PCM Ticket whilst parked outside a friends house visiting, do i pay?

[Deleted User]

No right to be heard without company special resolution. CPR part 39 practice direction.

Representation at trial of companies or other corporations
39.6 A company or other corporation may be represented at trial by an employee if –
(a) the employee has been authorised by the company or corporation to appear at trial on its behalf; and
(b) the court gives permission.

[Deleted User]

If she's not a director and has no written authority she should not be heard. At most she could answer questions relating to her statement, but she cannot make any legal argument.

infernouk

Cheers written this down on my notes and will raise it preliminary

bargepole

Johnersh wrote: »

No right to be heard without company special resolution. CPR part 39 practice direction.

Representation at trial of companies or other corporations
39.6 A company or other corporation may be represented at trial by an employee if –
(a) the employee has been authorised by the company or corporation to appear at trial on its behalf; and
(b) the court gives permission.

Ahem - see CPR 27.2(h) - part 39 does not apply to cases on the small claims track.

infernouk

Oh so I shouldn’t raise RoA then?

bargepole

infernouk wrote: »

Oh so I shouldn’t raise RoA then?

I wouldn't. Georgina will struggle with any legal arguments, such as those in your defence and witness statement.

Ask her to explain how PCM's signage can vary the original lease agreement, that should be worth a bag or two of popcorn.

Umkomaas

infernouk wrote: »

Oh so I shouldn’t raise RoA then?

For the lack of any further authoritative response, I think I'd stay on the side of caution, given that RoA will be your first interchange with the Judge. No need to potentially irritate him/her when you have many other strong points to put forward.

[Deleted User]

My apologies to all, sent on the fly from memory: my cases are all multi-track. Indeed bargepole is correct. PD 27 3.2 permits employees of companies to speak. She has an absolute RoA just like you as defendant do.

infernouk

Hey all, recap:

I was awarded the win, but it felt pretty hollow to be honest. I didnt get to speak, didnt use any of the evidence accumulated in the threads pages. The judge questioned Philpot asking her to prove that Bovis owned the land the roads are on, we of course know they do, but she couldnt prove it, she asked for 5 mins to get the evidence, and he said no you have what you come with only.

He said that he cant proceed if she cant prove that the contract they have is with people who own the roads. And said its over, i asked for costs, he grilled me over my salary and hours litigant fees and threw them both out for reasons I cant understand, he said you cant claim litigant in the small claims court, and didnt really understand why he wouldnt award my salary for the day, as i said hollow, i got expenses for £50.

I tried to bring up that it wasnt a contract when he asked if i had anything to say, and that it was a reference to one from 2004, and he kind of looked at me like I was a stupid kid who didnt know what they were talking about and didnt follow the questioning on the points I raised. He also pretty much told me off for parking there and said I cant park wherever I like, and I shouldnt be calling them robo claims because it was worse in the day of the clampers. And that my defence and WS were repetitions and boring to read...

All in all very underwhelmed, was a massive waste of resources on you guys part and mine, as he said if i hadnt turned up he wouldnt have been able to give them the win anyway. He never referred to anything i bought forth in my documents and ended it over the lack of clarity in ownership of the roads, which I had a document proving infront of me but kept quiet about in my own interests.

If id have paid the ticket and not taken today off work, id have been better off. I had 2 friends come down who have the claims against them, he said this ruling cant apply to them and they had better watch themselves as PCM know the flaw in their claim to use against them next...

All this aside, thanks for everything guys, im just sorry this is kind of hollow as it was a win on negligence of PCM and not anything I said or did...

[Deleted User]

It doesn't matter how you get over the line, it matters that you did.

Sounds like you had a judge who wasn't likely to be convinced that you were OK to park there, but recognised that as you'd put them to proof they needed to prove it (and they couldn't). It's litigation, that's the unpredictability of it.

I say chapeau. A lot of people don't fight these. You did and they didn't beat you.

You may be worse off in £££s in principle, but you didn't have to pay them. They are much worse off. Their business model fails when not only do they fail to recover on tickets but they have to write a cheque and keep someone out of the office all day. They are also on notice that they may not have a valid contract to cover the whole site!

As quoted elsewhere - a win, is a win, is a win... Now go and get a pint. :beer: