Jump to content

FTMDave

Site Team
  • Posts

    8,198
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    116

Everything posted by FTMDave

  1. As I'm off on holiday on Wednesday and won't be around I'll bring things forward and be pessimistic and decide that Iceland won't cooperate. There are two things to ponder. The private parking companies have a lot in common for obvious reasons. But also some differences. Excel and its sister company VCS are by far the most litigious. They take large numbers of motorists who don't pay them to court - perhaps the majority. That's not because they have a good case. Indeed their case is rubbish. It's because, sadly, enough people are terrified of the idea of going to court and just pay up when the court papers arrive. It's a numbers game to Excel/VCS. In cases where the motorist is in it for the long haul, Caggers win 85% of the time in court against Excel/VCS (yes, I did once go back and counted all the court cases over the previous 30 months). But Excel/VCS take the odd defeat because of the mugs who just panic and pay. So take this into account when deciding what to do. Secondly, without boring you with the reasons, I know about the world of local journalism. Papers have great difficulty in filling their column inches. If you do contact the local media there is a 100% chance that they will publish something and embarrass Iceland - and maybe get them to back down. Again, have a think if this is a road you want to to go down. If you don't win by Wednesday!
  2. There are two things to immediately clarify. Firstly, why did court papers go to the wrong address? In 99% of backdoor CCJ cases here the person moves and doesn't update the vehicle log book address. Or they move and they don't inform the parties who they are in legal dispute with of the new address. Does either of these apply to you? Secondly, given this has been going on for over three years without presumably any ill effects on you, how important is it for you to have a clean credit file? I ask as, if you do absolutely nothing, the CCJ will disappear in April 2027.
  3. You won't find much, because the vast majority of motorists are just interested in not paying their invoice, those who say they will sue then disappear presumably after changing their minds, and the two successes I can think of (Hitman and Moaning Crusader) won their cases by default. The argument about your case is simple though - are PE lying about the date they sent the SAR, or not? That's why I scribbled down some ideas in post 66 so they would be ready later on for your Witness Statement.
  4. Right, so the court hasn't send out the Directions Questionnaires/N180s yet. PE's one is a false one, meant to intimidate you into thinking your defence was rubbish and they are confident with their claim. This is par for the course. The PPCs do this regularly. However, PE have gone further and written that "a copy has also been filed with the court" which is a lie as the court haven't even sent out the papers yet. Keep a screenshot of MCOL, later on in your WS you can draw attention to their lying and abuse of court procedure. If you've got time on your hands, then complain to the BPA about one of their members lying.
  5. Don't give them your e-mail address, don't give them your telephone number and don't fill in their forms. They send these things to pretend they are some sort of statutory authority. In reality they are a disgusting cowboy company who use sixth-rate solicitors who can't get any other work so are reduced to doing everything on the cheap with no due diligence for private parking companies. Your letter is meant to totally ignore their procedures and show you've sussed them for who they are. From their point of view it would be better to drop you like a hot potato and instead concentrate on going after people daft enough to give in. That's why I went on & on about their previous court humiliations, to show them that if they continue with you they'll just end up with another thrashing.
  6. Rachael and Sean are the two directors of the solicitors' company https://find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/company/07966978/officers Writing with the first names shows (a) you're not scared of them and (b) that you have CAG to back you up, as by now they must have worked out that the letters originate from here. It doesn't really matter about GCSE law, write what you want, the point is just to ridicule their clients for being so incompetent in court. Their win rate against Caggers is ... ... 0%.
  7. If there is no reply to the "nasty" mail in 48 hours, then please come back here and we can assess what to do.
  8. Please come back if the second invoice turns up, although hopefully it won't. Thanks for updating us re the BP CEO too!
  9. The reason for the photos is to show you weren't displaying a permit. They are supposed to check that the permit hadn't fallen off the dashboard. There is no point in appealing to PPM. The very people who deliberately set up the site with rubbish signage to catch motorists out are highly unlikely to find against themselves. You've said several times that you think the company who you met with called PPM in so these are the people you need to contact in writing to request they call PPM off. Until you do so we're going round in circles. If you don't want them to have your e-mail address simply set up a secondary e-address.
  10. Make sure the WS is sent 14 days before the hearing. You can e-mail the court theirs. In the subject line put the case number, the names of the parties and "Witness Statement". Obviously click on "Return Receipt". Send Simple Simon his by 2nd class post - all VCS are worth - and get a free Certificate of Posting from the post office.
  11. Well done with the photo. Of course the signage is insufficient. PPM are not interested in competent management of a car park, they are interested in catching drivers out so they can issue their PCNs. For a start, according to their trade associations' Codes of Practice, they are supposed to have signage at the entrance. Any e-mail reply from the company and whether they will/won't/can/can't get the invoice cancelled?
  12. First the judge will rule on you representing your son, which will be a doddle. After that the full hearing date will be fixed, with WSs exchanged 14 days before. So for the moment just concentrate on getting the right to represent your son.
  13. I think final version of WS now prepared with exhibits added. All numbered properly. Of course it can still be tweaked if necessary. Laura will not need it on 25 June as that is just a Preliminary Hearing for her to represent her son. But as DCBL messed up and thought it was WS time why not prepare things calmly in advance. Defendant's WS - versione 3 + attachments.pdf
  14. Your case shows the idiocy of employing a solicitor to do things you could easily do yourself. Had Countryside dealt with their own case they would have entered judgement on 4 June and there would have been no way back for you. But they thought they were clever by running to Rachael and Sean of BW Legal for a more "professional" (aye, right) service. These dodgy solicitors can only make money on private parking cases by doing everything on the ultra cheap and certainly cant check the judgement date for every single separate case. Ho! Ho! Ho! Anyway, glad you got the defence filed OK. The next stage is that the central bulk court will send out a simple form called a Directions Questionnaire to you and to Countrywide which is part of the allocations process to your local court. If you read this short thread you will see all the stages of the court process https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/406892-highview-parking-anpr-pcn-claimform-urban-exchange-manchester-claim-dismissed/#comments
  15. No, it clarifies nothing. As you say, there is a contradiction in that this company's employees have received invoices yet it is assumed they called the parking company in. I would suspect - and it is only a suspicion - that someone else called in the parking company to "manage" the whole estate. While you are dealing with this verbally anyone can come out with any old baloney and you'll have no proof of it. You need a paper trail. So e-mail the company, pointing out the reasons for your meeting with them and that you were not abusing the car park, and request they get the ticket cancelled. That way they will have to reply in writing and you can get to the bottom of this matter.
  16. It's solved Laura. It's in the paragraph I've highlighted here in the attachment from the IAS. Plus look at page 28 of the PDF of Bank's WS. There is written - 157 IPS 29/04/2022 12:52 29/04/2022 14:52 Y.... 158 IPS 29/04/2022 12:51 29/04/2022 14:51 Y..... - there are the two payments. One is for the elderly woman's car. One is for your son's, but with the wrong registration. When I get a second this evening I'll add the exhibits to the WS and it will be finished. IAS adjudicator's report.pdf
  17. So if I've understood correctly, you had a meeting with a company who employ PPM to manage their car park, but PPM gave you a ticket and the company refuse to get it cancelled. Eh???!!! You are being somewhat secretive with the details and it would help us to give correct advice if you would be crystal clear about the story. Who did you have the meeting with? What is their address? Why do you think it was them who called in PPM? Were you informed about the matter of the permit by this company? Etc.
  18. What a disgraceful shirking of responsibility. Par for the course though I'm afraid with Iceland. You could get nasty and send them a version of the below (you know the local area so change what needs to be changed). Unfortunately the people who are replying are having to comply with the company policy which is being foisted on them - which is not to cancel tickets. But you might as well send the mail and try. Dear Cissy, thank you for today's mail. Of course you are "able" to cancel the charge, you simply contact Excel and tell them to cancel the charge. I will wait for exactly 24 hours and then contact the local newspaper XXXXX and the local radio station XXXXX about Iceland's disgraceful disability discrimination. Nothing much happens in Gravesend so I'm sure both will be happy to do a piece which will generate terrible publicity for your store and drive away customers, which is exactly what you deserve. Yours, XXXXX
  19. Laura - thank you for sending the CPR and the adjudicator's report. The former is redacted and here. The latter will follow in an hour as the free site has told me I've done two much redacting in the last hour so I have to wait 60 minutes! CPR.pdf
  20. We need to see the actual document from the IAS where it is written - "The Operator's evidence shows no payment for the Appellant's vehicle, or anything similar. It does show two payments for the same registration in quick succession. I would take a reasonable guess, based on the circumstances described, that the person paying has paid for the registration of the person they assisted again." You can't just type it up yourself. At the hearing in July or August or whenever the judge will have two Witness Statements. One from Bank's director says you never made a second appeal. You say you did make a second appeal and the IAS concluded that payment was made. The judge will immediately twig that either you or the director is lying. But who? Fail to show the documentation form the IAS and instead just produce something you've typed yourself will make it look like you just made up the appeal and you are lying and you will lose the case. Please let us see what the IAS adjudicator sent.
  21. When court papers turned up, you sent a standard letter to DCBL requesting to see various documents. That's the CPR. We need to see this plus its proof of posting. We especially need to see the part of the IAS adjudicator's decision where they mention the two consecutive payments to the same registration number.
×
×
  • Create New...