Court Case Tomorrow vs Horizon/Gladstones

Computersaysno

Is this case still tomorrow??


Tomorrow, will the case still be tomorrow?

beamerguy

Computersaysno wrote: »

Is this case still tomorrow??


Tomorrow, will the case still be tomorrow?

You seem to have lost a day in your life ?

It was YESTERDAY

Le_Kirk

beamerguy wrote: »

You seem to have lost a day in your life ?

It was YESTERDAY

Maybe the OP could change the thread title - the day before tomorrow!

Computersaysno

beamerguy wrote: »

You seem to have lost a day in your life ?

It was YESTERDAY

I knew that.

beamerguy

Computersaysno wrote: »

I knew that.

??????????????????????:eek:

Computersaysno

beamerguy wrote: »

??????????????????????:eek:

The point I was somewhat obliquely making was that this board is full of threads with titles like URGENT and TOMORROW [presumably because the OP has done nothing and then panics and starts SHOUTING FOR HELP!!!...


and after a day or so they are neither 'urgent' nor 'tomorrow'.

beamerguy

Computersaysno wrote: »

The point I was somewhat obliquely making was that this board is full of threads with titles like URGENT and TOMORROW [presumably because the OP has done nothing and then panics and starts SHOUTING FOR HELP!!!...


and after a day or so they are neither 'urgent' nor 'tomorrow'.

All posts are relative and your confusion never helps

Coupon-mad

OP, this is surely fairly simple for you now and all of this has already been said.

Your main points are:

res judicata (IamEmanresu already pointed this out). Did you tell the Judge you had already won against this Claimant re this site, and as such, the court's time should not be wasted going over essentially the same facts, hoping to get a different outcome?

And that this plus the fact they served the WS and evidence late, is wholly unreasonable conduct on the part of the Claimant and their solicitors who have no excuse.

Your second slam dunk is where the sign in their own evidence pack, and the landowner authority, clearly allows 4 hours free parking.

Slam dunk win for you, surely.

Submit nice and early as well - to the court and the Claimant's solicitors - a very high (at least £500 if not more) costs schedule for attending two hearings and all your hours spent at £19 per hour - or even push it higher to your actual hourly rate and explain it is only fair given the outrageous conduct of the Claimant, and quite low compared to a Band D fee earner.

Ask for full costs 'on the indemnity basis' due to the unreasonable and wholly vexatious conduct of bringing these facts to court all over again, including evidence that 4 hours was allowed all along...and not even supplying you with their evidence in time for you to meaningfully respond, with the Claimant attempting an ambush on the day.

How on earth was this one adjourned? Sounds like a fairly clueless Judge.

chad888

C+P from new thread started:

Writing my WS now for a case coming up (no date for hearing yet), I have another 7 days to complete it. I am struggling to come up with case law/counters to the witness statement of the claimant (Gladstones/Horizon Parking).

1) The SSA between Horizon and Workman LLP (site manager) is for 4hr +20m grace period. The signs that Horizon put up are for 3 hours and I am being charged for 3 stays of 3 hours 19, 20 and 22m. The argument put forward in the claim is that the contract is between myself and the parking company and the SSA is moot as case law states that this is a contract between 2 parties and they need no rights over the land to enter in to a contract with me. They use HMRC vs VCS and Beavis case for this. Reading through the VCS/HMRC case it seems that the charge is a penalty unless it is a free car park? The car park I used was a free ticketless car park.

2) The £70 that increases to £120 costs do not represent any damages as the claimant states, again they site the Beavis argument as being enough to act as a deterrent to overstaying. They also state that the contract is for free parking for XX hours and after that the charge for parking is £70. But then they also offer that charge reduced by 50% if paid within a certain amount of days. What can I use against that?

3) The site is owned by one party who hire a site management agency who in turn have hired Horizon Parking. The site manager at the moment is a different company to that which held the contract with Horizon, and Horizon was replaced as soon as the 24 month contract ended in 08/17. Is there an argument here that they have no proof over right of land and to bring a claim in their own name? They again use the HMRC and Beavis examples that they do not need to hold any interest or rights of the land as the contract is between myself and them through the sign, no relation to what they are asked to provide in the SSA or who holds any contract. Stating the HMRC VCS example of selling Buckingham Palace.

This is all lost on me, the parking cowboy page has a lot of case law that i try and include but then they have counters to that. This being their day time job and used to strawmanning/gaslighting case law to fit their rhetoric I am really panicking that I am going to state my case, they will come up with a completely random counter and leave me stumped and repeating what i said before.

Help please!?!

Quentin

Does that cowboy "page" actually deal with a WS?


See the newbies faq thread here (#2) for advice on how to prepare a WS!