Name of the Claimant : NSGL Ltd Claimants Solicitors: QDR Solicitors Ltd Date of issue – 17th Dec 2021 Date for AOS - 4th Jan 2022 Date to submit Defence - 18th Jan 2022 What is the claim for – N 1. The Claimants claim is for an outstanding parking charge issued to vehicle XXXX XXX when parked at CENTURY WHARF CARDIFF CF10 5NP. 2. The site is managed by the Claimant. The Defendant is the keeper of or the driver named in accordance with Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedom act 2012 of the vehicle. 3. Vehicles parking at the Site are subject to the parking restrictions and terms and conditions which are set out on signs at the Site and form part of a contract between the driver of the vehicle and the Claimant. 4. On 03 07 2020, the Vehicle was parked at the Site in breach of the contract, the contravention being Not Displaying A Valid Permit. 5. By entering this contract the Defendant agreed that they would be liable for £80.00 parking charges, plus additional contractual charges incurred by the claimant for the collection of the debt pursuant to the terms and conditions. What is the value of the claim? Amount Claimed £237 court fees £35 legal rep fees £50 Total Amount £322

Hi HB Unfortunately not. The previous thread I started in November last year to deal with the original claim. I just linked it here for reference purposes. Cheers CD

Good morning all. This is the latest instalment in the long running saga between perhaps the most inept parking company in the country (NSGL Ltd) and myself. Previously on Britain's Stupidest Parking Operators; Part 1; Thread here: TL/DR: NSGL manage the parking at a friend's apartment complex. A family member borrowed my vehicle on a few occasions in 2020 to visit them during the pandemic. When visiting they parked in the resident's own space with their full permission as the resident does not own a car. During this time they attracted a total of 7 speculative invoices, 5 of which were overturned at POPLA. NSGL filed a court claim for the first ticket in January and it proceeded to a hearing in July, where they were roundly humiliated due to their crap signage, and the case was chucked out. 1-nil Cardiff Devil. Part 2; Between filing the first claim and the hearing, NSGL also filed a claim for the second lost ticket at POPLA. I raised this with the judge after he passed judgement on the first one and he said "I can't enter any judgement on that matter at this time, but the claimant will need to have a long, hard think about whether they're going to pursue this any further." In October they filed a notice of discontinuance, and the claim was withdrawn. 2-nil Cardiff Devil. Part 3 (today); They've now filed a new claim for the same PCN as claimed in part 2. But this is where it gets interesting. The original second claim was for £162, plus court fees at £25 and legal fees at £50, for a total of £237. This new claim has been filed for (presumably) the same £237, with the court and legal fees added on again, for a new total of £322. Sounds a bit like double dipping to me. I'm filing the AOS this morning and sending a new CPR letter to their solicitors but I was wondering if there was a different tack I could take with this one. Surely if they've discontinued this case previously they can't just file it again for more money a few months later. Is it worth me putting in a section in the CPR letter asking them to explain how they believe they can include the court fees from their previous discontinued claim to my alleged debt, or is this something to save for my witness statement later on. Thoughts? Thanks CD

Morning all. I had a gym membership with Energie Fitness over the summer, with the DDs being collected by Harlands on behalf of EF. No issues with the gym itself, but my work circumstances have changed and I'm now no longer in a position to use it often enough to justify the monthly expense. My membership was a non-contract rolling 1 month subscription at £19.99 p/m. I tried to cancel via the members portal on the Energie website but wasn't able to do so. Couldn't get hold of anyone on the phone and Harlands weren't any help so I sent EF an email via the email contact form on the website. Once I'd sent this I cancelled the DD with the bank. I since had an email from EF confirming they'd received my request for cancellation, but claiming that I need to give them 30 days notice and pay for the final month as per the T&Cs. I've checked and they are there, albeit buried away in the small print but my thoughts are I don't have an actual contract with them. Surely they can't demand 30 days notice on a 1 month rolling membership? If I was to cancel Netflix I'd just have access to it until the current month was used up, then it'd lock me out. I've since had an email from Harlands stating that I shouldn't have cancelled the DD without speaking to them first. And they've now added a £20 admin fee, plus still saying I need to pay £19.99 for the final month. My response was that I haven't used the gym in 2 months due to my change in circumstances, and they took another £19.99 payment off me while I was in the process of trying to cancel so they've had their final month's payment as far as I'm concerned, and I'm not paying any penalty fees so they can shove that one. I've had a read around some similar threads and it seems like they are pretty powerless and unlikely to take court action, but I just wanted to double check that I'd covered off all my bases as well as possible? Thanks in advance CD

Thanks Dave HB: As soon as the payment from the PPC arrives I'll be sure to make a donation. There's something very satisfying about a parking company's money going to support a site like this. Cheers CD

Just a quick update, after a bit more back and forth with the builder in question, he's agreed to pay me back the full £2,000 I've paid out. He's due to give me £1,000 tomorrow and the other £1,000 next week. Whether he actually does or not remains to be seen. Thanks for your help with this Cheers CD

I will be sure to do that, if it gets that far. Cheers Andy Thanks CD

Hi Andy No, I know I can't claim them now, but this particular parking company is currently pursuing a second claim against me. This hasn't reached the witness statement part yet but if for some inexplicable reason they decide they want to double down and take this one to a hearing after being roundly beaten yesterday, I'll be sure to claim all my costs this time around. Cheers CD

Thanks all. I'm now aware that a litigant in person can submit a costs order for the time spent and costs incurred in dealing with this issue, seems a bit lop-sided that only solicitors can claim costs when small claims is intended for Average Joe to be able to take action without incurring big legal costs. Their representative kept on and on that PE vs Beavis made their charges legit. My response was that I don't see how this case can give the green light to parking operators to claim arbitrary invented sums that go straight into their profits, and that the "commercial justification" was a huge conflict of interest. My response was "what's stopping me putting a sign up at the end of my driveway saying every visitor has to be wearing a blue hat, and if you don't then you owe me £50". It was moot anyway as they hadn't even included a copy of the Beavis judgement in their evidence pack. Rest assured that if they are stupid enough to carry on pursuing this other case, then I'll be submitting a schedule for costs in advance. To be honest I half expected them to bottle it and back out before this hearing. Be interesting to see if they fancy trying it again. Thanks again CD

Afternoon all. Case won. Went through all the points I raised but the bit that seemed to swing it for me was the fact that once you drive from the outdoor areas into the underground parking garage, which is protected by an electronic gate no signage is visible inside, so it was held that they couldn't rely on the signage outside to apply everywhere, since they were classed as two separate areas. Claimant's overinflated claim for costs was dismissed, and they have to pay me a half day's lost wages (£45) within 21 days. I did ask whether I could claim back the costs of all the printing and postage of evidence packs etc but unfortunately not. That's the cost of litigation apparently. I do have another case pending from them for the other failed POPLA appeal. I asked the judge if he could throw that one out but he said he couldn't, but given the lack of the signage on site, the parking company would need to have a "long think" about whether they choose to pursue this other case any further. I'll let you know if they do. Thanks, as always for everyone's help with this. CD

Cheers BF. I'm just a bit concerned that if I accept the £1,500 he'll see that as the matter settled. I haven't been able to arrange for anyone to come up and give me a quote to complete the work yet but even I can see it's going to need to be started from scratch again because since it's been left for so long, there's grass and weeds coming up through the rocks that have been laid down. Also good point thanks Labrat. I believe once Whatsapp messages are read by the recipient they can't be deleted for all parties but I've screenshotted everything anyway as a precaution.

Hi all. Taking a break from the motoring forum to sort out a new issue. Moved into a new build property last year and in the spring started looking around for a landscaper to sort out the back garden. Basically I wanted the patio to be extended, the ground levelled off and artificial grass to be put down. Found a landscaper who came recommended by the person who had moved in 4 doors up who came and gave me a quote for the work (£3,000 incl materials and labour) and an estimated completion time of 2 weeks, which I accepted. The work was started, he brought up a mini digger to level the ground off, and for the following two days they were placing rocks down (presumably to create a solid foundation for the artificial grass). Landscaper then asked for £2,000 to cover the cost of the materials. He asked for the payment in cash initially which I declined and insisted on a bank transfer instead so there was an electronic record of it. (I now realise that this wasn't a great option either). This was paid on the 11th June. Since paying the £2,000, no more work has been completed. Communication with the builder has become very sporadic and there's usually some excuse like a family emergency, labourers letting him down etc. Several times he'd message me to say "we'll be back on Monday next week to finish off" but nobody has turned up and it's taken several messages from me to get an answer. He's eventually gotten in touch a few weeks later last Wednesday (21st July) saying how sorry he is etc, and that he's bringing a builder up to look at the site that day, and that if he can't complete it he'll give me the £2,000 back. Obviously he didn't arrive, so I sent him a message asking for the return of the £2,000. Now he's gotten back in touch, saying "well you've had a grand's worth of work done, so I'll give you back £1,000". My answer was that I don't think it's £1,000 worth of work, and even if it was, I'd say that 5 weeks of no-shows and broken promises was a fair trade. He's now countered with an offer of £1,500, but I'm reluctant to take it, especially since he already offered a full refund in his message last week. Worth mentioning at this point that all communications have been via WhatsApp, so I have a written record of everything that has been said. I'm reluctant to name the builder at this stage, but is there anything else I can do short of going down the small claims court route? Thanks CD

Thanks Dave Makes me feel better about the whole thing. Just want to get it all over and done with now. Cheers CD

Cheers Andy I'm not a lawyer but as I'm reading it, part 27.14 (2) basically means that the costs are fixed, and they can't claim for hundreds of pounds of extras, even if they did win? Unless they could prove that I've acted unreasonably, although since I'm the defendant and not the one that brought this action before the court, I'm not sure how that could be the case. If I've got that totally arse about face, then apologies. Cheers CD

That's what I thought. Cheers all. I've attached a redacted copy here as HB suggested for your perusal. Cheers CD Statement_of_Costs_Redacted.pdf

Top of the morning to you all. I had a letter through last night from the claimants solicitors. Attached was a "claimant's statement of costs", where they've listed under Counsel's fees an unnamed "LPC Law Agent", charging a £200 fee for the hearing, plus £50 under court fees, with the description "Fixed legal costs upon issue". Am I right in thinking that this is just a bluff tactic, and that legal costs are capped at small claims so they can't scare people off with vastly overinflated legal bills? Cheers CD

Thanks LFI. Not really applicable in my case but interesting reading nonetheless. Speaking of which, I've been doing some research in the meantime and have found this; Residential Parking – fightback guide WWW.PARKINGCOWBOYS.CO.UK The following piece is based on the Parking Prankster's guide to residential parking. It explains how to fight tickets in residential parking situations, often where landholders get unfairly ticketed in their own space. There are many... Interesting points regarding the Beavis case here; In Jopson v Homeguard [2016] B9GF0A9E it was established that ParkingEye vs Beavis [2015] UKSC 67 does not apply to residential parking, and this will therefore bring the penalty doctrine back in play. The charge will therefore likely be a penalty and unfair consumer charge unless it is found the charge is a pre-estimate of loss or there is commercial justification. The Supreme Court found that £85 was not a genuine pre-estimate of loss in Beavis as there was no direct loss to the parking company. Similarly, it would be hard to establish commercial justification for charging residents hundreds of pounds a year to park in their own parking spaces. I pointed out in my WS already that the circumstances of the Beavis case were vastly different and that there can be no "commercial justification" for the charges, as these are not commercial premises. Obviously it's too late now to include the above case in my WS but worth bringing up at the hearing do you think? Apologies for rambling but the hearing is in a few weeks and I just want to make sure I've got everything in order as much as possible, as I've stuck it out this far and can't really afford to lose. Cheers CD

Cheers LFI I had to send the WS when I did otherwise there was a chance it wouldn't arrive in time. On the plus side though it looks like both WS's crossed in the post so they wouldn't have had any visibility of mine before they sent theirs. My main point I want to raise is that the contract they've provided isn't with the landowner but a managing agent. Do you think it's worth spending the £3 to do a land registry search to confirm for sure that the managing agent is not also the landowner? Cheers CD

claimants full ws 774262966_claimantsfullWS.pdf

Yeah that's not all the pages, I left out a few parts that were just saying "We sent the defendant a letter" etc that don't really have any importance. I just uploaded the significant parts. I'm not sure how they can justify £70 for sending 2 template letters. Also £12 for "trace fees"? Last time I checked it only cost about 2 quid for them to request keeper details from the DVLA.

Sorry DX, let's try that again; WS Combined.pdf

Hi DX My WS has already been sent and was received by the other side's solicitors yesterday (I sent it tracked via courier and have the delivery receipt). I may be able to upload some parts of it in a bit using my phone camera but I'm at work and won't be able to upload the whole thing (it's about 50 pages). Cheers CD

Their WS has arrived. I don't have access to a scanner at the moment so I can't upload it but it consists of a witness statement from their solicitor, a copy of the PCN and all the letters, pictures of my car in situ, random pictures of the signage across the site (most of which is nowhere near where the vehicle was parked), a copy of a contract (dated 2015) and some other assorted gumpf. Some points of note; Referring to my court defence, they've written; [quote] The defence amounts to a bare denial and does not comply with 16.5(2) of the Civil Procedure Rules which state: Where the defendant denies an allegation; a. he must state his reasons for doing so; and b. if he intends to put forward a different version of events from that given by the claimaint, he must state his own version. The defence ought to be struck out accordingly. [/quote] Can they request a defence be struck out like this? Surely I'm within my rights to simply deny an allegation as it's for them to prove rather than for me to disprove? Something else I've noticed. The contract they've sent is the one I uploaded in post #51. It's between NSGL (the claimant) and a company called Warwick Estates. However in the witness statement it refers to Warwick Estates as a "managing agent appointed to administer the day to day running of the buildings and the estate". So if I'm right, the contract they've provided is not with the landowner, but a different managing agent. So there's no chain of authority back to the landowner as there's no evidence of any contract between Warwick Estates and the actual landowner. Would this be enough to discredit their case? Apologies in advance for the wall of text. Cheers CD

Cheers DX. Into the post it goes.

Quick question before I post this out, is the claimant copy going back to the parking company or to their solicitors?