Appeal dismissed by IAS

Coupon-mad

Snakes_Belly wrote: »

The WS is actually from Excel's litigation department. It does seem a bit robo as there is a lot of irrelevant stuff in there.

Why not just read other Excel claim threads to find it used and commented on, and debunked before?

e.g. look up lamilad's threads about his multiple beatings of Excel. i recall tearing apart a WS from Excel for him, just at the point where he became the staunch anti-PPC campaigner that he is now!

No links needed - search and you will find it all written about before (saves us time and gets you more info than we could reply to all over again here).

This WS is not just 'a bit robo' I bet! More likely to be cut & paste of all the others.

Snakes_Belly

The person that has written the WS for Excel is a paralegal working in their litigation department. Looks fairly new.

beamerguy

Snakes_Belly wrote: »

The person that has written the WS for Excel is a paralegal working in their litigation department. Looks fairly new.

SO WHAT ...... EXCEL struggled badly when they used BWLegal so a freshman will have his work cut out to try to explain to a judge why he thinks all those cases refer to your case.

You however will give a short precise reason why none are applicable in your case

Snakes_Belly

Beamer, I think that the WS is written by the Litigation department and depending on what court they use a local solicitor like Pickup. It may even be Mr Pickup.

beamerguy

Snakes_Belly wrote: »

Beamer, I think that the WS is written by the Litigation department and depending on what court they use a local solicitor like Pickup. It may even be Mr Pickup.

Pick-me-up ???? may well be ...... this forum has seen his work
not impressed

Umkomaas

Mr Pickup has been around the private parking court circuit for a few years now. He is hardly likely to be Excel's new paralegal lad.

Snakes_Belly

The new paralegal produced the 80 page WS but I doubt that Excel would send someone down from Sheffield for a small case like mine. I would think that a local solicitor would represent Excel at the hearing. I may be wrong and perhaps they will use their own paralegal however it will mean that they would have to travel into Birmingham and then out again to Stafford. Train fare would cost more than the claim. Some unlucky solicitor will receive that 80 page WS to work through.

BrownTrout

Mr pickup does not work excel parking:)

beamerguy

Snakes_Belly wrote: »

The new paralegal produced the 80 page WS but I doubt that Excel would send someone down from Sheffield for a small case like mine. I would think that a local solicitor would represent Excel at the hearing. I may be wrong and perhaps they will use their own paralegal however it will mean that they would have to travel into Birmingham and then out again to Stafford. Train fare would cost more than the claim. Some unlucky solicitor will receive that 80 page WS to work through.

Everything you say is correct. They cannot make any money, they will lose money regardless of the outcome.

Simon Renshaw-Smith, an ex clamper, has the mentality of "must win at any cost". very vindictive and stupid attitude

The fact is that he DOES LOSE, he then throws a wobbly and throws all his toys out of the pram

As I keep saying, you can quickly zap all the cases he thinks he can rely upon in court. For each one, you can rebut in a couple of lines.. You personally don't need 80 pages of waffle

Have you read this about VCS ....
https://parking-prankster.blogspot.com/search?q=vcs

Snakes_Belly

That case is very interesting Beamer. There is something a bit strange about the lease on the Travelodge car park. It's quite complex and when I have got the witness statement off I will look at it in a bit more detail. Excel are not paying business rates.

Fruitcake is looking at my photo's and we think that probably on the day of the incident that the fire door was open thus blocking the view of the ticket machine which was not signed so just the metal box against the wall. I rarely use this car park but could not understand how I could have not seen this machine previously. I think that it was because the fire door is usually open and there are people standing outside having a cigarette. On the day in question there was no one outside otherwise I would have asked them rather than walk across to the workshops. The fire door must been open because I did not see that machine and I walked past it. On the day I went back and took the photographs the fire door was closed but there were delivery vans outside. This has been the most difficult for me to try to explain how ambiguous the car park is. It's not just a big rectangle with obvious pay here signs.

I have a copy of the Beavis sign for my bundle and there is a huge difference in font used the Beavis sign and the Excel sign. There is no way that they can use the Beavis case as their signage contains huge amounts of small text. Their cases don't worry me it's the fact that there were other ticket machines that may prove tricky.