Printfriendly

Sunday, 29 October 2017

Gladstones client PCM UK hit with £1500 unreasonable costs order

PCM UK v 'Sassii'

This case has been reported on MoneySavingExpert.

The defendant was being pursued for three parking charges totalling £300, plus fictitious charges of £180 added by Gladstones department of random numbers, £22.39 interest and legal costs of £130, totalling £632.39. Gladstones finest, Jamie Ashford made a bit of a dogs breakfast with the claim form, scribbling additions here and there.




Gladstones failed to pay the hearing fee or send in any evidence meaning that the claim was struck out.

A hearing was then held to determine costs.  Coupon-mad and Loadsofchildren123 assisted with the case and with producing a comprehensive costs schedule, charging at the litigant in person rate of £19/hour. This impressed the judge who said they had ''never seen a professional one like that before''

Originally the judge was intending to order only the amount of the claim form but the defendant explained to him that PCM / Gladstones never supported their claim with any shred of evidence and that they personally spent 3 months going around,  printing and managing thousands of pages of paper and exposing their personal details to Gladstones. The defendant ended stating they thought it is a type of fraud designed to waste a defendant's time if they didn't pay the alleged PCN.

In total, the defendant asked for £2607.

The judge said: ''It's unreasonable behaviour from a commercial company against an individual but I can't allow all the amount the defendant asked for and I order £1500 against the defendant's costs''.

The amount is payable within 14 days - by Monday 30th October 2017.

Prankster Note

The Prankster notes that any potential customers of solicitor Jamie Ashford, SRA Id 435535 should bear in mind that due to his lack of respect of the civil procedure rules they are potentially exposing themselves to unreasonable costs orders. These can of course be significant, as the above shows.

Happy Parking

The Parking Prankster


10 comments:

  1. Beautiful, and whilst not precedent certainly a ruling that can be cited when making a similar claim.

    Is it worth getting a transcript?

    ReplyDelete
  2. And I'm pretty sure that Gladstones will still be invoicing PCM for their usual fees...

    Jamie did seem very self assured of his abilities when I met him recently, but despite his promise to attend the hearing where I won two tickets, he never turned up.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Happy days!!!

    I've posted this to a thread on MSE where we are looking to encourage everyone to max up a counterclaim so that when the PPC pulls out at last minute or simply fails to attend...the defendant gets a bumper payday!!!

    ReplyDelete
  4. Simply lovleh , I just going off later this month to give gallstones a spanking :)

    ReplyDelete
  5. It may be an idea to have them considered to be added to the Vexatious Litigant lists in HMCS.
    https://www.gov.uk/guidance/vexatious-litigants

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. An excellent idea, but with just one tiny flaw.

      Gladstones aren't the litigants, their clients are.

      Delete
    2. I don't suppose there is a "Vexatious Litigant pimps" list?

      Delete