the grounds of unclear and ambiguous signage but both were rejected. The PCN was then raised to £125. I have now received "Letter before Claim" from Gladstones Solicitors demanding £160 or they will commence court proceedings. Am furious about this as have parked there for many years without a problem and there is no indication that the rules had changed as to which shops could be visited.

I would appreciate thoughts on how likely I am to win in court and how time consuming and difficult it is to launch a challenge to Gladstones.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
3 Pages V   1 2 3 >  
Start new topic
Replies (1 - 19)
Advertisement
post Tue, 13 Nov 2018 - 18:52
Post #


Advertise here!









Go to the top of the page
 
Quote Post
nosferatu1001
post Wed, 14 Nov 2018 - 09:04
Post #2


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 28,687
Joined: 27 Nov 2007
Member No.: 15,642



Youre not launching anything. They are in charge.

1) Was the driver identiifed? A simple YES or NO is required. DO NOT ELABORATE
2) Do you have pictures of the signs?
3) Easy to find out how difficult it is to deal with Gladstones - not at all!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
raddoc
post Wed, 14 Nov 2018 - 21:46
Post #3


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 23
Joined: 13 Nov 2018
Member No.: 100,924



Yes driver identified by photos.
Yes I have a photo of sign - shall I upload here on this site ?

Have had reply from MP for that constituency - she has had a number of complaints about unreasonable parking penalties at this site and written to ES Parking but they have declined to reply to her.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
SchoolRunMum
post Wed, 14 Nov 2018 - 22:03
Post #4


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 18,751
Joined: 20 Sep 2009
Member No.: 32,130



Yes show us the sign.

As for replying to the LBC, read any other Gladstones LBC thread on here or on MSE, which make up about a third of all threads on both forums now as they are gearing up for early December court claims to hassle people just before Christmas.
QUOTE
thoughts on how likely I am to win in court


Well worth fighting an daft not to, no CCJ risk as long as you don't go ignoring stuff. On both here and on MSE parking forum (many of us post on both) we see wins in some 99% of cases, as long as the person reads all advice, and follows it, and doesn't overlook court Directions etc. Almost everyone wins their hearing at their local court. The MP's letter will help later on with your Witness Statement and evidence of unclear signs.

Read the MSE NEWBIES thread second post, now in advance, to know how to defend a case and what happens when and how to complete the various forms:

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showth...d.php?t=4816822

Don't send the example response to the LBC that's there though, it's too old and I am about to delete it as no template is needed at this stage. Reading other Gladstone LBC threads from this month, on both forums, shows you what to respond with instead of that awful long template, and to get a SAR from the parking firm (explained on loads of threads you need to read). No grasping at template straws.

This post has been edited by SchoolRunMum: Wed, 14 Nov 2018 - 22:05
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
nosferatu1001
post Thu, 15 Nov 2018 - 07:52
Post #5


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 28,687
Joined: 27 Nov 2007
Member No.: 15,642



"Yes driver identified by photos."

No, that doesnt identify the driver - they dont know the drivers name.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
raddoc
post Thu, 15 Nov 2018 - 21:17
Post #6


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 23
Joined: 13 Nov 2018
Member No.: 100,924



I think we disclosed the driver's identity when appealing to ES Parking/IAS in the early stages of this case - recognise now from other threads that this was a mistake in retrospect.

Photo of sign attached although it is a close up - not how it is seen from ground level within a vehicle.

Attached Image
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
SchoolRunMum
post Thu, 15 Nov 2018 - 21:25
Post #7


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 18,751
Joined: 20 Sep 2009
Member No.: 32,130



Does say what the 'site' is, no boundary or map or even a retailer's name as a clue.

QUOTE
Parking at the site (a car park on Seymour Grove Trafford Manchester) is free but the alleged contravention is for "leaving the site".


Contact the Local Authority Planning team and ask what the Planning Consent said about that car park when built, and whether the signs are allowed to insist that patrons do not leave the site - or did the Planning contemplate people using the local shops too and include that requirement? If so, report them for breach of Planning Consent.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
raddoc
post Sat, 24 Nov 2018 - 16:33
Post #8


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 23
Joined: 13 Nov 2018
Member No.: 100,924



Any comments on this as a response to Gladstone's LBC ? Thanks


I am in receipt of your Letter Before Claim of XXXXXXX.

This letter gave no details or evidence of any infringement and just a total amount outstanding of £160.00 and details of how to pay. I deny any debt to your client.

Your recent letter dated XXXXXXX gives provides limited information, but does give a date of charge (XXXXXXX) and a location of charge (XXXXXXXX).Your letter contains insufficient detail of the claim and fails to provide copies of evidence your client places reliance upon. I request further information in writing as I consider your Letter Before Claim to be woefully inadequate. I note particularly that you choose to refer to paragraphs 2.1c of the Practice Direction rather than focus on your obligation in paragraph 6 to provide adequate details of your claim. None of the following elements are contained in your letter:

• The basis on which the claim is made
• A clear summary of the facts upon which the claim is made
• An explanation of how the amount of financial loss has been calculated
• Disclosure of key documents relevant to the issues in dispute.

Please treat this letter as a formal request for all of the documents/information that the protocol requires your client to provide. Your client must not issue proceedings without complying with that protocol. I reserve the right to draw any failure of the Claimant to comply with the protocol to the attention of the court and to ask the court to stay the claim. As solicitors, I presume you are familiar with the requirements of both the Practice Direction applicable pre-1 October and the Protocol which applies thereafter (and your client, as a serial litigator of small claims, should likewise be aware of them). As you (and your client) must know, the Practice Direction and Protocol bind all potential litigants, whatever the size or type of the claim. Its express purpose is to assist parties in understanding the claim and their respective positions in relation to it, to enable parties to take stock of their positions and to negotiate a settlement, or at least narrow the issues, without incurring the costs of court proceedings or using up valuable court time. It is astounding that a firm of Solicitors are sending a consumer a vague 'Letter before Claim' ignoring much of the pre-existing Practice Direction.

I require your client to comply with its obligations by sending me the following information/documents:

1. An explanation of the cause of action.
2. What the details of the claim are, how the monies being claimed arose and have been calculated.
3. Is the claim for a contractual breach? If so, what is the date of the agreement? The names of the parties to it and provide to me a copy of that contract.
4. Provide me a copy of the contract with the landowner under which they assert authority to bring the claim
5. A plan showing where any signs were displayed
6. Details of the signs displayed (size of sign, size of font, height at which displayed)
7. What is the basis of the additional £60 charge? If it is for legal services, has your client already paid it?
8. Provide a copy of the Information Sheet and the Reply Form


Until your client has complied with its obligations and provided this information, I am unable to respond properly to the alleged claim and to consider my position in relation to it, and it is entirely premature (and a waste of costs and court time) for your client to issue proceedings.

Furthermore, I have sent your client a Subject Access Request and I therefore require a restriction of data processing and that the case should be put on hold pending this.

Yours faithfully
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
SchoolRunMum
post Sun, 25 Nov 2018 - 21:15
Post #9


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 18,751
Joined: 20 Sep 2009
Member No.: 32,130



On MSE those tired templates have been scrapped in favour of sending a SAR to the parking firm by email, using the contact shown in their PRIVACY page.

And a holding letter to the Solicitor requiring Restriction of Data processing, as any claim would be premature whilst a data concern is being addressed by way of the SAR that has been sent to their client.

And this IS important, and was urgent. It could kill the claim:

QUOTE
Contact the Local Authority Planning team and ask what the Planning Consent said about that car park when built, and whether the signs are allowed to insist that patrons do not leave the site - or did the Planning contemplate people using the local shops too and include that requirement? If so, report them for breach of Planning Consent.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
raddoc
post Wed, 28 Nov 2018 - 17:58
Post #10


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 23
Joined: 13 Nov 2018
Member No.: 100,924



QUOTE (SchoolRunMum @ Sun, 25 Nov 2018 - 21:15) *
On MSE those tired templates have been scrapped in favour of sending a SAR to the parking firm by email, using the contact shown in their PRIVACY page.

And a holding letter to the Solicitor requiring Restriction of Data processing, as any claim would be premature whilst a data concern is being addressed by way of the SAR that has been sent to their client.

And this IS important, and was urgent. It could kill the claim:

QUOTE
Contact the Local Authority Planning team and ask what the Planning Consent said about that car park when built, and whether the signs are allowed to insist that patrons do not leave the site - or did the Planning contemplate people using the local shops too and include that requirement? If so, report them for breach of Planning Consent.




This is Parking company's Data Protection officer response to SAR (they have sent copies of PCN and photos):

"I am obliged to inform you that under GDPR there are exemptions to what information we have to provide, namely: Legal advice and proceedings – Data Controllers do not have to disclose data which is covered by legal professional privilege. All correspondence that our company has had with our solicitors would be covered under “legal professional privilege”, and any correspondence that our solicitors have handled internally would I believe be covered under “legal professional privilege”.

I must bring to your attention that our company also is exempt from giving you access in respect of Confidential references – Data Controllers do not have to provide subject access to references they have confidentially given in relation to a data Subjects portfolio.

I have checked our system and can confirm that the enclosed data and associated PCN is the only record we have against your name, or against the specific vehicle

With regards to the evidence about an additional £60 demanded by Gladstone’s. I am not at liberty to get into dialogue with regards this matter as the companies Data protection officer. You would have to make that request directly on Gladstone’s."



On a separate note, I have emailed council planning department - waiting to hear response.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
raddoc
post Tue, 18 Dec 2018 - 21:33
Post #11


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 23
Joined: 13 Nov 2018
Member No.: 100,924



QUOTE (SchoolRunMum @ Sun, 25 Nov 2018 - 21:15) *
On MSE those tired templates have been scrapped in favour of sending a SAR to the parking firm by email, using the contact shown in their PRIVACY page.

And a holding letter to the Solicitor requiring Restriction of Data processing, as any claim would be premature whilst a data concern is being addressed by way of the SAR that has been sent to their client.

And this IS important, and was urgent. It could kill the claim:

QUOTE
Contact the Local Authority Planning team and ask what the Planning Consent said about that car park when built, and whether the signs are allowed to insist that patrons do not leave the site - or did the Planning contemplate people using the local shops too and include that requirement? If so, report them for breach of Planning Consent.




Emailed Planning Development Management team at the local Council but no response so I phoned and the person I spoke to said that there would not be anything in the planning consents relating to private land. They weren't very helpful.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
SchoolRunMum
post Wed, 19 Dec 2018 - 00:56
Post #12


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 18,751
Joined: 20 Sep 2009
Member No.: 32,130



There often is, when retail parks are built then some Councils only allow a car park, if it can ALSO be used by people wishing to use the local high street small businesses, too.

She is guessing. You want facts.

This post has been edited by SchoolRunMum: Wed, 19 Dec 2018 - 00:57
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
bearclaw
post Wed, 19 Dec 2018 - 09:47
Post #13


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 564
Joined: 15 Nov 2017
Member No.: 95,103



QUOTE (raddoc @ Tue, 18 Dec 2018 - 21:33) *
Emailed Planning Development Management team at the local Council but no response so I phoned and the person I spoke to said that there would not be anything in the planning consents relating to private land. They weren't very helpful.


There most certainly can be. I've seen one where the car park consent was on the basis that it was to be free to use.

Since the parking company was charging for parking effectivly, an approach to the landowner reminding them of teh fact and the likely increase in business rates made them cancel the ticket with some alacrity.

If the details are not in the online planning portal you can also make an FOI request to the council for all the information relating to planning and advertising consent for the site.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
raddoc
post Sat, 22 Dec 2018 - 21:07
Post #14


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 23
Joined: 13 Nov 2018
Member No.: 100,924



Had another letter from Gladstones claiming their client has "compelling evidence" of my wife's guilt. This can only be the photos showing her walking off the "site" towards a set of adjacent shops.

Gladstones have sent a reply from which they say has to be returned within 30 days. Should I do this ? Option D is "I dispute the debt" and requests an explanation of why the debt is disputed on a separate piece of paper and supporting documentation. I am happy to take my chances in court. Why should I provide evidence to them at this stage which would enable them to provide a counter argument in court or am I harming our chances in a small claim court by not complying ? Can Gladstones get a CCJ without the case being heard in court ?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
cabbyman
post Sat, 22 Dec 2018 - 21:12
Post #15


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 6,898
Joined: 15 Dec 2007
From: South of John O'Groats, north of Cape Town.
Member No.: 16,066



QUOTE (raddoc @ Sat, 22 Dec 2018 - 21:07) *
Had another letter from Gladstones claiming their client has "compelling evidence" of my wife's guilt. This can only be the photos showing her walking off the "site" towards a set of adjacent shops.


....Which was not included in the SAR response? Nice one!


--------------------
Cabbyman 11 PPCs 0
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
ostell
post Sat, 22 Dec 2018 - 22:22
Post #16


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 17,088
Joined: 8 Mar 2013
Member No.: 60,457



So how do they know they have a photo of your wife?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
SchoolRunMum
post Sun, 23 Dec 2018 - 01:31
Post #17


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 18,751
Joined: 20 Sep 2009
Member No.: 32,130



QUOTE (cabbyman @ Sat, 22 Dec 2018 - 21:12) *
QUOTE (raddoc @ Sat, 22 Dec 2018 - 21:07) *
Had another letter from Gladstones claiming their client has "compelling evidence" of my wife's guilt. This can only be the photos showing her walking off the "site" towards a set of adjacent shops.


....Which was not included in the SAR response? Nice one!



Wow, grounds to immediately report the parking firm online to the ICO for producing a SAR that omitted what their solicitor calls 'compelling evidence' of an occupant of the car walking off site (which can only be photo or video evidence so why did the parking firm withhold it from the SAR?). Easy to do this on the ICO's website. Dob the PPC in now, and tell Gs that's what you have done and you also look forward to receiving that evidence and that any litigation MUST be on hold whilst the missing SAR data/photos they suggest exist, are produced for your perusal.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
raddoc
post Mon, 24 Dec 2018 - 20:04
Post #18


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 23
Joined: 13 Nov 2018
Member No.: 100,924



Apologies just re-read Gladstones letter:

They say they cannot process my request objecting to processing of data because they can demonstrate compelling legitimate grounds for the processing of my data which overrides the interests, rights and freedoms of me as an individual. That legitimate interest being that they act on behalf of a client for recovery of monies relating to an unpaid parking charge notice. To process my data is necessary and lawful, as it is required in furtherance of their client's instructions and they act for them on their rights and obligations for the recovery of such monies.

They go on to say I should contact ICO if not satisfied with their decision and state I have a right to a judicial remedy through the courts if remain unsatisfied with complaint to ICO and believe there has been a breach of GDPR.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
SchoolRunMum
post Mon, 24 Dec 2018 - 20:51
Post #19


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 18,751
Joined: 20 Sep 2009
Member No.: 32,130



That's the standard reply, then.

Search the forum for Gladstones compelling and you find that letter mentioned before (yawn), and how to respond to that trash. Basically, there is no compelling reason why time is of the essence, and it is perfectly reasonable to expect them to restrict data processing whilst a SAR is undertaken by their client, which only takes a few weeks.

This post has been edited by SchoolRunMum: Mon, 24 Dec 2018 - 20:51
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
raddoc
post Sat, 23 Feb 2019 - 19:04
Post #20


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 23
Joined: 13 Nov 2018
Member No.: 100,924



Latest on this case:

Today received Claim Form from County Court business Centre (Northampton address) with ES Parking as Claimant and Gladstones as Address for communication. Options given to me are agree and pay, disagree or make counterclaim. Obviously I am continuing to disagree and go to Court if necessary. Is asking for costs I have incurred defending this "a counterclaim" or does that come later if case ever heard at small claims ? Also the response pack from County Court business centre has a section for "Defence" - do I disclose all my defence (photos, letters) on this form or is that for a later date in the small claims court ?

Incidentally nothing really helpful in the planning document which I obtained by FOI other than a clause indicating that all areas for parking be available at all times to safeguard the amenities of the area but I guess pre-existing shops in the immediate vicinity of the new development wouldn't be regarded as "amenities" ?

Have max 14 days to respond.

This post has been edited by raddoc: Sun, 24 Feb 2019 - 18:27
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

3 Pages V   1 2 3 >
Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 



Advertisement

Advertise here!

RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: Thursday, 28th March 2024 - 21:57
Pepipoo uses cookies. You can find details of the cookies we use here along with links to information on how to manage them.
Please click the button to accept our cookies and hide this message. We’ll also assume that you’re happy to accept them if you continue to use the site.
IPS Driver Error

IPS Driver Error

There appears to be an error with the database.
You can try to refresh the page by clicking here