Locked in car park

[MARTIN3030]

Anyone on the sidelines want to kick it off ?

[Patma]

Thanks Martin, excellent advice.

Theres been some good opinion and suggestions made already-what I think would be a good idea (and I have done this in my own cases previously) is to go back through the thread here-in particular recently-and print off those posts that address key points and guidance.

Its much easier to be able to sit down with a coffee and digest than to be scrolling up and down on the PC.

I also suggest that you establish a game plan for the hearing and post it up here before asking those others who have made some posts to give any further thoughts.

I'll get onto your suggestion

[Yorky2008]

From an engineers point of view, I would ask for...

 

- Machine make and model

- Diagram of machine

- Manafacturers maintencence schedule

- Owners maintenance log (v important, it may show it was already knackered or inadequately or completely unmaintained!)

- Safety features of sytem installed

- Failure modes (i.e. what it does in particular degraded modes such as barrier lift failure)

- Anti vandal measures.

 

Yorky

[Patma]

Machine make and model

- Diagram of machine

- Manafacturers maintencence schedule

- Owners maintenance log (v important, it may show it was already knackered or inadequately or completely unmaintained!)

- Safety features of sytem installed

- Failure modes (i.e. what it does in particular degraded modes such as barrier lift failure)

- Anti vandal measures.

 

Excellent points, thanks, Yorky. I especially like the owner's maintenance log. That's something we would never have thought of.

Here's the list we submitted in the draft directions order, which was just ignored.....

1) A receipt from the company who installed the replacement barrier with costings and date of installation. If the installation date is not present on this document then a sworn statement detailing the date of installation shall be provided by the car park security company.

2) A quote relating to the repair work claimed neccesary to the original barrier such quote to be dated.

3) A sworn statement from an officer of the car park security company that the signage mentioned in the claimants particulars of claim was in position at the time of the incident.

4) A letter of confirmation if such exists from Royal Sun Alliance authorising the installation of the new barrier instead of repair to the existing barrier.

5) A copy of all documentation relating to the insurance claim sent by the claimant to Royal Sun Alliance.

6) A copy of all documentation relating to this claim received by the claimant from Royal Sun Alliance.

7) Proof of receipt of the sum of £3468:60 from Royal Sun Alliance.

8) A copy of the CCTV video of the incident.

9) A sworn statement from the claimant that this particular car park was at the time only for the use of staff and not in use by students on Saturdays.

10) A statement of the make and model type/number of both the new barrier and the old barrier.

11) A copy of the deed of Power of Attorney granted the claimant by Royal Sun Alliance in order that the claimant might claim for both parties solely.

12) A copy of the damage report produced by the first engineer to visit site after 04/03/2006 .

13) A copy of all engineers reports from the 12 months preceeding the incident and itemisation of any damage reported or maintenance work undertaken or reported as being deemed neccesary.

14) A statement of the date on which the old barrier was first installed on the site.

 

Here's the CPR 18 list also

[Patma]

We thought we'd re-present the draft order and the CPR 18 and ask the judge to enforce them and also ask the judge about the Request for judgment by default on the counterclaim which has been ignored.

Perhaps it might be best to begin with that, as it pretty much knocks their claim out of the water if that's granted I would think.

All suggestions for strategies welcome . Fred is very grateful for all the help and support he's getting from you all and sends his heartfelt thanks and so am I.

[IdaInFife]

can't give you any help patma but keeping an eye on your thread and your in good hands.

 

i along with may others providing the moral support to you and Fred

 

ida x

[Patma]

Thankyou Ida, that's really sweet of you and thanks to all those who are wishing us well.

I'm getting quite nervous now the first court appearance is looming, not knowing what to expect, but it's lucky we'll have this chance to get used to the court before the proper hearing.

[MARTIN3030]

Whats the date of hearing ? - I mean next app ?

[Patma]

The directions hearing is on July 1st, next Wednesday.....oops the collywobbles are creeping in when I think about how close it is.

[MARTIN3030]

Hmn yes its close.

Sunday is usually not too bad a day to catch people on CAG-but the hot weather has changed lots of plans for many with barbies and such.

any news on the car park barrier side-as regards some of the points made ? specs/reports etc

[MARTIN3030]

Will pop in tomorrow and see whose online.

[Patma]

Thanks Martin. Did you enjoy your strawberries and cream?

Have made contact with several barrier companies with general questions about their construction etc and how they would be likely to react to being lifted as per the suggestions made,and we have got some general info on that, but what we really need is the info about the specific barrier, so we need the other side to come up with that info. We did a recce of the site and the necessary identifying information is not present on the barrier.Having spoken to the people we think are probably the manufacturers we weren't able to give them enough info and they said they have to make a site inspection to be able to tell us what we needed to know.

The bottom line is we need the other side to comply with our directions in order for Fred to be able to defend himself properly.

[MARTIN3030]

Yes this is clearly quite obvious.

 

This is a directions hearing not a trial and so the purpose of it is to determine the course.

As pointed out previously this is the BEST opportunity to ask the Court for some explanations AND clarifications.

I understand that you have not had your share of things-but you cant rule out that you will have a Judge who shares your concerns-they will need to read up on things before you are called in-but in view of the number of questions that remain here-you should be prepared to offer up questions to things that are not so obvious from a couple of minutes reading.

 

Fred needs to have a list in front of him of these questions-and will be given his moment to ask them.

 

He needs to remain calm yet focused and. hammer these points home

 

His list should have dates and actions.

 

He should not be afraid to use words which are definitive.

 

I suggest he begins by saying that the claimants have frustrated the defendants attempts to address the claim at every step.

The claimants failure to comply with Court orders and furnish the defendant with material facts and information which would allow an even hand should be viewed as an abuse of process.

(read out the list of non compliance)

 

I would respectfully ask the Court to consider the behaviour of the Claimants and to order their compliance of previous Court orders.

 

The other side will be asked to respond to this-and its difficult to imagine just how they can be convincing.

 

Its possible that their brief might want a word before you go into chambers-Let them do the talking and play it by ear.

Make it clear that you consider them to be frustrating the process and that the evidence is there to support it.

Being prepared is essential.

Make sure that Fred takes copies of everything - I know the Judge should have things in front of him-but so should Fred-and sometimes a Judge will ask to see your copy !

[Toulose LeDebt]

Wow!!

 

Just had a quick read through to try and catch up with your case Patma. I am stunned at the way it has been handled by the Court (and that's despite the tipoff a couple of months ago along those lines).

 

You've been getting some good advice, Yorky 2008 is bang on the money about the servicing manual. We asked for a copy of the last 12 months servicing and repairs in the special instructions with the AQ because it is critically important to establish the condition of the barrier prior to the event. be interested to see if it has been repaired or maybe even condemned.

 

Martin makes another good point that the period between Freds incident and the engineers assesment for a replacement unit is vague and unnaccounted for in the evidence. Did the engineer attend immediately or on the following monday?

 

BRW is right in there too. Drunk driver smashes barrier total cost £2k youths swing on barrier total cost £300 Fred lifts barrier total cost £4k +

 

Come on????

 

I'll be following this case too link

 

The whole business is a stitch up and IMO you are provably being denied your rights under proper Court procedures which means that even if you lost the case at a hearing you immediately have the grounds for an appeal whether the Judge likes it or not. (And we know he won't)

 

You have asked for disclosure and it has been refused or at best ignored, it's a shambles but at least you are trying to do it correctly.

 

I'll download the thread and go through it from beginning to end and see if there's anything I can come up with which might help you prior to this coming weeks hearing.

 

I think one thing you need for weds. is a checklist of documents and you need to go through them with the court/judge to see exactly which ones they have or have not. there are duplicate AQ's in the system somewhere make sure that they are working from the correct one and the same for all other docs. take proof of postage, receipts etc. with you. Make sure all parties are working from the same docs, it's not your fault the first AQ went missing and you were instructed to submit another (with SI's).

 

horrendous and I empathise with you completely I've got a County Court messing me about similarly up here because of who the original claimant now defendant is (HMRC ). The CPR has gone out the window.:-|

[Patma]

Martin, thanks for the guidance.It sounds as though you're speaking from lots of experience. I'll print it out and make sure we get it right.

[Patma]

TLD, Welcome back! It's great to hear from you.

I am stunned at the way it has been handled by the Court

Have you spotted the fact that the other side failed to file a defence to Fred's counterclaim and have ignored 2 properly filed requests for judgment by default?

That will be high on the list of questions for the judge.

Your idea of the checklist of documents is a very good point, which I'll make sure we do.

I'll be following this case too link

What a find that is and brilliant timing....it's going to be very interesting to follow developments.

Sorry to hear about your court problems, TLD. I'm afraid my faith in CPR has been badly dented due to our experiences down here, so it's very worrying to hear it's not just the wild southwest making up it's own rules.

At least in you they're facing someone who is very clued up on what should happen.Good luck with your case and please just shout if there's anything I can do to help in any way.

[MARTIN3030]

Patma-your faith should not be dented in the CPR-this is (or should be ) the means to a fair hearing and justice.The CPR within themselves are not the problem here.

 

Its those who are tasked with administering it, or failing to administer and follow the protocols therein,who have dented your faith.!!

[Patma]

Patma-your faith should not be dented in the CPR-this is (or should be ) the means to a fair hearing and justice.The CPR within themselves are not the problem here.

 

Its those who are tasked with administering it, or failing to administer and follow the protocols therein,who have dented your faith.!!

Yes, Martin you're absolutely right. Sorry I didn't express that very well.

You're absolutely right though. If the CPR are followed properly everything would be dealt with fairly. Well said.

[royboy68]

Hi Patma, Sorry to hear of your friends problems with these shysters. I did a bit of a search on line for a barrier manual and found this one. http://www.barriersdirect.co.uk/assets/0000/6494/O___M_Manual_PF6000HD__REV2.1_Blank.pdf

I know its probably not the same one as your friend allegedly damaged but most barriers will be nearly the same construction. there is a good diagram of the drive unit on page 19. This one dosnt show a shear pin but the only damage i could see happening would either a bent shaft which is unlikely or the gearbox teeth shear which is more likely. I would expect to pay no more than £100 for this unit and then a fitting cost which wouldnt take any more than 1 hour plus call out.

It was also interesting to read farther down the manual the recomendation for a service log to to be kept inside the barrier housing and for it to be filled in every time it is worked on.

[royboy68]

Patma, just out of curiosity was it the Tavistock place car park.

[Patma]

Hi royboy, thanks for your help. This manual could come in useful, very interesting!

Yes it is Tavistock Place. There are two carparks and this one is at the rear of the building.

[royboy68]

Hi again Patma

Dont know if this is any use to you but bellow is coppied and pasted from the PCAD MEETING OF FINANCE AND GENERAL PURPOSES dated Tues 14 FEB 2006

Its on line but i couldnt paste the web address. I typed in PCAB meeting of finance and general purposes into the google browser.

Its interesting where it says the car park on that date is still open to students on evenings and saturdays.

Estates Update

The DoF stated PCAD now had a permanent Estates Manager in place and

was undertaking a review of the structure of the Estates team. As

previously reported, the DoF was exploring the purchase of the Regent

Street land, and it had been decided not to pursue this until after the

completion and approval of planning for the Property Strategy. Regarding

the Lift in Tavistock Place, an expert report would soon be finalised. PCAD

was likely to claim between £100k and £150k for the faulty lift and faulty

flooring. The transition to the new car parking arrangements at Tavistock

Place had been completed and was effective. Congestion had been much

reduced. Students were still being allowed to park in the car park evenings

and Saturdays. A new swipe card system was to be piloted in some of the

rooms in Tavistock Place this term, starting with the IT Suites. Asset

tagging would be undertaken during Easter Week. The Studio Theatre

formal handover was due this week. The DoF stated he was undertaking a

review of security in Tavistock Place Building and was looking at quotes to

seal off the foyer in the evenings.

NOTED

[MARTIN3030]

Good find !

[banker_rhymes_with]

Here's the link!

 

PCAD MEETING OF FINANCE AND GENERAL PURPOSES - Google Search

 

Cheers,

BRW

[Annoying Twit]

I don't have the legal expertise here to add much, but I feel the OP's frustration and pain.

 

The only thing I thought of is that: if the college is publically owned, then the Freedom of Information Act should apply. And hence Fred should be able to request information concerning the car park via the FOI. Would be telling if there were meetings dicussing the need to replace the barrier soon before the "incident".

 

I'm appalled at the way the court appears to be trampling all over Fred's legal rights and taking the claimant's side on things.

 

I find it very informative to read of experiences of this type. Are there other epic legal threads around that people could recommend? Particularly those that reached a conclusion.