EXCEL/BW Claimform - PCN Feb 2015 Car Park in Keighley (West Yorks) off Cavendish Street

[dx100uk]

means nothing - its not a signed contract with the landowner

it was judge lottery sadly

 

 

wonder how the appeals going

[Oddfellow]

Try to find the related case on the MSE forum that was seemingly defeated by the other guy. Don't know if he had the same judge but was at Skipton. Why fixate on one case with an incompetent judge?

[Heaton]

Fixate...I wasn't really.

 

 

It was the 1st thread I'd found at the Retail park same as us. Yes trying to find that out...

[ericsbrother]

they are paid to talk rubbish by their client.

 

what did you expect

- an admission that they are incompetent chancers and that they actually owe you money.

 

You must start thinking that you are right and they are wrong and then question everything that they say rather than wanting to find reasons to just give up.

 

 

You could have done that months ago and saved us all a lot of effort.

 

 

So, accept where you are and do waht you need to do and stop worrying about their silly games.

 

 

Just got home to this...looks like I'm not entitled to anything so say BW Legal

[Heaton]

Agreed.

...I took a lot of the comments "they will go away...willy waving" too literally and did nothing in between.

 

 

Although you guys aren't professionals you've certainly good a good number of years start on most of us.

 

 

Hence the need of guidance.

.because there really is a right and wrong way to go about this.

 

 

Please don't stop the assistance at this stage.

[ericsbrother]

I have read that case mentioned above,

the defence made the mistake of saying only landowner can make a claim when that isnt true.

 

 

The judge was misleading themselves by saying Excel dont have to prove they have a right, just a balance of probability.

 

 

Likewise the same applies to the POFA, no balance of probability but an absolute necessity to follow protocols or no keeper liability is formed.

 

 

Unfortunately it is another example of a judge not being conversant with the law (they cant know everything) and the defendant not taking along paperwork to support their arguments regarding these points

( other cases and even a copy of the POFA to argue over).

 

I'm certain they would win an appeal but there are risks involved as far as costs go.

You are going to get your paperwork properly collated and include everything and not leave out things you arent sure about as far as case precedent goes.

 

 

They may well be persuasive if it can be shown that Excel have lost other claims at this spot

(mentioned on that thread so go and dig into that reference)

[Heaton]

My slight worry is the timeline on the 2012 one, ignored all the letters and never appealed, so I assume if I show a timeline of the correspondence it would start from BW's involvement.

 

I realise it is Pre POFA and that they cannot legally go after the Keeper, they will of course know this but I'm assuming once they see my WS & the mention of it..they and the Judge will know they haven't a leg to stand on.

 

As ive said Brad Met have confirmed they don't have P.P on the signage, but don't go far enough to say they've done anything about it, and there is an email from Sport Direct Asset Manager on that site commenting on Excel aggressive behaviour..although I'm not sure how if that is 100% legit.

 

So my court pack would include

 

All BW / EXCEL correspondence

My correspondence

Timeline

WS

Photos

 

I'm not sure if the signage would have changed after 1st October 2012, is it worth saying they were different even if I'm not sure ?

 

Another question, how exactly does the Court work. Do we both make a statement to the Judge and she makes a decision off that plus the WS ?

[ericsbrother]

you use the current signage to show that it isnt possibly what was there at the time.

 

Yet again you are taking a defeatist attitude to everything

 

doesnt matter that the law isnt enforced,

you dont get a driving ban every time you speed because no-one has got the willpower to track every car in the country and then prepare a case against every driver.

 

 

28million summonses a day would destroy the courts system and it would never recover if just one person said they were not guilty

 

 

 

so again

I have to say read properly what has already been written and act on waht is within your powers to do and dont worry about what BWL do.

 

 

If you have read the last 3 months worth of the pranksters blog you will see that they screw up with court procedure so you can get them on that and they will not be able to say a word on the claim itself.

 

What happens on the day?

Nothing if you dont get on with this first

[Heaton]

Not defeatist at all, just mindful that this is a big learning curve...and Ive more than enough on my plate at the moment with other stuff and I'm trying to stop my wife from secretly paying it off....

 

 

Did you get my PM ?

[ericsbrother]

you have plenty of time to gather what you need but it is something you want to keep on top of, we have too many posters who come hre for advice and then they go away and the next time we hear from them is when they have lost the claim because they didnt submit a defence as they were waiting for us to write it for them but couldnt be bothered to even tell us that one was due.

 

Also, when you get to see their contract with landowner check to see the company name who signed off the deal as Simon is a director of VCS in 2 guises and Captain Clampit ltd and he like to tell the court that it doesnt matter which company struck the deal he has a right to use another of his firms when he doesnt.

Edited January 19, 2017 by honeybee13
Paras.

[Heaton]

I realise that, this is why I'm trying to get as much done now as is possible now... but it isn't seamless so I will need some guidance from you guys. Ok on the landowner signature will look out for that. Seen a few BW WS posted, I'm assuming they are fairly generic in there content given their general standard of letter and content.

 

First thing this weekend is to read POFA, although it doesn't really matter to much on this as its before 1st Oct 2012..I think its wise to have a good understanding of it...especially if the 2015 PCN moves on

 

Just going back to my WS, apart from the Statement itself, photos, documents on other cases I have briefly mentioned, do I put down a brief description of events. Its 5 1/2 years ago a lot of water under the bridge...so my argument can only be whoever was the driver bought or attempted to buy a ticket and therefore

it could only be that the machines were not working, printed in-correctly & was not picked up on, the registration was not put in correctly, or the camera doubled up on our entry / exit...2 trips into the car park. ?

[ericsbrother]

not landowner signature but what parking company signed it. Again you are not paying attention to what was written and have made up your own version that it incompatible with what you need to achieve.

 

AS for WS, I sent you a draft statement so you dont witter on about what happened 5 years ago. Everything else you say after this is just plain rubbish and will get you into a slippery slope argument. Any suggestion that who was in the vehicle will damage your defence as some judges just make quick decisions to avoid having to make a considered one where the facts cannot support either side.

 

I sometimes wonder whether I am getting things across badly.so I will try again YOU PUT IT TO STRICT PROOF THAT EXCEL SHOW THEY CAN IDENTIFY THE DRIVER AT THE TIME as you dont know who it was nor are you obliged to find out or help them in any way whatsoever to do so.

 

To that end you keep your gob shut about any part of the days events. No-one is expected to remember so if their lawyers does ask you a simple it wasnt me will suffice, they can thendecide if they want to issue proceedings against the rest of the poplulation and hope someone coughs up.

Edited January 19, 2017 by honeybee13
Paras.

[Heaton]

Sorry...that was more of a typo than not paying attention.

 

 

I did understand what you meant on the signature as I had seen pdf of one on another thread.