Jump to content

Dave962

Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Posts

    158
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Reputation

2 Neutral

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. I think Dave called it right, but just for the record, the costs were... £25 Issue Fee £25 Hearing Fee
  2. Thanks Dave and BN Thats right, it just goes to show it depends on what Judge turns up on the day. As you say, I supposed it could have been worse, it could have been with an additional £60 thrown on top, so at least my defence counted for something. It is at least satisfying knowing that they have been left out of pocket by the episode, seems mad that they or anyone would do that, but I understand they probably see it as a necessary loss etc. Thanks to everybody though for all your help and support over the five years, it's been really appreciated. You really are an amazing helpful bunch.
  3. Hi Dave that absolutely rings a bell, thanks for that. Do you think that ultimately they will have been left out of pocket by this episode? I’m guessing they would have had to pay a barrister 4.5 hours in total for their work alone? It’s for some crumbs of comfort I am looking to take!
  4. I can't remember I'm sorry. It was 2 x £25, each for something different. It absolutely blew me away, because like you said, 1 minute prior to that the Judge was not entertaining for a second any extra charge. One min it was like £100, no more. The next it was £150. Just like that. I wanted to ask why, but the Judge had pretty much said that once he started his final speech, we cold make no further comment. Plus, once he agreed to it, I thought it was pointless to question anyway as it was not negotiable. Yeah this is without doubt that bit that has left the nasty taste in the mouth. I'm absolutely bewildered by it. Unless this is some sort of basic standard charge that can simply be added without question.
  5. Thanks HB. Tbh, once he rejected the £60, I was fairly pleased with that as a result of sorts, so it was an unbelievably gutting twist at the end when the Judge allowed the extra £50 to be included, as he seemed so staunchly anti additional charges in his closing speech about 1 minute prior! Thanks LFI. Yes, he was a different Judge to last time. This Judge seemed really keen to wrap it up, so we were finished in under 1 hour. The previous Judge wanted to allow 3.5 hrs, 30m for 'reading'. Well we didn't go anywhere near reading, as all he kept reiterating was that he had gone through all the evidence, so all we needed to do was add any extra bits. It's weird the way I can't cross examine the representative today because he never wrote it. Although I raised loads of points, I just felt like they fell on deaf ears. However the VCS guy could cross examine me. He went to town on me because I had worked there prior, so I should therefore be aware of the conditions. Everything centred on the three bullet points from the Defence I sent a few months ago. To which the Judge allowed VCS to effectively blow it apart. Thanks DX, you are very right indeed, and I should have raised this. Tbh, by this stage I was feeling disillusioned by the Judge as it was clear he didn't want to go over any of my details or evidence, and was absolutely fixated on the contract and signage.
  6. Morning all I had my case this morning and subsequently lost it. The main focus of the Judge seemed to be on the contract, which he deemed legitimate, in that it was still valid as it had a rollover clause in it. He also said the missing signage was irrelevant as I'd been working there previously, so therefore it should be assumed I was well aware of the T's & C's. He never seemed bothered by the fact I had a valid permit, and gave this very little consideration, due to the above. In my defence, he seemed keen to reject the extra £60. But then after VCS gave £50 of extra costs verbally to the Judge, I was then told I needed to pay £150 in total. Thanks everyone for all your help, I'm a bit disappointed, but at least that is the end of these parasites on my back now.
  7. Thanks LFI and BN, I appreciate all this extra information and support, it goes such a long way in terms of detail I can offer, and confidence it brings me on the day. I will take a good look at the link you provided which I am sure backs up further the abuse of process like you say. Wrt to costs, how would that be expressed? Is that something I offer verbally on the day, or something I chase up afterwards once the verdict has been given?
  8. Thanks DX and BN. He did keep saying he’s done loads of parking cases in the past, over the 10 years he’d been doing it, so as you say he’s bound to have come across VCS stuff before isn’t he. hopefully that’s the case then he just wants to go through it in a bit more detail. Either way you have given me a lot more confidence again now thanks.
  9. Thanks DX, I appreciate the reassurance about my case too. I take it I’m gonna be up against it now tho? Even if I have a strong case like you say, I don’t fancy my chances much against someone as high as a Barrister, especially for 3.5 hours.
  10. Thanks Dave, appreciate that information. Yeah as you say that’s good news with the Barrister they must have had to pay top dollar there mustn’t they. Do you think there is any particular reason they are taking this one a bit more serious? I can’t think whether this is a good or bad thing? Do you think Peel Ports or Holdings or whoever from Peel, have taken more involvement in this too? I wonder if they have rolled out the big guns for a reason. Cant say going toe to toe with a Barrister fills me with confidence might be a tad out of my depth there! Ah well if all else fails like you say it must be costing them a few Bob now...as long as I don’t end up forking out for his hourly rate. I won’t will I???
  11. Well thats what I thought they'd done? As you can see it was way over my head! Im sure the judge said he was a Barrister though? I'm totally confused. They didn't give me a name. Out of interest, if they now allocate me a 3.5 hr slot, and a 2nd court date, have my court costs just shot through the roof?
  12. Yeah your right I’ve thought that too. Sorry yes WS is it normal for VCS to roll out the Secretary?
  13. Well that was an anticlimax. the case has been adjourned due to the Judge believing the 1 hour time slot allocated is not enough time. He’s going to reschedule with a 3.5 hr slot some time soon. I asked the Judge if the claimant for their name and if they had the right of audience, to which I was told that it was the Secretary representing VCS, and a Barrister, so therefore yes they did. The judge made a point the my defence is so meaty, this was the reason for the extra time required. The Secretary seemed quite cocky, and I got the impression he felt he had a strong case. he made a quick reference to Britania and abuse of process, but can’t remember what he said it was all a blur. I think he made some quick quip about the byelaws too. The judge stressed most these cases usually don’t need more than an hour, but this was deffo an exception.
  14. Thanks HB, I'll give it a blast, the more ammo the better! Ive just checked with the court too, they have confirmed that my amended signage map has been included in the bundle, so that is a huge relief.
  15. Thanks Dave, its from the OPS case earlier this year. I never referenced it, but I'll try and crow bar it in if I can.
×
×
  • Create New...