Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Thank-you dx, What you have written is certainly helpful to my understanding. The only thing I would say, what I found to be most worrying and led me to start this discussion is, I believe the judge did not merely admonish the defendant in the case in question, but used that point to dismiss the case in the claimants favour. To me, and I don't have your experience or knowledge, that is somewhat troubling. Again, the caveat being that we don't know exactly what went on but I think we can infer the reason for the judgement. Thank-you for your feedback. EDIT: I guess that the case I refer to is only one case and it may never happen again and the strategy not to appeal is still the best strategy even in this event, but I really did find the outcome of that case, not only extremely annoying but also worrying. Let's hope other judges are not quite so narrow minded and don't get fixated on one particular issue as FTMDave alluded to.
    • Indians, traditionally known as avid savers, are now stashing away less money and borrowing more.View the full article
    • the claimant in their WS can refer to whatever previous CC judgements they like, as we do in our WS's, but CC judgements do not set a legal precedence. however, they do often refer to judgements like Bevis, those cases do created a precedence as they were court of appeal rulings. as for if the defendant, prior to the raising of a claim, dobbed themselves in as the driver in writing during any appeal to the PPC, i don't think we've seen one case whereby the claimant referred to such in their WS.. ?? but they certainly typically include said appeal letters in their exhibits. i certainly dont think it's a good idea to 'remind' them of such at the defence stage, even if the defendant did admit such in a written appeal. i would further go as far to say, that could be even more damaging to the whole case than a judge admonishing a defendant for not appealing to the PPC in the 1st place. it sort of blows the defendant out the water before the judge reads anything else. dx  
    • Hi LFI, Your knowledge in this area is greater than I could possibly hope to have and as such I appreciate your feedback. I'm not sure that I agree the reason why a barrister would say that, only to get new customers, I'm sure he must have had professional experience in this area that qualifies him to make that point. 🙂 In your point 1 you mention: 1] there is a real danger that some part of the appeal will point out that the person appealing [the keeper ] is also the driver. I understand the point you are making but I was referring to when the keeper is also the driver and admits it later and only in this circumstance, but I understand what you are saying. I take on board the issues you raise in point 2. Is it possible that a PPC (claimant) could refer back to the case above as proof that the motorist should have appealed, like they refer back to other cases? Thanks once again for the feedback.
    • Well barristers would say that in the hope that motorists would go to them for advice -obviously paid advice.  The problem with appealing is at least twofold. 1] there is a real danger that some part of the appeal will point out that the person appealing [the keeper ] is also the driver.  And in a lot of cases the last thing the keeper wants when they are also the driver is that the parking company knows that. It makes it so much easier for them as the majority  of Judges do not accept that the keeper and the driver are the same person for obvious reasons. Often they are not the same person especially when it is a family car where the husband, wife and children are all insured to drive the same car. On top of that  just about every person who has a valid insurance policy is able to drive another person's vehicle. So there are many possibilities and it should be up to the parking company to prove it to some extent.  Most parking company's do not accept appeals under virtually any circumstances. But insist that you carry on and appeal to their so called impartial jury who are often anything but impartial. By turning down that second appeal, many motorists pay up because they don't know enough about PoFA to argue with those decisions which brings us to the second problem. 2] the major parking companies are mostly unscrupulous, lying cheating scrotes. So when you appeal and your reasons look as if they would have merit in Court, they then go about  concocting a Witness Statement to debunk that challenge. We feel that by leaving what we think are the strongest arguments to our Member's Witness Statements, it leaves insufficient time to be thwarted with their lies etc. And when the motorists defence is good enough to win, it should win regardless of when it is first produced.   
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like
  • Recommended Topics

Parking Eye ANPR PCN Claimform - campanile liverpool queens dock, l3 4aj,


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 1873 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

you did take clear photos of the small print yes?

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 80
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

normally I would say go and get better pictures of the sign contents but I really think that this makes the point there was no contract offered as the signage is insufficient to create one and where it is visible issnt an offer of terms of a contract but just a statement that it is for hotel patrons only. That means either no breach as you were a patron or the sign prohibits you frok being ther is you werent a patron and that isnt a genuine offer to park so no contract.

 

 

so, you defence will be

 

1. no breach of contract so no money cant be owed

 

2. sigage is prohibitive and thus isnt a genuine offer to park so any charge would be an unlawful penalty.

 

 

second point just a good example of the first. Whe you get into the detail you will use the unfair contracts terms regs and other detaisl to show that 1. isnt just 2.

Link to post
Share on other sites

that's all for later at the disclosures stage IF it ever gets that far.

 

just make sure you file the above defence by 4pm Friday 5th oct and never early either

 

not the 6th [a Saturday] as your earlier post.

 

you can do it via MCOL same as you did the AOS.

 

you did send CPR yes?

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

End of your post 1....

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Good

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not that clever on the finer points of litigation but I do know that they are frustrating you by not supplying you with their evidence. No doubt they will try and ambush you at the court with extra rubbish which you can refuse to see

If you are asked to deal with any matter via private message, PLEASE report it.

Everything I say is opinion only. If you are unsure on any comment made, you should see a qualified solicitor

Please help CAG. Order this ebook. Now available on Amazon. Please click HERE

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok,

as they havent supplied the info you can write at the beginning of your WS with all honesty that you do not believe they have the necessary permissions and place the onus on them to produce their evidence and if they dont they are not likely to get far in a hearing as it is likely to be the first thing the judge will ask to se.

 

If they then magic up a contract or whatever you then ask for the new evidence to be disallowed for procedural reasons.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Would i not just be able to send the evidence i have ie, the signs all turned around facing buildings inches away, hiden behind bushes ect.. and say I didn’t know about the “contract” as there was nothing stating it either in the carpark or inside the hotel restaurant/bar

Link to post
Share on other sites

The main reason they don't provide what you asked for Is that they don't have it.

If they did they would surely Send it since you would think the odds were stacked Against you then so may as well pay up and avoid

going to Court.

 

Of course they cannot say that they don't have them as that would mean they LIED when they first applied To join BPA or IPC since they have to agree that they Have complied with all relevant Laws and regulations.

 

Now the they LIED then and got away with it they find It just as easy to lie in Court too.

One can only hope That the day of reckoning will come.

Edited by dx100uk
spacing
Link to post
Share on other sites

As posted on another thread,

they will claim they they arent deliberately telling lies,

they are just ignorant ( to the best of my KNOWLEDGE and belief) and even reckless in making untrue statements because these arent punishable.

 

It will however, with a modicul of luck get their witness statements chucked out as being wholly unreliable rather then just getting torn off a strip for the wrong bits.

 

You will need to lay it on with a trowel in wrting to push this point,

some judges wont entertain a false statement and others will pick through the wholes and then ignore the bad bits, which allows companies like PE to continue chancing their luck.

 

If every case that went through court was scrutinised for such untrue statements they would quickly learn but the court system is based on believing things to be as they claim to be unless proven otherwise.

That keeps lawyers out of prison and all judges were lawyers once.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

you have read other threads, pick out wat is relevant and post up what you have so we can comment.

you have done more than half of it already in your earleir postings.. So start off with no contract offered as signage deficient and insufficient to offer anything that was understandable. You will be indicaitngwhere your vehicle was parked and show the rubbish signage etc.

Link to post
Share on other sites

In the matter of

 

Parkingeye LTD (Claimant)

v

******** (defendant)

 

Claim no:

 

Witness statement of Ms *******, defendant

 

I am the Defendant in this matter, I am unrepresented, with no experience of Court procedures. If I do not set out documents in the way that the Claimant may do, I trust the Court will excuse my inexperience.

In this Witness statement, the facts and matters stated are true and within my own knowledge, except where indicated otherwise.

 

1. The Claimant has failed to establish keeper liability so there is no cause for action against the keeper. They have also failed to identify the driver at the time and cannot assume that they are one and the same.

 

2. The Defendant does not believe the Claimant has locus standi as the Claimant has failed to produce evidence of a contract with the landowner that gives them the authority to enter into contract with the pubic and to make civil claims in their own name by way of a CPR 31.14 request on the 05/19/18.

 

3. The Claimant has also failed to produce evidence of proof of planning permission granted for signage under the Town and Country Planning Act 2007. Therefore, the Defendant believes that the signs are placed illegally and so the Defendant cannot be held to a contract with the Claimant.

 

4. Signage inside the car park is not visible from the car as it is hidden behind bushes and you would only see that a sign is there after parking given the height and small size of it compared to the location. Other signs around the car park are not visible at all as they are all facing inward towards the building not allowing people to see them. See pictures 1,3,4 and 5 attached also the terms and conditions on the signage is so small you cannot read it.

 

 

5. The signage in picture 2 is the sign as you enter the premises and does not mention any conditions nor does it provide any charges for breaching the offered terms.

 

6. There was no breach of contract so no money can be owed

 

7. signage is prohibitive and thus isn't a genuine offer to park so any charge would be an unlawful penalty

 

 

This statement is true to the best of my knowledge and belief.

 

Signed

Dated 03/10/2018

 

sorry about the un legal terms I don't know they use but this is what I have got upto now

 

If it goes to court and they produce any evidence of what I have asked for I will ask for it to be dissallowed

Link to post
Share on other sites

Dont need legalese

But better grammar

Example..what i have asked for..that i have requested..

 

1st bit too up to in this WS......should go..too imho

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am not going to add that into my WS only upto the date, that was just added on to the end of my post for here :oops:

 

I will get rid of the top bit too

 

quick question as well

 

will my Mrs. whos the registered keeper have to go to court or can I as the driver

Edited by dx100uk
merge
Link to post
Share on other sites

the claimform is in her name is it not....

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

hang on

are you not supposed to be writing a 2 line defence to be filed by 4pm on the 5th not a witness statement yet.

 

its not even been allocated to your local court yet.

neither have you have the DQ n180 yet...

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

then stop jumping the gun...

read your timeline as post 1

 

find the 2 line defence already given here twice I think

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

well what a nightmare that was

 

I tried to log into mcol to submitt my defence it just wouldnt let me on,

I have been trying since 1:30am,

I reset my password and even called the helpline to be told I had to fill it in on the court papers I was sent and post it to the court.

Bit hard when its now 3:50 on the deadline day.

I managed to email it over as an attatchment but it was 4:03 by the time I got it sent

 

I just hope they take it into account that i did try everything in my power to get it sorted

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...