Free Traffic Legal Advice

Don’t worry about their argument that 15 months have passed since the CCJ. What is relevant is when you discovered it. Just more rubbish from them.

Is the attached contract redacted at all? If so, at the hearing, mention this to the judge. It is highly likely that the copy provided to the court is not redacted and this is a serious no no on their part.

Is there anything in your tenancy agreement about requiring to display a permit or requiring you to obey rules made by a third party, not a signatory to the tenancy agreement?

Regarding the PoC, they absolutely do not comply with CPR 16.4. There is nothing whatsoever that states what the alleged breach of contract is. They just state that the defendant breached a contract. No mention of what terms in the contract were allegedly breached. How would anyone know they were for not displaying a permit. Maybe it was because the vehicle was not parked properly within a marked bay. Maybe it was because it was a Tuesday and on Tuesdays, only red cars are allowed to park in that spot. Do you see where we are going with this? Where is the “concise statement of the facts”? There is none.

The PoC simply say that PCNs were issued and not paid. How can anyone be sued simply for not paying an invoice from a private company without knowing what the invoice is for?

Regarding the claimants witness statement, you can add the following paragraph into your SWS with its own paragraph number and subsequent paragraphs re numbered accordingly:

X. I respectfully submit that the claimant's witness statement should not be accepted by the Court, as it fails to comply with CPR Part 32 and Practice Direction 32. The statement has not only been signed by a legal representative who does not have firsthand knowledge of the facts and events described within the statement but is not even employed by the Claimant. According to CPR 32.4, a witness statement is intended to contain evidence that the witness would be permitted to give orally, which typically necessitates personal knowledge of the matters in question. Furthermore, Practice Direction 32, paragraph 18.2, stipulates that a witness statement should only include evidence that the witness could provide from their own experience or direct observation. Since the claimant’s witness statement does not adhere to these requirements, it lacks the requisite reliability and credibility, and I request that the Court disregard it accordingly. Should the Court decide not to dismiss the claimant's witness statement, I respectfully request that more weight be given to my witness statement, as it is based on firsthand knowledge and complies fully with the Civil Procedure Rules and associated practice directions.

Don’t worry about their argument that 15 months have passed since the CCJ. What is relevant is when you discovered it. Just more rubbish from them.

This - they're using the 15 months to try to suggest you have not acted in a timely manner, which you are required to do. But you cannot act on something about which you are unaware (assuming that lack of awareness is due to a genuine reason and not ignorance, of course).

Where applicable, the Client must ensure that all users of the Car Park agree to the terms of use that will include the displaying of permits in the front nearside windscreen of vehicles and the general rules applying to the conditions referred to in clause 4.1.

So, the property managers have signed a contract that requires them to curtail the rights granted to you in your lease - that's their problem. They also by your account haven't ensured that all users agree (partly it would seem, because they can't, having already granted you the right to park in your lease).

DE's argument is that the rights granted to you in your lease are irrelevant, because they put up some signs, and formed a contract with the property management (a contract about which you were unaware until this saga unfolded). They use more words to convey it, but it's essentially as daft as that.

I am genuinely interested in this, for one reason especially.

I think I’ve said earlier in this thread, I feel the sense of justice in all of this is missing. I have felt from the start that I have been thrown into a position of defending myself when I see the whole case as proceeding from their predatory and borderline unlawful practices.

Far from just getting myself off the hook and avoiding paying any charges, what I really want is to see these companies scrutinised and reprimanded for preying on innocent people.

I noted earlier, I think, that there were others in my housing complex who had received similar notices and paid up immediately out of fear of their immigration status being affected, dor example.

These companies are absolute sharks and cowboys, in my opinion, and far above and beyond defending myself against their claims, I feel impotent that I cannot bring anything upon them!

I have a 30-minute hearing on 27 September at Lincoln County Court.


As an aside, the deadline for submitting my defence in response to the order was today, 4pm. I submitted yesterday, as has been discussed above, and Gladstones responsed immediately.

If I am to submit a supplementary WS, would that have to be done before the end of today, or is it reasonable that responding to the Claimant’s WS will take time?

Is the wording of the below paragraphs temporal in nature?

Since the Tenancy Agreement does not mention any requirement to display a permit or authorise a third party to issue parking charges, the terms of the agreement take precedence over any subsequent parking rules imposed by the managing agent or parking operator. In the absence of any such terms in the Tenancy Agreement, I did not consent to these rules and, therefore, cannot be held liable for breaching them.

The Claimant has not demonstrated that they have any contractual authority over the land or that their terms override my existing rights under the Tenancy Agreement. The Claimant’s assertion that the Tenancy Agreement has no relevance is a flawed interpretation of the supremacy of contract principle, which should protect my pre-existing rights against the imposition of new terms by a third party without my consent.

The contract between the property manager and the parking company predates in time the contract between myself and the landlord. Do the words 'subsequent' and 'pre-existing' have a temporal meaning or only hierarchical?

FYI, I received a PM today, informing me of the following:

You've been offering guidance here for the past few months regarding a CCJ I had received without being made aware. Yesterday I attended the county court, where my CCJ was set aside and the initial claim (made by District Enforcement) was struck out entirely. It was also ordered that DE reimburse the fee I paid to make the application.

The judge commended me on the case I had put together and the evidence I had compiled. He called it 'very compelling' and asked if I had a legal qualification.

Hopefully @Karl will post a few more details in due course, such as the name of the judge and whether Gladstones sent a legal rep or not. If we could get some information on how the day in court went, that would be useful too. If Gladstones sent a legal rep, did they try to make contact before the hearing? Was the hearing in the judges chambers or in a full blown courtroom? How did the hearing proceed and so on.

We must be satisfied that this has cost DE/Gladstones much more than just the costs. They have had the CCJ set aside and also cannot recover their court fee, hearing fee and whatever they have paid to Gladstones. Gladstones will not be able to recover the cost of sending an advocate to the hearing either, assuming they sent a local "rent-a-legal" rep.

Great news for @Karl and also for any others contemplating a CCJ set aside.