DeVere Lose Court Case in Bournemouth

bargepole

Stop Press: Just had a message from one of our team who went to court as a Lay Rep today.


DeVere exhibited a landowner contract authorising them to issue tickets and take people to court, but the Land Registry entry showed that the actual landowner was a different company.


So the Judge ruled no standing to bring the claim, which was dismissed with costs to defendant.


Expect a Prankster blog about this, and full report later.

4consumerrights

This is indeed excellent news Mr Bargepole -

A Devere loss on no locus - what sweet music that is.

Hope Prankster and full report comes quickly

BenefitMaster

bargepole wrote: »

DeVere exhibited a landowner contract authorising them to issue tickets and take people to court, but the Land Registry entry showed that the actual landowner was a different company.


So the Judge ruled no standing to bring the claim, which was dismissed with costs to defendant.

Thank you Bargepole, for stealing my thunder.

The case itself was really as simple as described above, and to that extent it was a slam-dunk.

However, to Devere's credit, their rep stopped afterwards to talk to the two BMPA Reps (Me and AN Other) to find out what went wrong. And it turns out that it wasn't Devere at fault, it was a misrepresentation of Authority by the company that owns the company that owns the company that owns the company that owns the land (yes, that far down the chain)

Additionally, Devere has agreed in principal to discuss with BMPA how they can get their signage fair and right, and their rep was very open that they want to do this properly, and they are very aware that bad apples ruin it for everyone. I did point out that they are considered one of the bad apples...

Given the number of Sanction points they got from BPA, I have some misgivings about this, but lets take them at face value and see if we can work with them to make them as good an example as Total Parking.

So, rejoice at the first known win against Devere at Bournemouth, but rejoice more at the possibility of one sinner redeemed. :A

Judge agreed standard costs, despite my notifying devere of punitives beforehand, because they hadn't seen the email, and I'm not a total :mad: in that respect.

Prankster will have his own take on this when he writes it up. Please don't be too harsh on Devere, let him put his view first, as I think you'll all be surprised by his comments.

:T :beer: :T

Guys_Dad

Would it help to name the land in question so that if any other cases here come up or are under way, MSE members can use this in their appeals? Or do you think that Devere will drop all outstanding claims on this land?

I would only be supportive of Devere being "let off" with a light dusting from here and the Prankster if they have given that undertaking.

And, of course, if they further agreed to pay back charges already collected without proper authority. I hope you asked for that undertaking !

BenefitMaster

Guys_Dad wrote: »

Would it help to name the land in question so that if any other cases here come up or are under way, MSE members can use this in their appeals? Or do you think that Devere will drop all outstanding claims on this land?

I would only be supportive of Devere being "let off" with a light dusting from here and the Prankster if they have given that undertaking.

And, of course, if they further agreed to pay back charges already collected without proper authority. I hope you asked for that undertaking !

Both of these were discussed. The devere rep stated that signs would be coming down at the site today, and that no further cases would be pursued. So that answers point 1

As to refunding tickets paid, that was discussed, and I believe they will be willing to do that once they get the claim against the third party in place.

Again, I'm not holding out too much, but my impression was of a guy actually trying to do the right thing but being somewhat out of his depth and believing what his trade body said.

Guys_Dad

BenefitMaster wrote: »

Both of these were discussed. The devere rep stated that signs would be coming down at the site today, and that no further cases would be pursued. So that answers point 1

As to refunding tickets paid, that was discussed, and I believe they will be willing to do that once they get the claim against the third party in place.

Again, I'm not holding out too much, but my impression was of a guy actually trying to do the right thing but being somewhat out of his depth and believing what his trade body said.

Thanks for that. But as I asked, could someone who knows please post which site this was at. It would enable us to watch out for any cases arising in the future and also let us advise any members who have previous posts on here of the result so, if they have paid up, to ask for their money back.

esmerobbo

What's the BMPA? :think:

bargepole

esmerobbo wrote: »

What's the BMPA? :think:

British Motorists' Protection Association.


Website at www.bmpa.eu


Most of us who assist with appeals and defences are members.

esmerobbo

bargepole wrote: »

British Motorists' Protection Association.


Website at www.bmpa.eu


Most of us who assist with appeals and defences are members.

Thanks, I once ran a company which was in the BMPA which was the British Meat Packers Association. So was a little confused, which doesn't take much these days.:o

bargepole

esmerobbo wrote: »

Thanks, I once ran a company which was in the BMPA which was the British Meat Packers Association. So was a little confused, which doesn't take much these days.:o

Some of us do pack a bit of meat.


But that's a whole different website.

BenefitMaster

Guys_Dad wrote: »

Thanks for that. But as I asked, could someone who knows please post which site this was at. It would enable us to watch out for any cases arising in the future and also let us advise any members who have previous posts on here of the result so, if they have paid up, to ask for their money back.

This was Discovery Point, Bournemouth.