Vehicle Control Services

Snakes_Belly

FightingLegal wrote: »

The guy they sent to represent them was not a legal professional. Although he did have several degrees to his name he was not a solicitor nor did he work for VCS.

As they didn't turn up, they thought this guy showing up would do the job for them, they could not ask him to be a lay representative for them. Procedure rules only allow a Barrister, Solicitor or Legal Executive to conduct a case on behalf of a client.

That was a bit of a slip up on their part. :rotfl:

Another one bites the dust. :T

FightingLegal

Snakes_Belly wrote: »

That was a bit of a slip up on their part. :rotfl:

Another one bites the dust. :T

Apparently, this student man-child was saying that they do this thousands of times in a year, so best to check who is sitting on the opposing bench before you go in.

The Judge was unaware of this guys status when we walked in and he had been presenting a case just before he tried to present against me.

Coupon-mad

Great - so you won on the 'no Right of Audience' rule.

Well done for arguing it, some posters can't get their head around it (here it is for NEWBIES, with documents to take):

https://www.parkingcowboys.co.uk/right-of-audience/

Did the Judge strike the claim out immediately, as they hadn't bothered to send anyone, or did he/she read through the claim anyway and dismiss it on signage or something else, in the end?

Did you ask for and get your costs for attending, to make VCS pay?

Which court, please, we like to know which ones know about Rights of Audience?

FightingLegal

Coupon-mad wrote: »

Great - so you won on the 'no Right of Audience' rule.

Well done for arguing it, some posters can't get their head around it ...... Link Removed

Did the Judge strike the claim out immediately, as they hadn't bothered to send anyone, or did he/she read through the claim anyway and dismiss it on signage or something else, in the end?

Did you ask for and get your costs for attending, to make VCS pay?

Which court, please, we like to know which ones know about Rights of Audience?

I knew about Lay Representative statutory instrument from a previous case I had done in the SCC for my sister-in-law, and had looked into it (and the CPR & PD that covered RoA) a year earlier, so when he said he didn't work for them and he wasn't a solicitor something triggered in my brain and it all came back to me, so I ran with it.
It still took 45min with my opponent arguing his corner with the Judge and lots of searching through rules, practice directions, Legal Services Act 2004 and the White book.



It was Barnsley County Court


The judge struck out the claim after I made the oral application I was given 3 choices by the judge

1. Adjourment for them to appear or get paperwork in order
2. Papers only hearing (they hadn't made the application beforehand or sent notice to the court)
3. Strike out

I opted for strike out after going through each of them with the Judge. The Judge then made his ruling on the RoA for the student and struck out the claim as they did not attend and a "fundemental failure to follow the basic rules set down".
The Judge never even looked at the case or referred to it any any way. It was funny when the student piped up and asked for permission to appeal, the judge shot him down by saying "I have told you once Mr Wilkes you have no right of audience in this court, you cannot speak.":rotfl:
I have a costs order for £50 fixed costs.

So all in all they have lost the £160 claim, the £25 court fee, the £25 trial fee, £60 costs and £20.99 interest and have to pay me £50 = loss of £340.99 for having that car in their carpark.

Coupon-mad

Yay, well done!

With those three choices, no sensible Defendant would have chosen any differently - STRIKE OUT!

We need to remember that Mr Wilkes is only a law graduate/student and has no ROA, as it seems VCS use him a fair bit:

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/5961727/vcs-lose-again

http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showtopic=122536&pid=1448715&st=105&#ent%20%20ry1448715

Castle

FightingLegal wrote: »

So all in all they have lost the £160 claim, the £25 court fee, the £25 trial fee, £60 costs and £20.99 interest and have to pay me £50 = loss of £340.99 for having that car in their carpark.

Most of the £160 is bogus so it's just the DVLA fee plus postage & printing costs which they would have lost.

Snakes_Belly

FightingLegal wrote: »

I
So all in all they have lost the £160 claim, the £25 court fee, the £25 trial fee, £60 costs and £20.99 interest and have to pay me £50 = loss of £340.99 for having that car in their carpark.

Plus the costs of the admin and the sending out of the rain forest of a WS.

SillyBuster

Coupon-mad wrote: »

Great - so you won on the 'no Right of Audience' rule.

Well done for arguing it, some posters can't get their head around it (here it is for NEWBIES, with documents to take):

https://www.parkingcowboys.co.uk/right-of-audience/

Sorry to revive an old thread. This link is now dead - I don't suppose the contents from it appear anywhere else, or here on MSE?

KeithP

What, this link?...

https://www.parkingcowboys.co.uk/right-of-audience/

Just tried it. Works alright for me.