Court claim by VCS for JLA airport

salmosalaris

I wouldn't be relying too heavily on gpeol, agency or byelaws but obviously they should be in your defence .
What I would be relying on is there is no bloody contract on which they can sue in the first place . How the hell can you read and agree all the t&c whist driving ? A fairly fundamental point .

hoohoo

+1 to this.

I would rewrite the pranksters blog or perhaps just submit it as evidence.

I would also submit the DfT X-height guidance to show their font sizes are far too small and that only 6 words per sign can be safely read.
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/203663/traffic-signs-manual-chapter-02-x-height.pdf

Finally I would submit the judgment in the Ransomes Park v Anderson case from HHJ Moloney.
http://www.parking-prankster.com/case-law.html

This judgment provides that where signage attempts to make a contract but fails, damages for trespass can still apply. I think it fair that the signs make it clear the landowner does not want vehicles to stop. It is impossible for them to form a contract but trespass laws still apply.

VCS are not the landowner (Ransomes Park were) so have no standing.

rhubarbtriangle

Thanks HooHoo and everyone else, would be great to have one of you lot come to the hearing!!

Parking-Prankster

I'm interested. What court, date and time?

rhubarbtriangle

Parking-Prankster wrote: »

I'm interested. What court, date and time?

It is April 14th at 10am, but we have told even though they say 10am we could have quite a wait because of other cases being heard that day.

Herzlos

I'd remove that info from the public forum, and send it privately to the Parking Prankster, so that they can't identify you.

hoohoo

I think there is already more than enough information to identify the defendant, but it doesn't really matter.

Parking-Prankster

And the court?

Marktheshark

Think she said wakefield and the fax number is
01264 785019

enfield_freddy

:j:j that's handy :j:j