Trethowans / Aintree NHS lose £1622 case

AlexisV

NHS Aintree Foundation Trust v Perera
Case no. 1UD12840

£1622.84 costs sought from 25 tickets.

Mostly double yellow line parking incidences.

• Judge agreed that each amount was a penalty not a pre-estimate of damages
• Agreed that the Circuit Judge's findings in Thurlow v OB were persuasive
• Nobody was obstructed, no spaces were taken and a permit was on display
• Dismissed the notion that parking management was the purpose of the private ticketing regime

Result - defendant doesn't have to pay a penny. Will try and get more details.

Very important result when it comes to the Aintree situation IMO.

Trebor16

Nice result!!!

notts_phil

Brilliant result:)

peter_the_piper

Wonder when they will twig the costs are getting beyond justification.

Sirdan

About time the Press and the local MP took this lot to task about this scandalous waste of NHS (i.e. taxpayers) money IMO !!!

robredz

Perhaps the Aintree Foundation Trust should reconsider it's parking regime before they have to sack Nurses and Doctors to pay the court costs they will keep incurring

peter_the_piper

Vexatious litigant, Trethowans should know there is no case to pursue, they are just trying to bully someone into paying, one could say attempted fraud (probably not legally though)

TrickyWicky

Well lets hope that the PPC and the Nasty Health Service / No Health Service learn a valuable lesson from this.

HO87

Another sound result, Judges seem to be consistently getting their head around the issue now.

When one looks through the documents that Aintree so helpfully left on their website earlier in the year regarding their parking policy one can't help thinking that for whatever reason they have painted themselves into a financial corner. In addition, one can't help thinking that someone has built themselves a little empire here perhaps suggesting to the powers that be that by adopting the PPC model they could make the previously problematic car parks, at the very least, cost neutral. Who is now going to put the brakes on? Those managing the car parks or the bean-counters?

It will be a tough decision. As we all know hospital car parks are best described as a b*ggers-muddle at the best of times. People do take the mickey or because of the stress of their situation don't always employ that little extra bit of common-sense or straightforward decency. With the controls - such as they were - removed will there be a free-for-all? I pity the Trust manager who has to make that announcement.

We shouldn't ignore the relationship between Trethowans and their client. Who is really driving this? is it a case that Trethowans are telling Aintree, "Don't worry this is just a small claims court. They're fickle. We'll win in the end. Besides, we're sending out the right signals" Or is it perhaps that someone pulling Trethowans strings from Aintree is telling their bosses that they are getting results?

Given the money spent so far by Aintree it strikes me that its a bl00dy expensive point to be made. As has already been pointed out, this is money that should properly be being spent on vital services not on lining the pockets of professional mouth-pieces who, on the basis of their performances to date, one should really ask whether the word professional has been used appropriately.

robredz

HO87 wrote: »

Another sound result, Judges seem to be consistently getting their head around the issue now.

When one looks through the documents that Aintree so helpfully left on their website earlier in the year regarding their parking policy one can't help thinking that for whatever reason they have painted themselves into a financial corner. In addition, one can't help thinking that someone has built themselves a little empire here perhaps suggesting to the powers that be that by adopting the PPC model they could make the previously problematic car parks, at the very least, cost neutral. Who is now going to put the brakes on? Those managing the car parks or the bean-counters?

It will be a tough decision. As we all know hospital car parks are best described as a b*ggers-muddle at the best of times. People do take the mickey or because of the stress of their situation don't always employ that little extra bit of common-sense or straightforward decency. With the controls - such as they were - removed will there be a free-for-all? I pity the Trust manager who has to make that announcement.

We shouldn't ignore the relationship between Trethowans and their client. Who is really driving this? is it a case that Trethowans are telling Aintree, "Don't worry this is just a small claims court. They're fickle. We'll win in the end. Besides, we're sending out the right signals" Or is it perhaps that someone pulling Trethowans strings from Aintree is telling their bosses that they are getting results?

Given the money spent so far by Aintree it strikes me that its a bl00dy expensive point to be made. As has already been pointed out, this is money that should properly be being spent on vital services not on lining the pockets of professional mouth-pieces who, on the basis of their performances to date, one should really ask whether the word professional has been used appropriately.

The muppets would be more professional than this shower.

peter_the_piper

Just glad Trethowans are not doctors.