Parking Eye Court proceedings

bod1467

hansligg wrote: »

yes was returned same day I received and I opted for mitigation, but unsure as to what Parking Eye will opt for. Playing the waiting game now

I presume you meant mediation.

bod1467

Marktheshark wrote: »

If they are using Beavis as a case example you should object this in the strongest possible terms as county court is not supposed to be swayed by any other case.
To do so gives grounds for automatic appeal as the precedent is not case law, the decision would therefore be technically incorrect in law as it has followed an interpretation as opposed to a definitive case law.

It is perfectly allowable to to reference other small claims cases in evidence for either party. Whilst they don't set a precedent, a judge can decide for him/her self whether to be swayed by such evidence.

That said, the rebuttal needs to go to the judge that PE vs Beavis is going to the court of appeal, and so the case should be stayed for the outcome; or if the case is heard (and lost) then at least any judgement should be held pending the outcome.

Note: if it does go to a hearing, make very clear the point about the appeal. Also ask if the PE representative (usually from LPC Law) has made the court aware of this fact, as it has a major bearing on all PE cases. (A solicitor's first responsibility is to the court - withholding info like this could be contempt of court).

Marktheshark

The judge can but where the decision he references to is not founded in case law it gives an almost automatic appeal right under judgement not correct in law rule.
As we all know the particular judge was at best asleep at the wheel that day by aloowing redacted documents which had sections redacted that proved they had no case, then any attempt by them to use this, appealed or not should be robustly objected to in the written statement.
As should the use of redacted documents which may be of detriment to the defendant.
The judge as I gather was what I can only described as totally hoodwinked in to thinking parking eye were principle when in fact the redacted document showed them as agents.
The whole case should have been appealed and not the allowed appeal route.
It was fundamentally flawed and based on false documents which had been altered to the detriment of the defendant.
If you can obtain a copy of a un-redacted contract and as I understand they are pretty much template then I would stick it in the defence .
Can you see the judge not allowing it once he reads both versions ?

The_Deep

All of this argy bargy, it is double dipping, there is a wealth of evidence that this goes on all the time. Go to to court, look the judge straight in the eye and tell it as it is, unless you are a right towrag he will believe you, CCJs know what scumbags PPCs are.

!!!! Beavis, !!!! GPEOL,

If PE continue with this nonsense they need to be punished, have you considered counter-claiming?

Coupon-mad

Don't go to mediation (they will try to make you settle). Have you asked the court for the case to be stayed for Beavis or POPLA, as per the Newbies thread post #5?

hansligg

Update:

After sending a letter to Sunderland Hospital.

I received a court date for 23rd march and as far as i know parking Eye had paid the court to have a date summoned.

I received a phonecall from Complaints team at the hospital last friday. She explained that she will contact Parking Eye officials and have the court case dropped. She asked what had happened and that it was unfortunate for this to be taken so far even with me appealing at every stage of the process without acknowledging my letters.

I heard nothing until monday where I rang the complaints team and the woman i spoke to said that Parking Eye have agreed to drop the case and I should receive a letter from parking Eye.

This just shows that regardless of how wrong parking eye are, they will push and push for any kind of money. at this stage my fine had escalated up to £150 from an original fine of £35, all for something I didnt commit (double dipping).

So i will be happy to forward the letter and my case to anyone who has this issue with Sunderland Hospital as they (parking Eye) are an absolute farce and Sunderland Hospital acknowledge this.

bod1467

Well done on getting this killed off. Can I suggest you add this to the Successful Complaints thread?

(PS - It wasn't a fine)

ManxRed

Just wait until you get the Parking Eye letter and they ask you for £50 - £60 costs!

Come back if they do.

bod1467

The_Deep wrote: »

I cannot believe that PE are risking this at court. Please let us know when they chicken.

They're not any more. (Or shouldn't be anyway).

hansligg

Received a letter from the hospital saying the charge and court proceedings have been cancelled. but nothing from the courts or from Parking Eye, so at the minute I will still attend the court date with this letter if i hear nothing else.