Private PCN on residential estate

DoaM

They sent a barrister? Really? Are you sure it wasn't just a rent-a-legal solicitor from the likes of Elms Legal? (If they really sent a barrister then this case has cost them FAR more than it has cost you ... a barrister will have cost them £500+ whereas a rent-a-legal is about £150).

D_P_Dance

I very much doubt that a wet behind the ears barrister would cost £500.

Many years ago I was defendant in an RTA claim..  My insurance company put up a barrister, as did the other side, both were absolutely useless.  I took over, destroyed their barrister,  and won the case.

nosferatu1001

They do for a days fee! £100 an hour min. 
What "expenses" were allowed?
DO  you know the total judgement? If you do, pay that, now. Dont delay. Get a receipt and send it to the court. 

squire1234

DoaM said:

They sent a barrister? Really? Are you sure it wasn't just a rent-a-legal solicitor from the likes of Elms Legal?

Yep, I spoke to him after and he specifically mentioned it. I was surprised too, he was definitely rental though.

nosferatu1001 said:

They do for a days fee! £100 an hour min. 
What "expenses" were allowed?
DO  you know the total judgement? If you do, pay that, now. Dont delay. Get a receipt and send it to the court. 

I think I know but I don't have details for who to pay regardless. Expenses were £50 total (hearing costs)

beamerguy

5) The one point that went my way was the additional £60 charge, which the barrister tried to justify. I think he, himself, knew that the charge was a long-shot and was very quick to accept the Judge calling him out on it.

Ruling: Claimant is awarded max £100 + interest (had to be recalculated to excl the £60 add on charge) + expenses

At least the judge understood the fake £60 and deducted it.
On the day, it is Gladstones who are the big losers, after paying the "rent a legal", paying the parking company, that's if they actually do ?  

nosferatu1001

Yes you do know who to pay. Its on teh claim form. 

squire1234

beamerguy said:

5) The one point that went my way was the additional £60 charge, which the barrister tried to justify. I think he, himself, knew that the charge was a long-shot and was very quick to accept the Judge calling him out on it.

Ruling: Claimant is awarded max £100 + interest (had to be recalculated to excl the £60 add on charge) + expenses

At least the judge understood the fake £60 and deducted it.
On the day, it is Gladstones who are the big losers, after paying the "rent a legal", paying the parking company, that's if they actually do ?  

To be honest, the Judge brought it up before I got around to mentioning it and grilled the barrister on my behalf. I asked him if I could add to it and he replied that I didn't need to. I felt like he really wanted to give me something, just wish he could have been persuaded on the whole claim. With the interest it still cost me over £220. With the next two claims I'm looking at a total of £760 Would've been £180 had I paid at reduced.

NeilCr

beamerguy said:

5) The one point that went my way was the additional £60 charge, which the barrister tried to justify. I think he, himself, knew that the charge was a long-shot and was very quick to accept the Judge calling him out on it.

Ruling: Claimant is awarded max £100 + interest (had to be recalculated to excl the £60 add on charge) + expenses

At least the judge understood the fake £60 and deducted it.
On the day, it is Gladstones who are the big losers, after paying the "rent a legal", paying the parking company, that's if they actually do ?  

To be honest beamerguy not sure they are the big losers

OP has two other cases out there - winning this one might  help with the others (OP estimating £780) and it  may well  be a case that  they can quote going forward to frighten those in the same position. 

Think they might view it as a loss leader.

beamerguy

NeilCr said:

beamerguy said:

5) The one point that went my way was the additional £60 charge, which the barrister tried to justify. I think he, himself, knew that the charge was a long-shot and was very quick to accept the Judge calling him out on it.

Ruling: Claimant is awarded max £100 + interest (had to be recalculated to excl the £60 add on charge) + expenses

At least the judge understood the fake £60 and deducted it.
On the day, it is Gladstones who are the big losers, after paying the "rent a legal", paying the parking company, that's if they actually do ?  

To be honest beamerguy not sure they are the big losers

OP has two other cases out there - winning this one might  help with the others (OP estimating £780) and it  may well  be a case that  they can quote going forward to frighten those in the same position. 

Think they might view it as a loss leader.

Next time the OP will have a different take. Different day, hopefully different judge.
As we all know, judge bingo is present. The very last thing that Gladstones should do is assume
The next judge may not be as tolerant towards Gladstones £60 rubbish and could strike out the case. Something that Gladstones will never know until the day

squire1234

Anyone have experience of how to switch a hearing in person to an oral hearing if one cannot attend?