IMPORTANT: Please make sure your posts do not contain any personally identifiable information (both your own and that of others). When uploading images, please take care that you have redacted all personal information including QR codes, number plates and reference numbers.

Northampton Court Claim arrived (MCOL)

1181921232426

Comments

  • Castle
    Castle Posts: 4,116
    First Anniversary Name Dropper First Post
    Forumite
    Someone I know tried to challenge Nash's RoA last week and DJ Taylor simply said "Oh Mr Nash appears a lot in this court - I can't imagine he doesn't have RoA". He was asked was he a qualified barrister and he said yes. The Defendant then dropped it. If they'd understood the issue more they would have pursued it and would have shown that he didn't have RoA because he didn't come under the exemptions. Plus they were unaware that Mr Nash was refused RoA in Cardiff about a month ago (reported by Parking Prankster - I think the case was about Overstones). .

    I think you mean this one in which Mr Nash appeared as a lay rep, (at £450 per day); of course, the claimant also had to be there.

    http://parking-prankster.blogspot.co.uk/2017/03/overstone-court-test-case-adjourned-do.html
  • That's the one Castle


    What this of course means is that Nash KNEW he didn't have RoA, but chose to try to exercise them anyway. And worse, when challenged claimed that he did have them. It is of course a criminal offence which, from his Cardiff experience (if not before) he must have known. He certainly can't claim ignorance after his experience in Cardiff.


    On its face, this is a very serious matter. But of course he is unregulated so nobody can complain to anyone about it. And the judges "see him all the time" so don't care.


    I wonder if someone ought to write to Gladstones/BWL/Wright Hassall and Elms specifically to set out the law on RoA and to highlight that it's an offence, and then post it up here so that people can show it's been brought to their attention specifically. And a letter to Elms specifically about Mr Nash and why they keep fielding him. Elms has an SRA number but is not SRA regulated (haven't got to the bottom of that one yet) but it is CILEx regulated so maybe Elms should be reported to CILEx for commissioning a criminal offence.


    Of course, it's lovely to think that someone will write, but none of us have time!!!! I'm just venting really.
    Although a practising Solicitor, my posts here are NOT legal advice, but are personal opinion based on limited facts provided anonymously by forum users. I accept no liability for the accuracy of any such posts and users are advised that, if they wish to obtain formal legal advice specific to their case, they must seek instruct and pay a solicitor.
  • All set for tomorrow JackBasta?
    Although a practising Solicitor, my posts here are NOT legal advice, but are personal opinion based on limited facts provided anonymously by forum users. I accept no liability for the accuracy of any such posts and users are advised that, if they wish to obtain formal legal advice specific to their case, they must seek instruct and pay a solicitor.
  • Coupon-mad
    Coupon-mad Posts: 130,105
    Name Dropper First Post Photogenic First Anniversary
    Forumite
    Good call LoC123 - JackBasta do you know how to firstly challenge the Rights of Audience of the rep who rocks up?
    PRIVATE 'PCN'? DON'T PAY BUT DON'T IGNORE IT (except N.Ireland).
    CLICK at the top of this/any page where it says:
    Forum Home»Motoring»Parking Tickets Fines & Parking - read the NEWBIES THREAD
  • Millennium usually don't use an advocate, they generally send along India Beavan, a young girl whose job appears to be to co-ordinate the claims. She used to be a barmaid in the club that the director of Millennium owns. Millennium's office is literally 100 yards from the court. Sometimes David Bellis, the director, comes along.


    No harm in being ready with the RoA arguments. But you need to understand them properly - the last person I know of who challenged RoA in Swansea was just told by the DJ (Taylor) "well, Mr Nash appears here regularly so he must have RoA". It was not a Millennium case (think it was Excel - it's on pepipoo).
    Mr Nash explained that he was a qualified barrister. The Defendant left it there because they didn't understand (and nor did the DJ) that you can be qualified all you like, but you MUST be regulated (ie working in a chambers as a practising barrister) to have RoA, not simply have done the Bar course.
    Mr Nash in fact KNEW that he didn't have RoA - DJ Platt had held about 2 weeks earlier in Cardiff (reported on Parking Prankster - it was a Link case) that he didn't have RoA, meaning that his argument that he did was at best disingenuous, at worst dishonest because he must have been aware that it was a crime to claim RoA when you don't have them.
    Although a practising Solicitor, my posts here are NOT legal advice, but are personal opinion based on limited facts provided anonymously by forum users. I accept no liability for the accuracy of any such posts and users are advised that, if they wish to obtain formal legal advice specific to their case, they must seek instruct and pay a solicitor.
  • JackBasta
    JackBasta Posts: 112 Forumite
    Hi Loc.

    Yes, I'm as ready as I'll ever be. About to leave for the court in 45 mins or so.

    I've printed out Ellis v Larson to challenge RoA in the event that anyone from MPS isn't there

    I can argue all the points in my Defence and WS pretty well as well as the really poor quality of the Claimant's bundle (different charge amounts on all documentation and contracts and images from years after the event etc.). However I'm hoping it won't even get that far with my main argument being the event being pre-POFA and the Claimant's inability to prove who was driving.

    However I'm aware that the judge could end up being sympathetic to their argument and it could all go south.

    We shall see.....
  • beamerguy
    beamerguy Posts: 17,587
    First Anniversary Photogenic Name Dropper First Post
    Forumite
    JackBasta wrote: »
    Hi Loc.

    Yes, I'm as ready as I'll ever be. About to leave for the court in 45 mins or so.

    I've printed out Ellis v Larson to challenge RoA in the event that anyone from MPS isn't there

    I can argue all the points in my Defence and WS pretty well as well as the really poor quality of the Claimant's bundle (different charge amounts on all documentation and contracts and images from years after the event etc.). However I'm hoping it won't even get that far with my main argument being the event being pre-POFA and the Claimant's inability to prove who was driving.

    However I'm aware that the judge could end up being sympathetic to their argument and it could all go south.

    We shall see.....

    good luck to you
  • I'm hoping you get DJ Bennett - she seems the most sensible of the lot when it comes to parking around here. The quality of the Swansea DJs seems generally poor.
    Although a practising Solicitor, my posts here are NOT legal advice, but are personal opinion based on limited facts provided anonymously by forum users. I accept no liability for the accuracy of any such posts and users are advised that, if they wish to obtain formal legal advice specific to their case, they must seek instruct and pay a solicitor.
  • JackBasta
    JackBasta Posts: 112 Forumite
    edited 31 May 2017 at 2:21PM
    Well THAT was a buzz. I need to start committing crimes so I can do it again...

    I won. I was up against Ms. Beavan, so I couldn't go after RoA, however I didn't need to worry too much - District Judge Bennett tore her a new one.

    The Judge started off by listing out all the documents in the bundles, and asked if there was anything missing. I told her there should be two emails from me complaining about the Claimant's WS being a month late.

    Judge asked Ms Beavan why their WS was a month late without asking the court for permission.

    "Don't know".

    I complained that the Claimant having a month to view my WS before submitting their own WS put me at a disadvantage. Judge didn't agree as there was nothing in their WS that wasn't "standard", and I still received it a month ago, so she would allow it.

    The Judge then went on to the landowner contract and asked why that contract was dated 2015, 3 years after the event.

    "We do have a proper one".

    "Why didn't you use it then?"

    "Don't know"

    At which point I raised the fact that all the pictures of the signs were a number of years out too. Judge asked Ms Beavan why.

    "Don't know".

    Then the Judge moved onto the crux of my defence - they were going after me as the registered keeper, had no proof I was driving, and the incident was pre-POFA.

    Ms Beavan stated they were going after me as the driver. Judge asked for proof of the driver. Ms Beavan said "We don't have any".

    At which point the Judge said "You've pretty much fallen on your own sword here. I'm dismissing the claim.

    I immediately asked for costs at which point the judge produced the costs schedule I put in with my defence.

    Judge explained that costs would only be allowed if the claim was seen to be unreasonable and for the reasons detailed above, this was judged to be an unreasonable claim.

    Judge asked me why I was attempting to charge the maximum of £95 for loss of earnings. I explained that I can only take a full day off work, not a few hours, and my salary is high enough to cover the maximum allowable amount.

    She then agreed to the 5 hours research and documentation @ £19/hour as a litigant in person, and the mileage.

    The only thing she didn't agree to was the £15 postage costs, as "you could have done that cheaper".

    So I got awarded £197.34 in total.

    Pretty buzzing with that to be honest...

    Can I just thank you all for the help you've given me. It's come a long way since the bollocking you guys gave me on the first couple of pages of this thread :)
  • Redx
    Redx Posts: 38,084
    First Anniversary Name Dropper First Post Photogenic
    Forumite
    welll done

    to be honest , the vast majority of thread starters need the early b*ll*cking so that they focus on the jon in hand and then win out at the end of the day !! lol

    so although it seems you needed it , which you admit , its all turned out nicely and another win to add to the others being collected

    great info and great to see that the professionals "dont know" a lot either

    make sure you get the costs paid too , as its cost those idiots at the PPC (Millenium) a lot of money to lose this case already, plus your costs on top
This discussion has been closed.
Meet your Ambassadors

Categories

  • All Categories
  • 342.2K Banking & Borrowing
  • 249.8K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
  • 449.3K Spending & Discounts
  • 234.4K Work, Benefits & Business
  • 606.7K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
  • 172.7K Life & Family
  • 247.2K Travel & Transport
  • 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
  • 15.8K Discuss & Feedback
  • 15.1K Coronavirus Support Boards