Jump to content

shamrocker

Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Posts

    1,447
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    9

shamrocker last won the day on May 18 2020

shamrocker had the most liked content!

Reputation

628 Excellent

Recent Profile Visitors

1,331 profile views
  1. Ok, thanks. Have you read up on other cases to get an idea of what might be a suitable response?
  2. Post up a copy of the letter (hide any identifiable information first).
  3. You had a killer argument that was well supported, so it would make sense to not spend time on other arguments which are more difficult to persuade. The claimant isn't particularly clever really, and was probably just blinded by what they thought would be an easy £600 (your hard earned cash!).
  4. Awesome - great stuff! They're lucky it's only £95 they owe you. Bet you're glad it's all been resolved, finally. Was there any mention of the fact the parking space is not on land managed by the claimant?
  5. Well done! This is more than likely the end of it, but you should check with the court at some stage that they've officially discontinued. They can still chase you for the debt, and they might, but you can just ignore. If they were to issue proceedings again, you can refer to this case in your submissions - it won't reflect very well on them if their case is similar to this time. The chances of them trying again are probably slim though.
  6. Ok, as long as you've satisfied yourself that how you're angling it puts you on a firm footing. A lot of people read stuff but often don't understand how to use it. Good luck!
  7. Have you read any other forum threads where the claimant disclosed the same type of screenshot and it was not deemed sufficient by the judge?
  8. Admission of something is one thing, but is it legally enforceable?? I sense they wouldn't be quoting an online forum if their case was watertight. Would be interesting to see what they've disclosed.
  9. johnbomo - how do you rate your chances with this, in view of the evidence put forward by the claimant?
  10. Thanks for coming on here to update us Coupon Mad. It's a pity that DJ Harvey didn't give the entrance signage the same savage treatment as other aspects of the case. I can kind of understand why though, in the greater context of things. Thanks again. Sham
  11. Sorry, I haven't got any additional information on the case or defendant. Has the journalist got the URL for the MSE forum post? They could probably attempt making contact themselves, maybe. Sham
  12. It's nothing to do with me. I just found it on a parking tickets group that I keep an eye on (albeit I far prefer the tone and content of CAG on this subject - by a long shot) and, as it had originated on MSE forum, I would expect there'll be some updates posted on there. I haven't had a chance to look yet, but I can't imagine it being too hard to find. It's a good one though. I have to say, it all felt a bit surreal when I read it. You become accustomed to the constant fear of 'judge lottery' and then along comes this little beauty to brighten up your day.
  13. Glad you seem to be enjoying the read! Just a word of caution, the person who posted this warned against naming individuals as it's likely the affected companies will lean on the forum to take the material down. I don't know how valid this is, but I'll say it anyway and leave it to admin to advise accordingly. It's great to see these shysters taken to task though.
×
×
  • Create New...