Parking Eye v. The World.

Forensic

Guys_Dad wrote: »

I am a bit lost on this Albanian bit.

Are you saying that, in a British car park, there is a sign in Albanian or where exactly does this come from?

Sorry if I have missed the relevant bit.

It was a point I raised in my first ever post so I realise that continued reference to it doesn't help readers not to have spotted my first contribution in May.

Some car parks have the terms and conditions on display in a handful of languages, especially at motorway services which is where you get all the wagons from overseas. Rather like the list of languages you see on the back of a product you buy, a short instruction message is presented and translated into all relevant languages. On Parking Eye literature, the Albanian message telling drivers that it is a two-hour maximum stay goes on to inform the reader that failure to comply results in a £100 "fine". That is the word they use in Albanian, not "charge" which is a separate word. Also, in all three entities where Albanian has official status (Republic of Albania, Republic of Macedonia where it is a nationally recognised language, and the disputed region of Kosovo where it functions as the de facto language), laws are exactly the same with "fines" only issued by courts.

It is an interesting point, one that PE has clearly overlooked!

hoohoo

Forensic wrote: »

Apart from that, for my particular finding, even if that Ledson female prints these discussions out and say on the day, "that's him, see? Same description?", it will be too late to deny the point made. That said, I don't believe I have revealed anything damaging that would screw my chances.

Thank you very much for the advice and I will heed it.

Rachel Ledson never turns up on the day. PE hire a lawyer from LPC Law to argue their case for them. That costs them £200-£300. They try and reclaim this during the costs phase (if they win) by arguing that you have acted unreasonably by ignoring their letters. So far this does not appear to have worked, and they incur large losses even if they win; possibly this is because their own 'letter before action' is so far adrift of the practice directions that they have shot themselves in the foot.

kittiej

Hi just adding my little bit since I've had a LBA

I am really hoping this will go to court because it's better than a good game of chess imo but most importantly I will get to stand in front of the resident Judge who is luuurvely :T

So PE if you would like to use my internet postings then feel free

I have a little digging to do re the actual car park since there are numerous businesses on that trading estate - 2 hours seems a bit ridiculous by the time you've wandered around B&Q (prob landowners), visited Argos, nipped into Topps Tiles, then Currys PC World ooo and then let's have a peek in Halfords and speak to their mechanic before getting something to eat at the burger van. These steps could be taken in any order.

Quite ridiculous to expect 2 hours to be long enough, I will want to see the submission for planning permission to see what it says and once I find out who the landowner is I will name and shame them to everyone and anyone.

It will be interesting.

Forensic

hoohoo wrote: »

Rachel Ledson never turns up on the day. PE hire a lawyer from LPC Law to argue their case for them. That costs them £200-£300. They try and reclaim this during the costs phase (if they win) by arguing that you have acted unreasonably by ignoring their letters. So far this does not appear to have worked, and they incur large losses even if they win; possibly this is because their own 'letter before action' is so far adrift of the practice directions that they have shot themselves in the foot.

Oh believe me I have not ignored any letter!

Besides, I've seen an analysis of their costs, they feature on the court sheet. I'll be honest, despite all you have said, I still hope it fails to make it to the courtroom with the judge having ripped up their papers.

I'll happily provide the shredder!

zzzLazyDaisy

Forensic wrote: »

On Parking Eye literature, the Albanian message telling drivers that it is a two-hour maximum stay goes on to inform the reader that failure to comply results in a £100 "fine". That is the word they use in Albanian, not "charge" which is a separate word.

It is an interesting point, one that PE has clearly overlooked!

I'm not sure if you are joking about raising this as an issue before the judge, but if you are you will get very short shrift. The only person who is likely to be misled by this is a non-english speaking motorist from albania. Since that clearly doesn't apply to you, the judge is not going to be interested. It doesn't prove anything other than their translator does not understand the nuances of the albanian language and it doesn't affect your own case one jot. Rather than looking for innovative loopholes, you'd do better to familiarise yourself with court practice and procedure.

Guys_Dad

I agree. The Albanian point is likely to confirm to the judge that you are scraping the barrel .

You are aware that under the late Albanian Dictator, the only foreign films allowed were those of Norman Wisdom, the celebrated English clown?

Don't lay yourself open to a judicial comparison in court, please.

Forensic

Sorry I didn't make myself clear.

No it isn't a joke and I have accepted that it may not do very much. There is no question of scraping the barrel because this the defence will be far greater. There is no "struggle in comprehension" where translation is concerned, the very fact that "fine" is mentioned in any tongue proves incontrovertibly just what it would in English which is that the measure is penal and a threat and therefore cannot represent damages to client.

Now if you put yourself in the position of the enemy Parking Eye, how could you possibly defend this one?

Guys_Dad

Forensic wrote: »

Sorry I didn't make myself clear.

No it isn't a joke and I have accepted that it may not do very much. There is no question of scraping the barrel because this the defence will be far greater. There is no "struggle in comprehension" where translation is concerned, the very fact that "fine" is mentioned in any tongue proves incontrovertibly just what it would in English which is that the measure is penal and a threat and therefore cannot represent damages to client.

Now if you put yourself in the position of the enemy Parking Eye, how could you possibly defend this one?

Only if you are Albanian and have little or no English.

Forensic

No point dwelling on it because I am at the stage whereby I hope this issue doesn't see the light of day. All I can say is that a translator only writes into the target language what is being dictated to him from the source language, and "fine" and "fee" are as different from one another as "left" and "right". It is obvious from my posts that I am not a legal expert but I know that when dealing with legal issues, you have to watch your p's and q's and this is an oversight that will surely make it impossible for Parking Eye to defend any form of "damages to client" standpoint - it has nothing to do with the judge.

nigelbb

I agree the Albanian defence is ludicrous. It would carry more weight if it were Welsh but a bad translation in some random non-EU foreign language is no defence at all.