AM Parking v "MA61", 31/06/2017. D4GF8736. Maidstone.
The Department of Utter Incompetence has been in full swing at Gladstones recently, and this claim proved no exception.
The full story is here on MSE.
AM Parking decided to pursue a parking event from back in 2014 and so filed a claim. As is Gladstones practice, the claim was vague to the point of uselessness.
The defendant represented themselves. AM Parking paid for Marcus Cleave from Elms Legal to attend on their behalf.
The defendant prepared well, given the paucity of available information, and obeyed the court's directions. Gladstones, going by their usual standards of apparently believing directions apply only to the other side and not to themselves, did not bother to file the witness statement on time.
The judge therefore started and ended proceedings with the following.
"We have a problem here, my directions were that the witness statements be submitted at least 14 days before the hearing. The claimant's statement was not received until the 24th. Therefore I cannot consider it and have no choice but to dismiss the claim."
Costs of £95 were awarded
Gladstones do no proper due diligence before filing a parking claim because it costs too much money. This means that at the point of filing a claim they have no idea what exactly it is for (beyond some vague 'parking charge' related payment) and their particulars of claim reflect this.
They then attempt to stuff the true particulars of claim into their witness statement.
This means that if there witness statement is not allowed there is literally nothing for the court to go on, and the claim can only be dismissed.
AM Parking, you've been Gladstoned.
The Parking Prankster