PE lose in court..again

PEfighter

I'm going to leave the Prankster to blog about this, it was his books we used for the defence. Not that this is an endorsement or an advertisment, I just followed the advice of this, and other forums.

Thanks to Bargepole for his previous blogs, they helped a lot.

oh, and the fax-elf, whoever you may be... your efforts have not gone un-noticed and are much appreciated.

Stroma

Well done The fax-elf are a number of helpers off the forum who send daily faxes or emails across britain on claims mostly by parking eye. I am sure we will hear of the exploits in due course.

hoohoo

It may perhaps be this case

http://parking-prankster.blogspot.co.uk/2014/05/parkingeye-lose-in-court-reason-not.html

In which case ParkingEye have found a new way to lose cases

bazster

Seems that this judge had already decided to throw out PE's legal pygmy before the case had even started.

Yet again we see PE trying to drive a coach-and-horses through the "rules" and just hoping that no-one will notice. Kudos to DJ Neaves for not being hoodwinked.

As a matter of purely academic interest, if someone lost a case and subsequently realised that PE's representative had no right-of-audience, would that be a ground for appeal?

Umkomaas

Oh dear, a monumental cork-up by the LPC lady! 'Under instructions from my client'. Five words and she's toast!

I wonder if Rachel will be sending her the £300 she owes her. £60 per word, great work, if you can get it - who needs to be a Premiership footballer.

bazster

Not sure what other capacity the LPC Law dope might've been trying. As I understand it (but I'm no expert) to represent someone in the County Court you must be one of:

- A barrister
- A solicitor
- An employee of a law firm under instruction from a solicitor
- An employee of the company you are representing
- A litigant in person
- A lay representative, so long as the party you are representing is also present.

So if she wasn't a barrister or solicitor and was self-employed then she was stuffed whatever way you look at it.

The_Slithy_Tove

So, if PE want to continue to pursue claims, they're going to have to fork out more money for "proper" lawyers. And even then, they have only overcome one of the many hurdles they have put in their own way.

It seems to be that county court judges up and down the country are becoming wise to PE's antics, and are coming up with more and more ways to scupper them. If PE are going to play they system, then so are the judges (and the judges have all the trump cards). I think that PE sticking their heads well and truly above the parapet is going to be the cause of their own undoing. Quietly intimidating and harassing people to pay up would have kept on going (for a lucrative proportion of their tickets), but in making their scheme so public, the backlash is well under way.

Hot_Bring

The next BPA conference would be interesting to be at ! Parking Eye sitting in the corner while all the other PPCs throw big, hard objects at them.

Ivor_Pecheque

PE really are a bunch of amateurs.

Computersaysno

Rumour has it that PE are f*$£ed.


They are having a massive re-think and decided that they are going to have a small brazier installed on the lawn in front of the offices and they will burn several thousand pounds in it every day as they have worked it that will be cheaper than continuing with court actions.


They will also be sacking all the staff.

Computersaysno

bazster wrote: »

As a matter of purely academic interest, if someone lost a case and subsequently realised that PE's representative had no right-of-audience, would that be a ground for appeal?

Not sure on that one.


Remember that the judge can still allow the LPC advocate to attend, even though strictly they don't satisfy the criteria required [it's a lottery]. However using PPranksters suggested reply/letter should definitely increase the chances of the LPC-bod getting binned.