Link Parking / Gladstones - unclear signage Court Defence by 23 July

psdie

Just read IamEmanresu's clarification by the way that if I separate my Witness Statement from the Skeleton Argument, then I can keep the WS very simple and don't have to send the Skeleton to the court / GLS until a few days before the hearing / take with me on the day.

That's quite tempting to buy time and keep the (fanciful?) possibility that they fold. I guess the main downside is I wouldn't be allowed to include any new evidence / citations (such as CRA '15 Sch 2 and Vine) in a last minute Skeleton?

BTW, the court instructions stated a deadline for "all documents he intends to rely on" (ie, document bundle) that was earlier than the deadline for the WS, which the Claimant ignored and filed late (I was a few hours late too - but they were a week late!). Perhaps this is overridden by the usual 14 day cut-off before the hearing?

On the plus side, last-minute Skeleton would give Claimant less time to prepare a rebuke. Hmmm. Perhaps a hybrid - include with my WS any new references I'll likely need, but save the Skeleton till the last minute.

For reference, here's the index from my Doc Bundle, in case there's any obvious references missing.

nosferatu1001

A WS is simply a set of facts.
You then have your skellie which tears their WS apart. You can also repsond to their WS in YOUR WS, by pointing out the factual errors such as the section 10 notice lie, by pointing out hte cliamants own evidence proves they are either misleading the court deliberately, and you request theya re sanctioned, or they are so incompetent their "witness" statement should be disregarded as being unreliable. I owuld certainly do the rebuttal to their WS - get facts in, anfd point out all their errors. You can summarise all their unfounded assumptions (meanig not a WS), their arguments theyve never advanced before (meaning its not a WS), etc

Skellie - 3 days before court, to court AND claimant, and costs schedule as well. Costs split into two -normal costs which you know by now, PLUS then a setion about unreasonable behaviour costs.

You should include citaitons now and cannot introduce new evidence for sure after this. No ambushing allowed

There is no "overridden" here - the Order is the Order. You should include in your "unreasonable" the FACT they were late, as they served at the same time.
Remeber you MUST take proof to court that YOU complied and served on them. GS have LIED TO THE COURT before now about not recieving docs.

psdie

Thank you nosferatu, that's useful Will file at minimum the WS this evening - hopefully with a draft here first for feedback. Final input welcome before then!

psdie

Hi all - well here we are: hearing is tomorrow, yikes! I've been up to my eyes with work and just realised I didn't post a copy of my WS here yet - it's here (complete with a glaring "Litigant in Peron" typo I've just spotted - brilliant).

I'm not going to have time to write a separate Skeleton Argument, so will need to make oral arguments I presume.

I need to print 3 copies of my Document Bundle, is that right? What a waste of ink and paper (don't have double sided printer, but it's laser at least).

And presumably create a schedule of costs in order to claim - any pointers on that? Per my WS, I've used time tracking software to track a minimum of 56 hours on this, plus earlier time - I estimate ~100 hours in total. Do I try to claim LiP rate hours for this (from references I've seen here), or does the court expect me to cap at a certain level?

Thank you all - getting nervous now! :-o

psdie

Pleased to report I won - claim dismissed in full, costs of £112 (£95 earnings + taxi) awarded Couldn't have done it without the help here from you guys (Coupon-mad in particular) - thank you so much

Case was heard at Cheltenham County Court at 2:30pm, claimant sent a solicitor who was only briefed on Friday so was on catch up (but to be fair better organised than I'd expected). We went through the evidence in detail and Judge was impressed with the clear photos I provided, in contrast to the unclear exhibits from the claimant.

Summing up, my core argument was clearly confusing signage, made plain by signage photos, site plan showing how distant (estimated in metres - Judge seemed to appreciate concrete things like that) and absence of their signage near the parking space. The claimant's rep simple said they disagreed and emphasised how many signs were in place overall - despite being out of sight.

Judge fortunately agreed without question that signs confusing and dismissed case without needing to consider other points in detail. I asked for costs, but had a hiccup that I'd not submitted Schedule of Costs to Claimant in advance, which was an oversight. Attendance costs was no issue supported by evidence of my hourly rate. I tried to push for LiP costs, but Judge said didn't think claimant's behaviour unreasonable enough - I obviously disagree given refusal to hear appeal, etc - but I didn't argue.

So a win, and a small bit of compensation - but the amount of time I had to spend to get there makes me question whether was worth it TBH. Can't help feeling £112 is zero disincentive for the PPC to carry on with the same tactics - can only help the Parking Bill is passed and shakes up the industry.

By the way - I saw repeated instructions to print 3 copies of my entire document bundle, which was 55 pages so burned through paper and toner - only to find neither the claimant nor judge wanted or expected those printed copies. Perhaps that advice should be revised for Small Claims?

Here's copies of my Defence, WS and Doc Bundle index to help others:

• Defence
• Witness Statement
• Document Bundle Index (missing WS and Schedule of Costs) - BundleDocs.com was useful for this.

Thank you again

PS: I don't suppose cases like these get summarised online by the Court, with the Judge's decision or similar? I presume I'll at least get something in writing by post.

Umkomaas

Well done and a great result.

By the way - I saw repeated instructions to print 3 copies of my entire document bundle, which was 55 pages so burned through paper and toner - only to find neither the claimant nor judge wanted or expected those copies.

It's a point you make well, but ....

If neither the Judge nor the Claimant has a copy, shiite creek and paddle come to mind.

Better safe than sorry is my view. Wouldn't like to lose, with a ~£200 cost order against me, for the sake of a bit (lot!) of extra printing. People will read this and can make up their own minds based on the pros and cons.

Hope you're enjoying a nice glass or two tonight.

psdie

Thank you The claimant's rep had their laptop with copies of the docs on it and just got that out after getting permission from the Judge (as their print outs were appalling quality) - actively refused my carefully put together copy :P

DoaM

psdie wrote: »

PS: I don't suppose cases like these get summarised online by the Court, with the Judge's decision or similar? I presume I'll at least get something in writing by post.

You'll get a copy of the judgment through the post (as will the [losing] claimant). You won't though get a transcript of the hearing - they need to be ordered (and aren't cheap).

The_Deep

Once again, justice has failed the little man imo. Here we have a serial litigant, driving a coach and horses through established procedure, lying to the court, bringing a claim which should have been thrown out at the outside, and getting away with it.

In my opinion such behaviour is totally unreasonable and the judge should be called to account for his actions.

Umkomaas

The_Deep wrote: »

Once again, justice has failed the little man imo. Here we have a serial litigant, driving a coach and horses through established procedure, lying to the court, bringing a claim which should have been thrown out at the outside, and getting away with it.

In my opinion such behaviour is totally unreasonable and the judge should be called to account for his actions.

Our little man won @TD!

Or are you saying that the case simply should not have been pursued in the court by the PPC and their legals in the first place?