MIL-2 more lost court cases

The_Deep

I hope you do follow this up OP. These companies and their solicitors are getting away with murder. It needs a few more of Barry Beavis's ilk to stand up to them. t

HO87

You will be pleased to know that yet another MIL case has been discontinued this morning - and for Northlakes information (and I know he'll clap his hands with glee) its yet another NWPE one from Carlisle.

NL will also recall the particularly knotty issue we had at Lowther Street (where the car parking area was "shared" by Iceland and NWPE) and those cases have been discontinued. They were separate cases from those the PP discusses.

My sincere thanks go to Northlakes in respect of those cases for his diligent on-the-spot assistance.

Should any other cases emerge from Carlisle (NWPE) involving incidents at Lowther Street, Struts (Chapel Street), DFS, Duke Street and Peter Street (opposite the old fire station) then there are good grounds for your defence.

The courts are not, in general, picking up these cases at early points because no one (judges or otherwise) look at them. Then again there are certain judges who now routinely strike out MIL claims because of their failure to comply with the Civil Procedure Rules. There is of course the reverse in the shape of the occasional judge who howls down any defence and passes judgment in MIL's favour, for example. As always the small claims track represents something of a lottery.

Few if any of those who currently represent PPC cases in court are actually solicitors. The vast majority are simply "advocates" nominally supervised by a solicitor somewhere. In such cases these guys receive their briefs a matter of a few hours before the hearing and sometimes barely then. In some cases the advocates are actually qualified barristers who don't have a position in chambers (what is known as a tenancy). What is also clear is that it is not unknown for these advocates to have been misled in some way about the strength of the cases they are sent so they are not always wholly to blame.

zardoz70

If anyone is interested the current legislation on trading names etc. is at the link below. Most people still seem to quote the Companies Act 2006 with regards to this but that has been superseded by the below.
Not showing the proper details on any business communication is an offence per Part 6.

The Company, Limited Liability Partnership and Business (Names and Trading Disclosures) Regulations 2015
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2015/17/pdfs/uksi_20150017_en.pdf

Northlakes

Local press coverage of this MIL case.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/nzh1whfzpkx38sp/Carlisle%20Mil2%202016247.jpg?dl=0

Coupon-mad

Good stuff, can't get too much publicity about PPCs and MIL being stuffed.

Even better will be when suing them for DPA data misuse becomes better known & documented!

Northlakes

Thanks again CM for the detailed post #19

I took some time to read up on the DPA cases. Having read these transcripts It was decided to write in the first instance a warning letter to the PPC. This was done just before Christmas. This gave the PPC the opportunity to ‘call off the dogs’ and order DRP/Zenith to desist from sending further distressing correspondence to the keeper.


Sirs,

Re,xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx


You are aware that the above PCN was successfully challenged by me at POPLA on xxxxxxxxxxx.

However I have continued to receive letters from your debt recovery agent DRP and its affiliate Zenith Collections. The first of these letters, dated xxxxxxxxxx, was received even before the adjudication process had been completed.

As the keeper of the vehicle has no liability in this matter I find the tone and content of these letters threatening and as such has caused considerable distress.

Please be under no misunderstanding that if I receive further letters from your debt recovery agents I reserve the right to take this matter further.

Proof of posting of this letter has been obtained.


Yours faithfully,




xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx


A further letter was received today from Zenith with the interesting comment that they would pass it to THEIR (my emphasis) legal department with the recommendation of legal action.

I have now to seek permission of the ‘keeper’ to pursue this further with a LBCCC.

Coupon-mad

Good, I think this case is a perfect one for a claim and they deserve to have to cough up. Keep us informed. The best thing will be if they are stupid enough to send some old bluster and don't defend the actual point of the particulars of any claim - the data misuse.