£860 Private Parking County Claim - Urgent Help!

Redx

please read post #2 of the NEWBIES sticky thread, ESPECIALLY the posts by BARGEPOLE

Umkomaas

Shall the keeper request meditation?

Check which one!

Meditation is a practice where an individual operates or trains the mind or induces a mode of consciousness, either to realize some benefit or for the mind to simply acknowledge its content without becoming identified with that content,[1] or as an end in itself.[2]

Mediation is a dynamic, structured, interactive process where a neutral third party assists disputing parties in resolving conflict through the use of specialized communication and negotiation techniques. All participants in mediation are encouraged to actively participate in the process. Mediation is a "party-centered" process in that it is focused primarily upon the needs, rights, and interests of the parties. The mediator uses a wide variety of techniques to guide the process in a constructive direction and to help the parties find their optimal solution. A mediator is facilitative in that s/he manages the interaction between parties and facilitates open communication. Mediation is also evaluative in that the mediator analyzes issues and relevant norms ("reality-testing"), while refraining from providing prescriptive advice to the parties (e.g., "You should do... .").

I'd suggest requesting neither.

Jonathon365

Thanks. I've read the NEWBIE thread

The keeper has until 17th August to complete the small claims directions questionnaire that was provided.

The questionnaire has already been completed by the claimant. It details their contact details, the hearing venue (keepers own local court), it says they are not using written evidence of an expert, states that 2 witnesses (Is this normal?) will give evidence and sets out dates. The claimant has answered 'YES' to "Do you agree to this case being referred to the Small Claims Mediation Service."

So, to confirm on the keepers form, they will answer that the small claims track IS appropriate for this case, the County Court hearing should take place at the local court (The same one as stated by the claimant), no written evidence from an expert, 1 witness (the keeper), set dates for a hearing and say NO for mediation.

They will send this off asap.

I have a few questions:
1) Is the use of 2 witnesses for the claimants case normal? (As above)
2) I am assuming this is unlikely to go to a hearing judging by the claimants track record - Is this a correct or likely assumption?
3) The directions questionnaire as completed by the claimant is signed by an individual and is the first time i've seen evidence of an other human on the other side (until now I feel like it's been auto generated). Again, is this standard or normal procedure?

Thank you for the on-going support.

Redx

I find it unusual that the claiamant and defendant have chosen the same court

the defendant should be choosing their nearest court to them , not one close to the PPC , MAKES LIFE HARDER FOR THE CLAIMANT AND EASIER FOR THE DEFENDANT

Jonathon365

Hi Redx,

To confirm:

The claimant parking company has suggested the keepers local court. The claimant has suggested the nearest court to the keeper.

Meaning both the keeper and claimant agree on a court.

You say this seems unusual, does this have any kind of implications? the claimant feels confident?

beamerguy

jordan365 wrote: »

Hi Redx,

To confirm:

The claimant parking company has suggested the keepers local court. The claimant has suggested the nearest court to the keeper.

Meaning both the keeper and claimant agree on a court.

You say this seems unusual, does this have any kind of implications? the claimant feels confident?

Cannot see it will make any difference, the job of the judge
is to rule on the evidence from both sides

God forbid we find out that a judge was eating out of the
hands of the PPC

Jonathon365

Thanks both.

Could I get your thoughts on the following -

1) Is the use of 2 witnesses for the claimants case normal? (As above)
2) I am assuming this is unlikely to go to a hearing judging by the claimants track record - Is this a correct or likely assumption? Or is it too far gone now?
3) The directions questionnaire as completed by the claimant is signed by an individual and is the first time i've seen evidence of an other human on the other side (until now I feel like it's been auto generated). Again, is this standard or normal procedure?

Redx

jordan365 wrote: »

Hi Redx,

To confirm:

The claimant parking company has suggested the keepers local court. The claimant has suggested the nearest court to the keeper.

Meaning both the keeper and claimant agree on a court.

You say this seems unusual, does this have any kind of implications? the claimant feels confident?

it is unusual because the parking company will have clients all over the UK as a nationwide operation, so if the PPC was in london and the car owner was in manchester , the defendant would choose manchester and the ppc would either travel up , or engage a local brief , or not bother attending court (so a claimant would prefer their own local court , so in this example that might be central london

so if we assume that the PPC was in sheffield and the vehicle owner was also in sheffield , then what are the chances ? given that one could be in penzance and the other in newcastle ? (so each would prefer their own local court , making it inconvenient for the other party)

being the same local court means they are more likely to turn up and put forward their claim before the judge

so the implications are that it wont get struck out due to the claimant not turning up , where the defendant turns up for example

frankly , this is a sideshow to the main event , but you did ask

Jonathon365

Hello RedX,

From what I can tell the PPC is based in London and the keeper is in the North. However, the PPC has requested the hearing be held at a county court in the North, which is the most convenient court to the keeper.

From what you and others have said, this is strange. The reason I ask is I'm wondering the likelihood of the hearing actually going ahead. I think this makes it look more likely.

Redx

you wont know until AFTER the DQ stage when the Notice of Allocation kicks in and the claimant has to pay a further fee

if they pay the fee, its likely they may continue to a court hearing

if they dont , it wont

so at this stage you have no idea, nor do we