Without Prejudice Offer Rejected. What Now?

The_Deep

Of course they can reject it.

But do you really not want to fight this. They have so many hurdles to clear, accreditation, paperwork, timing, contract, signage, data protection, etc. They only need to fail one and they lose, read this.

The whole industry is a scam, relying on threats of court, and the public's ignorance of the Law, A bill is currently before parliament which will regulate the scammers, many of whom are ex-clampers.

This is an entirely unregulated industry which is scamming the public with inflated claims for minor breaches of alleged contracts for alleged parking offences, aided and abetted by a handful of low-rent solicitors. Is has been suggested by an MP that some of these companies may have connections to organised crime.

Parking Eye, CPM, Smart, (especially Smart}, and others have already been named and shamed in the House of Commons as have Gladstones Solicitors, and BW Legal, (these two law firms take hundreds of these cases to court each week), hospital car parks and residential complex tickets have been especially mentioned. They lose most of them, and have been reported to the regulatory authority by an M.P. for unprofessional conduct

The problem has become so widespread that MPs have agreed to enact a Bill to regulate these scammers.

Sir Greg Knight's Private Members Bill to curb the excesses, and perhaps close down, some of these companies passed its Second Reading in the Lords this month, and, with a fair wind, will l become Law later this year..

All five readings are available to watch on the internet, (some 7-8 hours), and published in Hansard. MPs have an extremely low opinion of the industry. Many are complaining that they are becoming overwhelmed by complaints from members of the public. Add to their burden, complain in the most robust terms about the scammers. rc

onlyfoolsandparking

The_Deep wrote: »

I would have no hesitation in disclosing a WP offer I had made to a judge.
I would not however tell the judge about a WP offer made to me. My reasoning for this would be that it was my offer and I could use it how I pleased. The use of the WP words would be merely to prevent the other side from using it in court. Have I misunderstood?

I agree and that's what I am saying too. It smacks of double standards when we as Defendants have to (try to) get everything legally correct and the Scammers often DONT get everything legally correct yet it doesn't seem to affect their winning outcomes.


I would produce a WP offer without any hesitation and risk the wrath of the Judge, as I said earlier what has the OP got to lose, the odds are stacked against them with current Court procedures.


@ the OP, well if you have no proof its just pure speculation and also could have just been some mindless moron which there are lots of these days.


Your chances in Court are well documented on here with the many Court cases that have run their full course, read them and formulate your own opinion of your next move.

The_Deep

OP you can find hundreds of court outcomes on the parking Pranksters blog, her, and on peppipoo, here is one

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/5420582/sip-loses-in-court

The whole industry is a scam, relying on threats of court, and the public's ignorance of the Law, A bill is currently before parliament which will regulate the scammers, many of whom are ex-clampers.

This is an entirely unregulated industry which is scamming the public with inflated claims for minor breaches of alleged contracts for alleged parking offences, aided and abetted by a handful of low-rent solicitors. Is has been suggested by an MP that some of these companies may have connections to organised crime.

Parking Eye, CPM, Smart, (especially Smart}, and others have already been named and shamed in the House of Commons as have Gladstones Solicitors, and BW Legal, (these two law firms take hundreds of these cases to court each week), hospital car parks and residential complex tickets have been especially mentioned. They lose most of them, and have been reported to the regulatory authority by an M.P. for unprofessional conduct

The problem has become so widespread that MPs have agreed to enact a Bill to regulate these scammers.

Sir Greg Knight's Private Members Bill to curb the excesses, and perhaps close down, some of these companies passed its Second Reading in the Lords this month, and, with a fair wind, will l become Law later this year..

All five readings are available to watch on the internet, (some 7-8 hours), and published in Hansard. MPs have an extremely low opinion of the industry. Many are complaining that they are becoming overwhelmed by complaints from members of the public. Add to their burden, complain in the most robust terms about the scammers.

Umkomaas

The_Deep wrote: »

I would have no hesitation in disclosing a WP offer I had made to a judge.
I would not however tell the judge about a WP offer made to me. My reasoning for this would be that it was my offer and I could use it how I pleased. The use of the WP words would be merely to prevent the other side from using it in court. Have I misunderstood?

Disclosing a letter marked 'Without Prejudice - Save As To Costs' would be a natural progression once the case had been decided and costs were being determined. If both sides had their documents so marked, they would each have the opportunity to present them to the Judge. Marked simply WP, seems to narrow the options.

Perhaps one of our in-house lawyers can help?

judrop500

I just want to say that I really appreciate all your advice.

I’m pretty intelligent and I’m sure I could battle out a court case. I made the WP offer because I’ve spent the last year as a LIP in the family courts and I’m a bit exhausted by litigation & self-representation.

What is stopping me from proceeding to court is:

1. I did not keep any of the six original letters they sent me or the follow-up letters. They were all binned. My ex-husband used to tell me to ignore all parking letters and eventually they would give up.

2. I didn’t pay for parking. It’s not like I’m one of those people who went shopping and parked in a 2 hour free bay and overstayed because they couldn’t fold their wheelchair in time. Would a judge have sympathy on a woman who’d rather spend £10 on her kid than on parking when she was living on nothing as a student? Are personal circs taken into consideration?

waamo

If this goes to court you can continue negotiations right up until you walk into the court room.

You can revise your offer up or down as you see fit. Similarly they can reject or accept your offer as they see fit.

The_Deep

Would a judge have sympathy on a woman who’d rather spend £10 on her kid than on parking when she was living on nothing as a student? Are personal circs taken into consideration?

I hope not. I hope that he would have more sympathy for the landowner who has to maintain and pay rates on the land.

judrop500

Exactly. That’s why I’m hesitant?

fisherjim

I may be wrong but I am not sure they can just offer a payment plan by law unless registered with the FCA.

judrop500

Say I let this go to court.... what are my next steps? Do I ask for evidence of the contract, evidence that the contract (such as it was) was broken, evidence that they are the landowner etc.?