Court in 2 weeks

Mrnick74

I'll try again. Sruggling for software on Linux!

Mrnick74

Hope I've got everything now - got rid of the car years ago, mostly ride a bike now.

hxxp://drive.google.com/file/d/0B93C0Wu5SHkbYlhiZEJJUEZwX1U/view?usp=sharing

Mrnick74

Will the court accept it on Monday if I deliver in person - only 12 days before court date?

System

Will the court accept it on Monday if I deliver in person - only 12 days before court date?

Yes. You may be late but the other side may need to explain how they were disadvantaged by 2 days. The other side do it all the time.

Don't forget to add in challenging the Right of Audience of the paralegal who appears for BW. Should be the first section and headed "Preliminary Matters". The WS is by a Litigation Executive who a) does not work for the claimant and b) cannot supervise another Litigation Executive.

Lamilad

Mrnick74 wrote: »

Will the court accept it on Monday if I deliver in person - only 12 days before court date?

Yes they will accept it.

http://drive.google.com/file/d/0B93C0Wu5SHkbYlhiZEJJUEZwX1U/view?usp=sharin

Coupon-mad

Obviously I've been totally naive...how long do you folk spend on this s**t??

Every day. We want to bring the scam to an end.

Lamilad wrote: »

Yes they will accept it.

http://drive.google.com/file/d/0B93C0Wu5SHkbYlhiZEJJUEZwX1U/view?usp=sharin

Just to tell the OP, you can trust Lamilad if he sends you a private message to help. Just saying...

Coupon-mad

IamEmanresu wrote: »

Yes. You may be late but the other side may need to explain how they were disadvantaged by 2 days. The other side do it all the time.

Agreed, press ahead with a WS anyway, Mrnick74, we will help.

Of course Excel have not been disadvantaged and at least you are here now being assisted.

Don't forget to add in challenging the Right of Audience of the paralegal who appears for BW. Should be the first section and headed "Preliminary Matters". The WS is by a Litigation Executive who a) does not work for the claimant and b) cannot supervise another Litigation Executive.

Yep. I helped someone on pepipoo with a skeleton argument I flung together last weekend (the idea is to rip apart their 'evidence' not make excuses as to the parking). His court date was Tuesday and he won on the spot by insisting on the other side's RoA being questioned by the Judge:

http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showtopic=113246

That was despite the OP being fairly clueless until he went to pepipoo (weak defence trying to explain the parking event) and despite facing a Judge who said 'but this legal rep has been in front of this court lots of times'.

Then the OP pressed the point and she was exposed.

Half_way

is the restaurant still in business?
Do they support their agents taking customers to court?

Coupon-mad

The 17 minutes overstay as stated is incorrect. I was present at the vehicle before the ticket was issued as recorded on the ticket (page 2 of NA01). Return to the vehicle was in fact within 15 minutes.

How are you going to prove that? Their evidence says 17 minutes so the only way to show that is unreliable would be to pop there this weekend and find a P&D machine where the clock is not set at correct GMT, compared to your phone showing the right GMT. Take a photo of one next to the other showing a 2 minute difference and you will be halfway to exposing doubt.

Lamilad

This is the only correspondence I've ever sent, relatively recently dated 07/02/2017:



Dear Sir or Madam

Please be advised that I will be defending this case.

In your correspondence you have kindly brought to my attention the case of Parking Eye Limited vs Beavis [2015] UKSC 67 in which the Supreme Court held that parking charges serve a legitimate commercial interest, specifically to efficiently manage the car park for the benefit of the generality of users of the retail outlets. Given that I was patronising a restaurant served by the car park, that there is no ‘P & D Expiry’ entered on the ticket and I am able to evidence that I returned to my vehicle within an acceptable grace period as required by the IPC Code of Practice I shall contend that the circumstances of this case do not justify either the initial penalty of £100 or the escalating costs pursued.

Furthermore, the case law deriving from UKSC 67 did not exist in February 2014 which is presumably why you have not brought a case until June 2016, 2 years and 4 months after the alleged incident. I have submitted a Freedom of Information Request to HM Courts & Tribunals Service for details of cases brought before the courts since the ruling of the Supreme Court in November 2015 in order to demonstrate an unscrupulous opportunism to pursue historic Parking Charge Notices where the particulars of the case have so little in common with UKSC 67 as to make reliance on that case irrelevant.

I wish to note also that my surname has been consistently misspelled on all correspondence meaning that it is likely I have not received all communication on this matter.

Is this the defence you submitted?

I notice the parking event took place in the hours of darkness. Were the signs illuminated or was the car park well lit?

There was no P & D expiry time entered on the ticket (page 2 of NA01)

Not sure what you mean by this the expiry time is clearly shown on p25 of their bundle