Glad to be here after all these years! I tried posting here briefly once, for a while, but then settled on MSE and pepipoo only.
I was the lay rep in this case and Bank Fodder has been in touch, so I thought I'd come here.
I was also the lay rep in the Southampton case of Britannia v Crosby & anor, where DJ Grand refused to reinstate multiple Britannia cases where £60 was added. That transcript cost BW Legal £420ish then they didn't appeal but wouldn't share it (how selfish!) so I bought a copy for about £14 and it's now used by other Judges (Lewes, Skipton, Warwick, Luton, etc).
I post as Coupon-mad on MSE and SchoolRunMum on pepipoo.
Glad you all liked the judgment about OPS. We did! It was achieved by a posse of five middle aged women who rocked up to Lewes court, three in watching at the back, and me and Ms W sitting facing the aggressive rep from LPC Law (sent by QDR). On the day, I wasn't sure I'd done enough due to having a lease sprung on me, and the rep stealing the floor & talking over me.
One thing the judgment missed was the fact the entrance signs have been twisted round to face the main CCTV camera for three years (check Google Street View, also I have half a dozen cases I've handled that prove it). The issue is, this place looks like a road, next to shops and thre is no appearance of a 'car park' if you are looking ahead and/or the sun shines on the white words on the road as you turn.
So the twisted entrance sign means the CCTV operator can use the images, but drivers never even realise they are in a 'car park' let alone that it's managed by a BPA member. This was covered in court along with everything else. The lease was produced in court on the day, after I slapped an unredacted copy of the OPS-signed contract on the table, the rep did a retort along the lines ''I see your unredacted contract and I raise you this lease'' (not in those words, but it was played out like that!).
DDJ Harvey was unwell and said straight away he'd defer his decision, but that he was allowing both the ambush documents because he wanted to get to the bottom of it.
Lewes & Brighton Judges have dealt with a number of Eastage Wharf cases and where a defendant turns up, we've always seen OPS lose. I know someone who goes to watch. But sadly we knew that there have been cases where OPS won due to the D not appearing , and I've sat in a case myself as lay rep six months earlier where we won on POFA arguments and unclear signage and the Judge didn't want to hear my next point, exposing the OPS contract. He knew I had something to say about it because I'd listed my points at the start, but I had to bite my tongue that day. In his summing up, that Judge was taken in by it, said he was satisfied with it (the OPS signatures were covered).
So I can say first hand, that document HAS misled at least one Judge and I know second-hand, of another. It's also won POPLA cases for OPS - I've seen 2 such cases. Couldn't wait to expose it this time.
The landowner authority signed only by OPS, also claimed they had authority over 'the site'.
The lease doesn't say that, it states P&D bays only.