UKCPS Court Claim Trashed By Judge

Umkomaas

lescm19 wrote: »

Classic.
I like how the DJ Dawson felt he had to pass comment on the GPEOL point even though he had already found on another point.

Agree. Perhaps a lesson somewhere there for POPLA!

salmosalaris

I particularly like the gpeol point being considered to help with future cases in that court .
Well that one's now out of bounds for Mr Haswell

Jailhouse_John

bargepole wrote: »

Link to Judgment here: https://www.dropbox.com/s/xw9hqmb3ag35el2/UKCPS-v-Gaskell.pdf
This was an unusual case, because not enough time was allocated at the hearing. So the Judge heard brief submissions from both sides, sent them away, and said he would read all the papers and send on his Judgment.

There are some real gems in this, which rubbish not only UKCPS, but the whole PPC industry.

Perhaps the most telling is this bit: 'So it is difficult to see where there is actual loss resulting from the non-payment of this demand; and therefore it is difficult to see how high a figure as £100 (or,indeed, any figure) can be a genuine pre-estimate of loss.'

It will indeed help my UKCPS POPLA appeal so may I be a tad presumptuous in assuming that there might now be a modified pro forma POPLA letter drafted for us to use soon?

kirkbyinfurnesslad_2

Jailhouse_John wrote: »

It will indeed help my UKCPS POPLA appeal so may I be a tad presumptuous in assuming that there might now be a modified pro forma POPLA letter drafted for us to use soon?

No . No changes needed

bod1467

Paragraphs 33-36 and 42 are very interesting.

(i.e. why did the PPC put up "old" signs when taking over a site AFTER the BPA 2-part signage requirements were already in place).

Umkomaas

bod1467 wrote: »

Paragraphs 33-36 and 42 are very interesting.

(i.e. why did the PPC put up "old" signs when taking over a site AFTER the BPA 2-part signage requirements were already in place).

Indeed, and the Judge spotted the perverse incentive in doing this.

Methinks he should be awarded honorary membership as a 'regular contributor' to MSE! Sufficiently au fait with this stuff to warrant such an award!

bazster

Judge Dawson returns Hasbeen's @rse:



If you think it's bad now Peter, you'd be totally sh|tting yourself if you knew what I know.

lexicalmatt

Wonderful read. Is there a list of similar judgements in thread or similar?

Umkomaas

lexicalmatt wrote: »

Wonderful read. Is there a list of similar judgements in thread or similar?

Try some of this

http://www.parking-prankster.com/case-law.html

Jailhouse_John

2 things have occurred to me following this judgement:

1) Should I resubmit my Appeal to the UKCPS NTK I sent off a couple of days ago utilising the standard format including this judgement?

2) Do those unfortunates who have previously paid up their £60 or even £100 Charge now have legal recourse to get their money back?