Parking Control Management/Gladstones Court Claim

[TikiJnr]

Re: Parking Control Management/Gladstones Court Claim

Wow I've learnt so much throughout this. All the work you do is amazing. Thank you very much.

[TikiJnr]

Re: Parking Control Management/Gladstones Court Claim

Been scrolling through all the documents M1 and I've spotted a few things for the legal argument thing. Shall I post them or is that helping them?

[mystery1]

Re: Parking Control Management/Gladstones Court Claim

They can't change it so yeah post it up.

M1

[TikiJnr]

Re: Parking Control Management/Gladstones Court Claim

You've probably spotted it but I'm trying to help. The pcn says £100 for the charge. The court claim says it's £150.

Then their signage refers to numbered bays. If you look at my photo there are no numbers on those bays at all.

[mystery1]

Re: Parking Control Management/Gladstones Court Claim

I never noticed the numbered bays in the witness statement. Oops. All useful if it turns in to a parking case

M1

[TikiJnr]

Re: Parking Control Management/Gladstones Court Claim

Thats what I thought. Their sign relates to numbered bays. There are no numbers. What's with the £150? Am I right with that? Or is there something I've missed off they've tried to add on there?

[mystery1]

Re: Parking Control Management/Gladstones Court Claim

They'll say it's collection costs etc aka more bullshit.

M1

[TikiJnr]

Re: Parking Control Management/Gladstones Court Claim

This might be relevant

http://parking-prankster.blogspot.co...tones.html?m=1

Scroll down to dismissing the case and amount. It says it cannot be proved? Or something to that effect.

[TikiJnr]

Re: Parking Control Management/Gladstones Court Claim

Well tomorrow is D Day and typically I've woken up with the most hideous chesty cold. Hoping this goes in my favour ans they'll want me out of their company as quick as I walked in it! I'm going to ring the court and double check everything and then finish off that costs thing. When would I present that? Before or after he's made a decision?

[TikiJnr]

Re: Parking Control Management/Gladstones Court Claim

Well they're uselessly not answering

[mystery1]

Re: Parking Control Management/Gladstones Court Claim

So we are hoping the judge doesn't require you to say much at all and kicks this shit right out. If they do then that's when costs are raised.

You'd point to cpr 27.14 (2) (g)

https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/pr...s/part27#27.14

(g) such further costs as the court may assess by the summary procedure and order to be paid by a party who has behaved unreasonably

Now clearly it is not unreasonable to bring a case. However the fact they brought a case so poorly pleaded and the continual denial that it was so vague and poorly pleaded in contravention of the rules as well as the late witness statements and the fact the 1st one in particular introduces legal argument rather than fact and witness evidence is unreasonable.

You would list all the faults and times we have asked for them to be corrected but pay attention to the judge in case they are already agreeing with you.





Obviously the case may not go like that.

In that case it is up to them to make their case. When they introduce the witness statements and exhibits then you should object to them, if required. 1st witness statement - Ask the judge to strike it out as irrelevant to the pleadings and full of non witness evidence such as legal argument.

http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2012/293.html


40. Some guidance as to how counsel should react in circumstances of this sort was given by Lawton LJ in this court in Rolled Steel Products Holdings Limited v British Steel Corportation & Others [1986] 1 (Ch) at page 246, in a passage which is to be found at pages 309 to 310. Lawton LJ said this:
"Page 309f. I wish however to add a comment about the pleading points which have had to be considered in this appeal. From the way they were raised by counsel and dealt with by the trial judge, I was left with the impression that neither the judge nor defending counsel appreciated as fully as they should have done the need for precision and expedition when dealing with pleading points.
My recent experience in this court shows that some counsel and judges are not giving pleadings the attention which they should. Pleadings are formal documents which have to be prepared at the beginning of litigation, they are essential for the fair trial of an action and the saving of time at trial. The saving of time keeps down the costs of litigation. A plaintiff is entitled to know what defences he has to meet and the defendant what claims are being made against him. If the parties do not know, unnecessary evidence may be got together and led or, even worse, necessary evidence may not be led.
Pleadings regulate what questions may be asked of witnesses in cross-examination. When counsel raises an objection to a question or a line of questioning, as Mr Morritt did on a number of occasions, the trial judge should rule on it at once. He should not regard the objection as a critical commentary on what the other side is doing. If the judge does not rule, counsel should ask him to do so. If a line of questioning is stopped because it does not relate to an issue on the pleadings, counsel should at once consider whether his pleadings should be amended. If he decides that they should, he should forthwith apply for an amendment and should specify precisely what he wants and the judge should at once give a ruling on the application. The principles upon which amendments should be allowed are well known and are set out in the current edition of the Supreme Court practice."

Print 1 of the case and 3 of that page.


As for the lateness the claimant should be barred from using the 2nd witness statement because not only is it only to submit a document that is central to the case it was very late, in breach of the court order that said 14 days. No relief from sanction should be granted as it fails the Denton test and the document is irrelevant to the pleadings.

http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2014/906.html

Stage 1

It is so 10 days late in to a 14 day limit with a trial 4 days away. A significant breach.

Stage 2

There appears to be no good reason for the delay.

Stage 3

The sum sought it relatively low. It is not proportionate to adjourn the hearing when this would cost more to all parties, including the court and other court users, thanthe claimant could win.






If the judge is against everything so far then we have to be prepared for the case.

So read High Wycombe Three Approved Judgment.pdf and http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/...488337&page=59






If we win we go back to the same costs arguments as before. If we lose, then ask for permission to appeal as you feel the judge has erred in fact/law.

I will be out in a few hours so if you need to ask please do but if you are later i may not be able to answer until the small hours.

Set the 3 files up with all exhibits and the cases etc but keep your arguments to your own file only. You may find labels and highlighting handy for your own copy.

Take your time and ask if you don't understand when in court.

M1

[TikiJnr]

Re: Parking Control Management/Gladstones Court Claim

Wow. Right it's going to take me that long to get my head round this lot lol! The judge won't use a load of technical language will he? Like he will make it clear whether he's accepting my beef over the way they've handled it all or he wants to hear the parking facts? And then we go onto the poor signage, the lack of numbering in the bays etc?

[mystery1]

Re: Parking Control Management/Gladstones Court Claim

If you don't understand, say so. Should be relatively straight forward language. Fingers crossed the judge chews them out straight away without much input from you, as they should.

So yes you are attacking the technical merits of the legal case before you start on the actual parking issue. Usually it's the claimant that starts as it is up to them to prove their case on the balance of probability.

M1

[TikiJnr]

Re: Parking Control Management/Gladstones Court Claim

What's the chances of the case being booted out on merit? Because if it doesn't meet the criteria how can it proceed? That's what I don't get.

[mystery1]

Re: Parking Control Management/Gladstones Court Claim

You mean the argument the pleadings are shite, the witness statement is late etc ? Should be pretty good but depends on the Judge.

If you mean the case that the sign doesn't make an offer as it is forbidding, again should be a winner but if the judge didn't get laid that morning they could be grumpy .....

M1