Appeal dismissed by IAS

Fruitcake

The OP has sent me a PM to say the court hearing is being rescheduled, and will be a two hour hearing.

They will update this thread at some point in the future.

Umkomaas

Fruitcake wrote: »

The OP has sent me a PM to say the court hearing is being rescheduled, and will be a two hour hearing.

They will update this thread at some point in the future.

No doubt approaching 400 posts by the time it's all over?

beamerguy

antandann wrote: »

My god! Just read the start of this thread and it would seem the scammers know no mercy. If it was part of a work of fiction it would be seen as too far fetched, yet this is the reality of ripoff Britain in 2019.

I can't be of much use to you technically unfortunately. All I can say is whatever the result, you've already won by taking on these ruthless parasites.

May I put it this way ...... when the new code of practice is law, these parasites will be under intense scrutiny and one by one we will pick them off ...... that's the PPC's and their dodgy legals.

The biggest problem will be getting the courts to understand they are being scammed by roboclaim vermin

beamerguy

Fruitcake wrote: »

The OP has sent me a PM to say the court hearing is being rescheduled, and will be a two hour hearing.

They will update this thread at some point in the future.

Thanks for advising us Fruitcake.

A 2 hour hearing for £100 ????? does this suggest the courts actually endorse time wasting from PPC's?

Fruitcake

Excel must already be out of pocket, and will be more so even if they win at the next hearing.

If every case got to court the scammers would go out of business. Only the scamlicitors would make any money.

keep_calm_and_carry_on

I am going to court on Friday defending against Excel regarding the same car park and will be using a lot of the same arguments regarding the signage. Does anyone know if this case has reached court yet?

Snakes_Belly

Sorry about the PM but my folder is full as I am saving things on there. I have deleted a couple so I have some capacity. I did actually get as far as the court and saw the judge but the case was rescheduled.

Snakes_Belly

My first court appearance was rescheduled however the judge did make some comments to the representative of the PPC. I did not fully understand all the comments. One particular point that the judge made was that the PPC had failed to provide any evidence that the ticket machine was working yet the Claimant had included in their WS an image of my car with the note on the windscreen. She commented that was not an afterthought on my part as they had taken that photograph at the time of the transgression.

My question is that it is now out of time for the P.P.C to provide the records of the ticket machine. If they do provide them now or at the court can I object to this? I would not have had time to study these records and in the light of the Ambler case I would not have any confidence in anything that they produced. I don't know if I would have the knowledge to see if they had tampered with the records.

I really do not know what to expect now so I am prepared for all eventualities and if it's the same representative they will have had longer to prepare. It's down for a two hour session.

Coupon-mad

My question is that it is now out of time for the P.P.C to provide the records of the ticket machine.

Do you mean the Judge specifically gave them a date by which they could add that evidence and they have not complied?

Snakes_Belly

Coupon-mad wrote: »

Do you mean the Judge specifically gave them a date by which they could add that evidence and they have not complied?

It was a bit more veiled than that. It sounded more like a polite version of put up or shut up.

I had really psyched myself up for the case and then the judge said it was going to be rescheduled. I was trying to take it all in. The judge then said that there were a couple of points about the case that she wanted to make.

1) That the Claimant had stated in their W.S. that the Defendant had not provided evidence that the machine was not working.

2) That the Defendant had placed a note on the car. (The Claimant had tried to say that I had no intention of paying the parking fee). The Judge saw the note on the dashboard as evidence that the machine was not working as it could not have been done as an afterthought.

3) That the Claimant had not provided any evidence that the machine was working.

The judge then directed her comments to the representative and told her to convey her comments back to the Claimant that they may want to rethink their position (or something like that). She definitely told the rep to take those comments back.

My question is that if they intend to produce the records should they have produced it by now as the hearing is imminent? I should have had chance to look at these records in detail and take advice. They surely cannot just present them on the day and if they do can I object?

I am not sure what to expect. It could be a different judge this time. It may not be the same representative. The P.P.C. may decide to throw the towel in at paying for another representative for two hours on the other hand they may decide to throw more money at it.