Parking eye won cambridge case

Stroma

It's a small claim decision so not binding , like the other wins and losses by both the claimants and defendants , what happens in court at this level has little bearing on other cases, district judges determine what happens in their courts, their decisions are pure lottery.

If this goes to appeal then that is the decision that matters as it's a court of record, they the ppcs will be bricking themselves there, their whole scam could fall apart on the utter greed being shown by the largest cowboy's out there. I hope the 2 defendants decide to go further, it's up to them.

atilla

Bantex wrote: »

Which rules did you chose to ignore?

Surely that should be aimed at the PPCs.

nobbysn*ts

Stroma wrote: »

It's a small claim decision so not binding , like the other wins and losses by both the claimants and defendants , what happens in court at this level has little bearing on other cases, district judges determine what happens in their courts, their decisions are pure lottery.

If this goes to appeal then that is the decision that matters as it's a court of record, they the ppcs will be bricking themselves there, their whole scam could fall apart on the utter greed being shown by the largest cowboy's out there. I hope the 2 defendants decide to go further, it's up to them.

Bit disappointing then, if it wasn't a significant case in the end. Why was it billed as a supercase on here, and a lot of cases nationwide stayed waiting the outcome? Even the advice on this forum was to request a stay pending the outcome?

Stroma

This leads to the super case if it goes that far, it's always been a small claim and the outcome hasn't been decided yet as it can be appealed. If it ends here then it's just another small claim decision and it's finished. If it goes further then that decision could be binding, and it could mean massive changes are coming.

nobbysn*ts

How much do the defendants have to find for the appeal?

da_rule

From this form: http://hmctsformfinder.justice.gov.uk/courtfinder/forms/form-200-eng.pdf the fee would appear to be £465.00 (and you can get discounts if you cannot afford to pay).


It's not the court costs which are the problem though. If the appellant loses then they could get seriously stung for costs. As the appeal has been skipped to a higher level then you could end up paying for multiple barristers (possibly QC's) and a team of solicitors, and all of the other costs incurred by PE.

lescm19

Tanglefoot222 wrote: »

Parking eye won hands down in cambridge today.
To bad you lot

Do one. :mad:

nobbysn*ts

da_rule wrote: »

From this form: http://hmctsformfinder.justice.gov.uk/courtfinder/forms/form-200-eng.pdf the fee would appear to be £465.00 (and you can get discounts if you cannot afford to pay).


It's not the court costs which are the problem though. If the appellant loses then they could get seriously stung for costs. As the appeal has been skipped to a higher level then you could end up paying for multiple barristers (possibly QC's) and a team of solicitors, and all of the other costs incurred by PE.

Need to have a bit of a whip round to guarantee any costs for the defendants if they're going to front it.

Half_way

Looking at this from a wider viewpoint, if the descision stands where does that leave other companies / cowboy outfits who are not related to the parking industry, but could take advantage of levying contractual penalties?

da_rule

nobbysn*ts wrote: »

Need to have a bit of a whip round to guarantee any costs for the defendants if they're going to front it.

Problem is, a bit of a whip round may not do it, you could be looking at 5 figure costs. It would be better if only one of the parties appealed, that might help limit costs.