Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Indians, traditionally known as avid savers, are now stashing away less money and borrowing more.View the full article
    • the claimant in their WS can refer to whatever previous CC judgements they like, as we do in our WS's, but CC judgements do not set a legal precedence. however, they do often refer to judgements like Bevis, those cases do created a precedence as they were court of appeal rulings. as for if the defendant, prior to the raising of a claim, dobbed themselves in as the driver in writing during any appeal to the PPC, i don't think we've seen one case whereby the claimant referred to such in their WS.. ?? but they certainly typically include said appeal letters in their exhibits. i certainly dont think it's a good idea to 'remind' them of such at the defence stage, even if the defendant did admit such in a written appeal. i would further go as far to say, that could be even more damaging to the whole case than a judge admonishing a defendant for not appealing to the PPC in the 1st place. it sort of blows the defendant out the water before the judge reads anything else. dx  
    • Hi LFI, Your knowledge in this area is greater than I could possibly hope to have and as such I appreciate your feedback. I'm not sure that I agree the reason why a barrister would say that, only to get new customers, I'm sure he must have had professional experience in this area that qualifies him to make that point. 🙂 In your point 1 you mention: 1] there is a real danger that some part of the appeal will point out that the person appealing [the keeper ] is also the driver. I understand the point you are making but I was referring to when the keeper is also the driver and admits it later and only in this circumstance, but I understand what you are saying. I take on board the issues you raise in point 2. Is it possible that a PPC (claimant) could refer back to the case above as proof that the motorist should have appealed, like they refer back to other cases? Thanks once again for the feedback.
    • Well barristers would say that in the hope that motorists would go to them for advice -obviously paid advice.  The problem with appealing is at least twofold. 1] there is a real danger that some part of the appeal will point out that the person appealing [the keeper ] is also the driver.  And in a lot of cases the last thing the keeper wants when they are also the driver is that the parking company knows that. It makes it so much easier for them as the majority  of Judges do not accept that the keeper and the driver are the same person for obvious reasons. Often they are not the same person especially when it is a family car where the husband, wife and children are all insured to drive the same car. On top of that  just about every person who has a valid insurance policy is able to drive another person's vehicle. So there are many possibilities and it should be up to the parking company to prove it to some extent.  Most parking company's do not accept appeals under virtually any circumstances. But insist that you carry on and appeal to their so called impartial jury who are often anything but impartial. By turning down that second appeal, many motorists pay up because they don't know enough about PoFA to argue with those decisions which brings us to the second problem. 2] the major parking companies are mostly unscrupulous, lying cheating scrotes. So when you appeal and your reasons look as if they would have merit in Court, they then go about  concocting a Witness Statement to debunk that challenge. We feel that by leaving what we think are the strongest arguments to our Member's Witness Statements, it leaves insufficient time to be thwarted with their lies etc. And when the motorists defence is good enough to win, it should win regardless of when it is first produced.   
    • S13 (2)The creditor may not exercise the right under paragraph 4 to recover from the keeper any unpaid parking charges specified in the notice to keeper if, within the period of 28 days beginning with the day after that on which that notice was given, the creditor is given— (a)a statement signed by or on behalf of the vehicle-hire firm to the effect that at the material time the vehicle was hired to a named person under a hire agreement; (b)a copy of the hire agreement; and (c)a copy of a statement of liability signed by the hirer under that hire agreement. As  Arval has complied with the above they cannot be pursued by EC----- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- S14 [1]   the creditor may recover those charges (so far as they remain unpaid) from the hirer. (2)The conditions are that— (a)the creditor has within the relevant period given the hirer a notice in accordance with sub-paragraph (5) (a “notice to hirer”), together with a copy of the documents mentioned in paragraph 13(2) and the notice to keeper; (b)a period of 21 days beginning with the day on which the notice to hirer was given has elapsed;  As ECP did not send copies of the documents to your company and they have given 28 days instead of 21 days they have failed to comply with  the Act so you and your Company are absolved from paying. That is not to say that they won't continue asking to be paid as they do not have the faintest idea how PoFA works. 
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
        • Like
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
        • Like
      • 161 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like
  • Recommended Topics

HXCPM/Gladstones claimform ANPR PCN - Overstay Lawson Rd Brighouse HD6 1NY *** Claim Dismissed Costs awarded***


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2001 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

read uop on it on the parking pranksters blogspot and web site and copy cases where it has shown to be irrelevant. Judges like persuasive cases, thety follow others for consistency and they dont get into trouble then for making up new law.

EB should we include Elliot v Loake case in the WS ad an exhibit also?
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 177
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Hello all

 

Today we received another WS from the Claimant, identical to the last except for the date the WS was signed. The first WS dated 11th Oct signed and dated on 10th Oct (printed electronic signature) and today's WS dated 23rd Oct signed and dated 9th October. Is this normal practice? Am I missing something?

 

Thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

It HAS to be signed so the electronic one could be challenged and chucked out.

 

Who has signed the WS and in what capacity? You can make hay if it is soemone who works for the solicitors and not the parking co. Often happens that they forget who they work for as these are just roboclaims. If in doiubt pass on the name to an admin person and we can have a dig in the manure pile

Link to post
Share on other sites

the facsimilie sig isnt a problem, it is in what capacity soemone signs things.

However, he will have to turn up and speak about his WS or you ask for it to be discounted as you clearly wnat to cross examine him on his knowledge of this site and the circumstances surrounding the issuing of the charge and claim.

 

many judges are fed up of parkig co's clogging the court system with shoddy claims and wont want to waste tiem on this and dismiss any evidence that cant be supported in person.

 

Unfortunately a small number go the other way for the same reason and accept anything shoved in front of them to save time

Edited by dx100uk
spacing
Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks EB

 

Have today received yet another WS, different to the last, which 'challenges' the points in the one we sent to them. I thought they had to send everything they wanted to send 14 days before the court....talk about last minute :)

 

Just getting all documents and paperwork finalised and ready for D-Day tomorrow!

Link to post
Share on other sites

they cant do that its in admissible

bet it was by email?

 

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

inadmissible

if they refer to it you tell the judge the postage date and when you got it.

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

so when you get top court you ask for that letter to be chucked out as inadmissable.If they send thier witness along then they can make those points in person. If they dont have that witness then their lawyer can ask questiosn but cant respond as they arent there in their own right. Some judges enforce the procedures, others let anyone say anything and then show in their summing up on how they make their decision what they think of this sort of thing and will not be kind to a legal person trying it on against a lay person.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks EB, will do along with the second one they sent a week ago!

 

Have demolished a small forest in wood what with all the printing that we've done. Just sorting Costs now (in case we get chance to reclaim them if we win). Looking at other threads am I right in claiming costs for:

printing - is this per page and how much per page?

postage

travel - per mile? at what cost per mile?

parking

loss of earnings

Am i on the right lines?

 

Thanks, your help has been invaluable, I just hope everyones hard work pays off tomorrow!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

printing- say 20p a page, postage at cost. travel- 2nd class rail fare or mileage at govt set allowance of 45p per mile. (dont forget there and back)

 

Parking at cost

loss of earnings-depends on your job as you have to show a loss. Self-employed and those on an annual salary who cna choose when they work or take holiday tend to get nothing as they can make up the time so only those who clock in or get paid hourly get the money. Work out your pay for a day though and put that down and explain how your employer views your absence. If forced to take a days a/l you may well get the money.

You are right about needing numbers to show the judge though or you get just the rail fare.

Link to post
Share on other sites

another thing is dont forget to take a printout of the law regarding rights of audience. IfHXPCM or BWL dont turn up then they have to pay a SOLICITOR to attend as counsel. Because thy only pay about £50 the local solicitors often send along a paralegal and as they arent involved from the outset and arent a practising solicitor they have no right to speak.

 

 

 

So challenge the credentials of whoever turns up but dont talk to them beforehand or mention this until they get to the court door. the judhe MAY decide to let them speak ( their court so their rules for some) but much less weighting will be given to what they say as they arent a witness, just someone reading stuff out. This means they shouldnt be allowed to cross examine or answer questiosn on matters of fact because thye dont know the fats as set out in the claimants WS.

 

 

 

Try and keep their input to a minimum but dont upset the judge by being rude to them to do this.

Edited by honeybee13
Paras
Link to post
Share on other sites

if you are not self employed I thought loss of earnings is set a £90 per day?

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks EB.

 

Have just got out after a 4 minute hearing.

They allowed me in as the defendants lay rep.

Gladys did a no show.

 

Judge was satisfied with the defendants evidence showing he could not have been the driver and also agreed that there was no obligation for him to name the driver.

She awarded £50 in costs.

Not massive but we don't care tbh

Glad it's o er and we can get on with our lives!!

 

CANNOT THANK YOU ALL ENOUGH!!!!!

 

Really, you all have been a massive support and your patience knows no bounds.

 

Will make a donation as soon as my adrenaline comes back down to a normal level

Edited by dx100uk
spacing
Link to post
Share on other sites

as they didnt pitch up you had more grounds for a CPR 27.14.2 unreasonable costs order.

Ah well at least HX have lost a good couple of hundred quid for believeing the drivel that Will and John put out as Gladdys/IPC.

they are sure to be a little more careful next time.

 

Tell all your friends and get your friends to tell their friends.

i hope you parked in one tof the car parks they manage and then didnt pay to be there.

They would learn the meaning of irony then.

Edited by dx100uk
spacing
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...