URGENT Small Claims Court - Gladstone Solictors acting for EPS (Euro Parking Services Ltd)

one_cruzer

Bump - can anyone help on this?

Umkomaas

Personally, I'd chalk it down to experience. Not very satisfying for you, but unless you can prove very unreasonable behaviour (it's a high bar) there would be no cost award other than £95 loss of earnings/leave for half a day, mileage at .45p and a parking fee - but the discontinuance letter seems to have also fouled that pitch too for you.

See if anyone else comments.

Quentin

I agree with Umkomaas


Not to mention not showing the discontinuance letter to the Judge at the outset was a mistake and he obviously proceeded with a normal hearing in their absence till you decided to tell him!

Castle

Given Bargepole's assessment of the OP's chances, (in post 3), and the late submission of the WS and evidence, (on both sides), the result was better than expected. Time to move on I'd suggest.

The_Deep

The judge also said that I didn't need to attend the hearing as I had a letter of discontinuance from the claimant. I mentioned the courts said that I should still go if it hasn't been filed.

I disagree with the others.

If I was this OP I would be making a huge fuss. I would make a complaint that in failing to award unreasonable behaviour costs the judge erred in law, and he certainly seemed not to be impartial. Someone suggested that the PPCs actions bordered on contempt, I agree.

Of course defendants make mistakes, they are usually unrepresented by a legal professional, may well be unfamiliar with the Rules and perhaps even awed by their surroundings.

I think that judge served the defendant very poorly indeed.

beamerguy

The main thing is he won and probably Gladstones the incompetent wasted time in the first place.

There still appears to be grumpy old judges around who are not in touch with the real world and should be put out to grass

one_cruzer

P

The_Deep wrote: »

The judge also said that I didn't need to attend the hearing as I had a letter of discontinuance from the claimant. I mentioned the courts said that I should still go if it hasn't been filed.

I disagree with the others.

If I was this OP I would be making a huge fuss. I would make a complaint that in failing to award unreasonable behaviour costs the judge erred in law, and he certainly seemed not to be impartial. Someone suggested that the PPCs actions bordered on contempt, I agree.

Of course defendants make mistakes, they are usually unrepresented by a legal professional, may well be unfamiliar with the Rules and perhaps even awed by their surroundings.

I think that judge served the defendant very poorly indeed.

I totally agree on the comment you have made here. What's the best of course of action? I don't think any justice has been served on the PPC and they have got away with it lightly

onlyfoolsandparking

The_Deep wrote: »

The judge also said that I didn't need to attend the hearing as I had a letter of discontinuance from the claimant. I mentioned the courts said that I should still go if it hasn't been filed.

I disagree with the others.

If I was this OP I would be making a huge fuss. I would make a complaint that in failing to award unreasonable behaviour costs the judge erred in law, and he certainly seemed not to be impartial. Someone suggested that the PPCs actions bordered on contempt, I agree.

Of course defendants make mistakes, they are usually unrepresented by a legal professional, may well be unfamiliar with the Rules and perhaps even awed by their surroundings.

I think that judge served the defendant very poorly indeed.

Absolutely agree, what a bleedin cheek!! what chance do we have with Judges like this around, I agree its a win but if it was me I would cause as big a stink as humanly possible otherwise how is the system ever gonna play fair.


I bet Gallstones are p***in themselves laughing at this one, lets see if they are still laughing when Sir Greg Knights reforms come in the scumbags!

bargepole

The_Deep wrote: »

I think that judge served the defendant very poorly indeed.

I disagree.

The OP filed a Defence which was utter garbage, and then failed to comply with the Court's directions for filing and serving a WS.

He then turned up for the hearing, as he should have done given that he was advised to do so by the court staff. But he then failed to inform the Judge at the outset, that he had received a late NOD from the Claimant, which had not been received by the Court in time to vacate the hearing.

His argument should have been that the Claimant had acted unreasonably by filing an NOD too late to prevent the hearing from remaining in the daily listing.

But, as with every other aspect of this case, anything he could do wrong, he did do wrong.

one_cruzer

bargepole wrote: »

I disagree.

The OP filed a Defence which was utter garbage, and then failed to comply with the Court's directions for filing and serving a WS.

He then turned up for the hearing, as he should have done given that he was advised to do so by the court staff. But he then failed to inform the Judge at the outset, that he had received a late NOD from the Claimant, which had not been received by the Court in time to vacate the hearing.

His argument should have been that the Claimant had acted unreasonably by filing an NOD too late to prevent the hearing from remaining in the daily listing.

But, as with every other aspect of this case, anything he could do wrong, he did do wrong.

At the same time the claimant did file a WS late as well. Being a litigant in person I have never come across the stages here before or in court. So there should be some leniency in that fact. I mentioned they behaved unreasonably but the Judge believed they didn't act unreasonable. He said my costs were unreasonable