DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Private parking tickets
*****************************************************
#Post#: 45449--------------------------------------------------
Re: Received two PCNs from April 2023 with legal and court fees
on top but this is the first time I am hearing about thi
DIR By: dave-o
Date: November 13, 2024, 9:02 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Well done being awarded £95 from the robbing b'stards! That
will be a sweet payment to receive!
#Post#: 45463--------------------------------------------------
Re: Received two PCNs from April 2023 with legal and court fees
on top but this is the first time I
DIR By: bz.08
Date: November 13, 2024, 10:57 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: b789 link ---
>
> A win is a win. Well done for persevering.
>
> Regarding the judgment, on what aspect of the contract did the
judge find that it was not valid? Was there any mention of the
redactions? Was there mention of the different entities that had
signed the contract and whether it flowed from the landowner?
>
> Did the judge make any other comments about the case or the
presentation of it?
>
--- End Quote ---
Thanks.
He wasn't very structured in the way he conveyed his decision so
it was difficult to follow him at times. I did not want to
interrupt (wasn't sure on what was the right etiquette) but he
did extensively refer to the contract and the change in entities
over the time period (in relation to the land) as one of the
reasons he decided to strike the claim out. I don't know if this
is because I explicitly called this out during my time to speak
at the beginning too. He also referred to the PoC as "defunct"
and that it lacked details. This was one of the other reasons
for striking the claim out.
In terms of other comments from him, when I mentioned the other
cases that I had attached (again in my opening at the start), he
basically shot it down saying he would make his own judgement
and that these wouldn't have a bearing (something along those
lines). He did not refer to these after this point.
He did not make a comment on the presentation and I don't think
he mentioned redactions. In relation to the £95 request of mine,
he asked me what I do for a living (I guess asking me to justify
this?) and I replied with: "I am the director of a wholesale
company that has revenue in the low millions". He did not
enquire any further.
One thing I'd do different if I find myself in this position
again is taking a pen on the day to take notes. I would have
probably been able to give more detail here had I done that.
Edit: Just to add something that might be interesting, I also
met a chap who said he had been to court 5x over private parking
tickets and won every single time. Today's session was his 6th
court appearance.
#Post#: 45482--------------------------------------------------
Re: Received two PCNs from April 2023 with legal and court fees
on top but this is the first time I am hearing about thi
DIR By: b789
Date: November 13, 2024, 11:56 am
---------------------------------------------------------
The referenced cases are "persuasive", not "binding". As they
relate to appeal decisions in the same level of court, a judge
does not have to follow the same decision as was in the
referenced case. However, they should be considered persuasive.
If the appeal decision was from a higher court (High, Crown,
Supreme), then the decision is binding on the lower court.
Interesting that he still decided that the PoC failed to comply
with CPR 16.4, which is what those two transcripts were all
about anyway. Go figure.
The contract was always going to be a strong point in this case,
and it seems the judge agreed.
I'm surprised that there was no mention of unreasonable
behaviour due to the inappropriate and offensive assertion about
your ability to understand the complexities of the Civil
Procedure Rules, their unwarranted assertion about your defence
being a template and the hearsay evidence.
Enjoy the Schadenfreude knowing that it has cost them much more
than just the £95 you were awarded. Not that they'll learn
anything from it. It is a drop in the ocean compared the amount
they rake in from the vast majority that just end up paying
them.
*****************************************************
Page 6 of 6
DIR Previous Page