pcm legal case - Could judge do that

Sassii

Hi all again

One of my neighbor had a court hearing while pcm didn't serve WS to him or to court and didn't reply to any of his request for documents under new protocol. so defendant asked to strik out the case 2 weeks before hearing and asked for costs of course.

at hearing pcm represented by a barrister without any WS then Judge confirmed from defendant evidences that L&Q are not the landowner and there was no period of parking stated in NTK and photos provided by defendant shows only one minute between 1st and last photo.

Also judge confirmed pcm didn't comply with CPR, PD, court order but the judge adjourned hearing to give pcm chance to provide evidences for period of parking.

The judge blamed defendant for not chasing pcm for WS while defendant did in writing and by phone and presented proof of posting that strick out application been sent to Gladstones.

Could the judge do that and why he didn't just dismiss or strik out the case.

Regards

Coupon-mad

Sorry to say I don't know why some Judges still think parking firms are upstanding companies.

Sometimes they do adjourn cases to allow the Claimant to get their ducks in a row and that always seems unfair on the Defendant, especially in any parking case where the entire claim is a scam.

System

So this will go to a rehearing. What did the judge say about costs for the first hearing?

In addition, any rehearing will be/should be in front of a different judge so you can use the same issues again - no WS, no details, not the landowner etc.

You could put a Skeleton Argument together to be sent 3 days prior. You can also write to PCM inviting them to drop the case too - and have a copy of that letter when it comes to the costs stage at the rehearing.