• Welcome to the LegalBeagles Consumer and Legal Forum.
    Please Register to get the most out of the forum. Registration is free and only needs a username and email address.
    REGISTER
    Please do not post your full name, reference numbers or any identifiable details on the forum.

County Court Claim - Parknig Charge Notice - Gladstones/Link Parking

Collapse
Loading...
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • County Court Claim - Parknig Charge Notice - Gladstones/Link Parking

    I am hoping someone can assist me with a County Court Claim by Link Parking Ltd which is being represented by Gladstones LLP.

    I have received a letter from the County Court informing of Link Parkin Ltd who are claiming the sum of £237.42.

    £162.42 Amount Claim
    £25.00 Court Fee
    £50.00 Legal rep cost

    For the purposes of:

    “The driver of the vehicle registration ******* (the “Vehicle”) incurred the parking charge(s) on 14/04/2017 for breaching the terms of parking on the land at St Andrews Village – Marner Point – 1 Jefferson Plaza Bromley By Bow London E3 3QB.
    The defenden was driving the vehicle and/or is the Keeper of the Vehicle.
    AND THE CLAIMANT CLAIMS
    £160 for Parking Charges/ Damages and indemnity costs if applicable, together with interest of £2.42 pursuant to s69 of the County Courts Act 1984 at 8% pa, continuing to Judgement at £0.04 per day”

    Firstly, I was not the driver at the time of the alleged breach in contract and subsequently never received the ‘Notice to Keeper’, though I have received several others for other dates which I have responded to with the name and address of the ”Driver”. I assume that the Notice to Keeper was lost in the post, if in fact, it had been posted. I have no other knowledge previous to the County Court Claim of this ‘breach of contract’.

    I have not received any other correspondence in relation to this and the claim form is the first. I have since completed the AoS and confirmed that I will be supplying a defence.

    I have since conduced my own research and visited the ‘site’ or ‘St Andrews Village’ as it is referred to in the claim. There is no mention or any information which identifies ‘St Andrews Village’ at the site or in online research. Having inspected the specific place in which I believe the ‘breach of contract’ to have taken place (from pictures from the other Notice to Keeper’ I have received and responded to) it appears that in fact this place is known as Hannaford Walk (opposite to building called Ivy Point). Marner Point and 1 Jefferson Plaza are some 150m away from where the alleged ‘breach in contract’ occurred. There is clearly some discrepancy here and also as it referred to as ‘the land’, it is ambiguous, the definitive article ‘the land’ seems to imply a specific place in which the ‘breach of contract’ occurred however I believe it did not occur at that specific site.

    I have inspected the area and determined that although there are several ‘signs’ places regularly along the area, they are not abundantly clear. The main wording takes precedence on ‘Private Land Contractual Agreement’ followed by ‘No Parking for any vehicle in this area’ followed by Terms and Conditions in which the charge of £100 for ‘parking’ is in significantly smaller font than the rest of the sign.

    The signs are also placed on lampposts which are not properly illuminated as the ‘lamps’ actually face the opposite direction of the signs themselves. Having also checked the ‘Code of Practice’ on the IPC website (trade body of the Parking firm) it states that signs should be placed at the entrance of the site. There are no signs facing the “driver” upon entry. There is only one entrance from what I have determined. The first sign is parallel to the “driver” approximately 2/3 metres in the road/site.

    There is also a gate (buzzer operated) approximately 30m along the site, which could be perceived as it being the ‘entrance’ to the site, which again makes the initial signs further unclear as to whether ‘the land’ is post the gate or not.

    I also inspected several other local parking sites where Private Parking firms operate all of which have clear forward facing signs at the entrance(s) providing clear warning.

    Can you please advise on how to defend myself and write to the court?
    Tags: None

  • #2
    Re: County Court Claim - Parknig Charge Notice - Gladstones/Link Parking

    The fact that you did not receive a NTK within the proscribed time means that they cannot claim from the registered keeper, only the driver.

    You mentioned that you have given details for the driver. Have you got copies of those letters? The reason I ask is that they cannot, under POFA claim from the keeper if the have driver details.

    5
    (1)
    The first condition is that the creditor—
    (a)
    has the right to enforce against the driver of the vehicle the requirement to pay the unpaid parking charges; but
    (b)
    is unable to take steps to enforce that requirement against the driver because the creditor does not know both the name of the driver and a current address for service for the driver.


    Condition (b) has not been met and therefore they are unable to claim from the keeper. If you can provide further details that you were not the driver then that would help greatly.

    Signage is confusing, especially if it is parallel to the road and therefore not able to be read by the driver without diverting eyes away from the road.

    No clear definition of the location of the alleged parking infringement as required by POFA.

    The signs are forbidding. They do not offer a contract for parking, Indeed they state no parking for any vehicle in this area so cannot then contradict themselves and say you have breached a contract by parking

    The particulars of claim are confusing as they have not stated if they are attempting to claim against the driver or the keeper.

    As the keeper you are not liable for more than the amount stated on the (nonexistant) NTK.

    Court procedures have not been followed as there has been no letter before claim to allow you to dispute the matter before a claim was raised.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: County Court Claim - Parknig Charge Notice - Gladstones/Link Parking

      Hi Ostell,

      Thank you for the advice, I certainly feel a lot less anxious.

      Firstly, I cannot be sure if they did not send the NTK but I definitely did not receive it or anything else except the claim form.

      This claim is for an alleged breach of contract on the 14/04/2017. I received several other NTKs which I responded to providing the name and address of the driver. I have kept proof (pictures) and used signed for delivery. I have not heard anything since.



      [IMG]IMG]http://i68.tinypic.com/296bx8l.jpg[/IMG[/IMG]




      Also apologies as I am new to forums and hopefully have provided the image links appropriately, if not really sorry!

      You will see in the picture that the building at the top of the image is the where the Particulars of Claim, claim the breach occurred but I believe it occurred on or near the entrance going with the images I've seen for the driver that parked several times at the same location.

      As you mentioned it is very contradictory to say No Parking but then breach for parking. How do I put this in my defence?

      Can i ask the solicitors to send me all the evidence they have?
      If so is email or letters the best?

      Really appreciate your advice!!!

      Comment

      View our Terms and Conditions

      LegalBeagles Group uses cookies to enhance your browsing experience and to create a secure and effective website. By using this website, you are consenting to such use.To find out more and learn how to manage cookies please read our Cookie and Privacy Policy.

      If you would like to opt in, or out, of receiving news and marketing from LegalBeagles Group Ltd you can amend your settings at any time here.


      If you would like to cancel your registration please Contact Us. We will delete your user details on request, however, any previously posted user content will remain on the site with your username removed and 'Guest' inserted.
      Working...
      X