Appeal dismissed by IAS

Snakes_Belly

Thanks for all your help. The hearing in over three months away. Seems a long time but I guess that the courts are very busy. Will start looking at the WS.


Thanks again.

Coupon-mad

Don't forget to show us your WS in good time.

Snakes_Belly

I have now received the witness statement from Excel. It looked a bit daunting to begin with but there are a lot of photo's. Lots of my car from all angles. They have quoted Beavis, Thornton v Shoe Lane, Vine v Waltham Forest, Chaplair v Kumari. I can bat some of their comments back. The Cutts case should see off Thornton v Shoe Lane. Beavis not really relevant and is likely to be superceded by PMB. Vine I am quoting and I wonder if they are looking at the first case before the appeal. Chaplair V Kumari maximum amount for debt recovery £60.00 but surely that is only if a debt is recovered.

beamerguy

Chaplair V Kumari maximum amount for debt recovery £60.00 but surely that is only if a debt is recovered.

Without going back through this long thread, if it was DRP who chased you as a debt collector .... do remember

"We offer a ‘no collection, no fee service"

https://www.debtrecoveryplus.co.uk/pcn-collection/

Snakes_Belly

Thanks Beamer. It was DRP and Zenith who claimed that the debt had been assigned to them.

The Thornton and Shoe lane case relates to a barrier type of car park where a motorist stops and sees the sign and then takes a ticket. It's different from the type where you drive around looking for a space and park up before you get a ticket. The barrier type seem to work on capacity as well so you know that there should be a space if the barrier lets you in. The judge in the Cutts case says that a motorist cannot be expected to read the signs whilst driving round. This all relates to the point at which the contract is formed. Excel are saying that the contract is formed as soon as a person enters the car park.

beamerguy

Snakes_Belly wrote: »

Thanks Beamer. It was DRP and Zenith who claimed that the debt had been assigned to them.

The Thornton and Shoe lane case relates to a barrier type of car park where a motorist stops and sees the sign and then takes a ticket. It's different from the type where you drive around looking for a space and park up before you get a ticket. The barrier type seem to work on capacity as well so you know that there should be a space if the barrier lets you in. The judge in the Cutts case says that a motorist cannot be expected to read the signs whilst driving round. This all relates to the point at which the contract is formed. Excel are saying that the contract is formed as soon as a person enters the car park.

Whilst they are allowed to pass to a debt collector, the current CoP does not state that one debt collector can pass to another debt collector. DRP do not own the debt and if they fail to collect then they have one option .... pass it back to the PPC.

If DRP passes to another debt collector, albiet if it is the same company under a different name, that is their problem

Excel of course will stick to the so called contract and as usual totally ignore grace periods
It is the mindset of an ex clamper scammer

The_Deep

So much time and energy has been expended on this. If you win OP will you be asking for unreasonable behaviour costs?

Snakes_Belly

I will see how it goes. Their WS is a weighty tome but not that much real content when it all boils down. If I was the judge having to read that I would be bored to bits. I am very p---ed off with some of their comments regarding the visual problems that I experience when I get a migraine. They basically trivialised it. I am going to write an addendum regarding migraines as many people think that they are just a headache. A migraine is a neurological condition of which a headache can be one of the symptoms.

They have asked me for medical evidence and also for evidence that their machine was not working.

Snakes_Belly

To be honest if the £60.00 is cancelled (which I should achieve at least), the cost to me will be about £130.00. The claim after appeals was £100.00 so it is worth it for the mental stimulation. It's also useful to know if the boot was on the other foot what the procedure would be.

Whatever the outcome the PPC will not have made much out of me.

beamerguy

They have asked me for medical evidence and also for evidence that their machine was not working.

Can you get a letter from your doctor.

You have claimed The machine was not working, it's not up to you to prove this ....... THEY MUST PROVE IT WAS WORKING