Newcastle Airport UKPPO BW Legal collective defence group

david_c88

I paid the £60 online. I only did it because I threatened them with it from
My very first email and I like to keep me word 😂.

My issue with the juristricfion....UKPPO are attempting to get a parking charge IAW para 6.3 which the byelaws allow for the operator to chase the costs so the specifics of their claim is the juristriction is with county court.

Again...saying that, looking at byelaws for most other UK airports there is no allowance for parking charge notices so Newcastle is unique.

Minefield.....but the roads leading upto the car parks - byelaws do not apply.

Umkomaas

My issue with the juristricfion....UKPPO are attempting to get a parking charge IAW para 6.3 which the byelaws allow for the operator to chase the costs so the specifics of their claim is the juristriction is with county court.

If that's the main thrust for your case, you'll need to sort out 'juristricfion' (sic) and 'juristriction' (sic), neither of which appear in any dictionary, before you even attempt to explain it to a Judge.

But at least having paid the filing fee, UKPPO can no longer walk away from a hearing (unless they settle your counterclaim beforehand). However, you do need to understand fully what the grounds of your cc are and be able to cogently argue them in front of a Judge.

david_c88

Haha thanks for pointing out my spelling errors...was typing while at work so my attention wasn’t really on the post.....

But no, that isn’t my case...thanks.

Computersaysno

david_c88 wrote: »

I’ve recieved the same, already filed my defence and rather cheekily submitted a counterclaim for £1000 for harrasment 🤣

You might need to change it to 'costs' as opposed to harassment [@£19/hr]...and book all the time you've spent reading and preparing it etc...not too difficult to get it up to £1000+!!!


They do NOT want it tested in court...especially since they should be passing the monies raised onto the courts....instead the scumco pocket it for themselves!!!!

ianeverton

david_c88 wrote: »

I’ve recieved the same, already filed my defence and rather cheekily submitted a counterclaim for £1000 for harrasment 🤣

Happy to join any group but my defence sounds similar to what you guys are discussing.

I even have evidence from Northumbria Police staring that the RTA DOES apply on the land.

That's interesting with the Police stating that.

Castle

david_c88 wrote: »

Minefield.....but the roads leading upto the car parks - byelaws do not apply.

If you read section 145(3)(a) of the 1988 Road Traffic Act; the Act also applies to "or other public place" so it covers the public car parks as well!
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1988/52/section/145

bilib

By public it's possibly meant as kept at public expense ie owned by the people



The core definition of an unadopted road or a private one is that it's maintenance is not from the public purse.


It's public owned. So ' to a public space' is not the same as 'for the public'.


A shopping centre generally are not public spaces nor libraries built under a PFI for example

twhitehousescat

public , as in public right of access , just like a supermarket car park , they are maintained by supermarket Co , but you can still be breathalyzed by police on that land

bilib

Road/ public place is decided on a case by case basis.


At Airports either the byelaws apply airside only or the intention is that access roads used by the public are intended for safe/insured/licensed ... users and that includes lighting and parking as enactments setout. Byelaws can apply where enactments do not (regulations for car parks?) or further define in parallel to enactments. Littering for example is both a pollution offence and under varied byelaws.



Definitely a valid question to ask in a defence but very dependant on the thoughts of a circuit judge on the day.



My reading of the intention of such a broad inclusion of 'road traffic enactments' is to ensure road safety and other national/eu legislation are complied with. The argument that the parking etc byelaws have an airside only enforcement is both supported and undermined by the layout of the published byelaw.


Newcastle document is less distinctive on the airside only intention than other airports other than that it in no way excludes the right of police to enforce any enactments. Example door security at a nightclub neither party in a entry dispute protected from prosecution for assault or an arrest.

Coupon-mad

david_c88 wrote: »

I’ve recieved the same, already filed my defence and rather cheekily submitted a counterclaim for £1000 for harrasment 🤣

Happy to join any group but my defence sounds similar to what you guys are discussing.

I even have evidence from Northumbria Police staring that the RTA DOES apply on the land.

Can you provide that evidence to the group? send a private message to this thread starter and collaborate from start to finish.

Love your case re harassment. Read Henry Hippo's case on pepipoo against UKPC where he had a successful counter-claim, as you need to lay it on THICK at Witness Statement stage about the distress caused, and cite the right parts of the Act (two WS will be needed for you, one in support of your counter-claim alone, and even if UKPPO discontinue their claim, you can force your CC - which remains 'live' - to a hearing by paying the hearing fee).