Newcastle Airport UKPPO BW Legal collective defence group

Keyworker

Hi all
didn't have the time to start my own thread as advised but thought that I would let you know that I received my docs from BW Legal today, their evidence for court, they are still offering settle out of court to but have submitted my defense as per the template on here, tweaked with my info.
I can scan & send it if anyone would like to see it, but the basis is loads of signs ref parking, wish that I had known this before I had submitted mine as they tend to be on the way into the airport & in daylight where my issue was on the way out in the dark, but hey ho, will let you know how I get on if you want me to.

Coupon-mad

No-one needs to start their own thread, this is the UKPPO Newcastle Airport Group thread to stop us having to repeat ourselves on individual threads, at least for these cases!

These are different because we SHOULD NOT Be telling people to defend.

Have you all managed to join the Whatsapp group?

Do the NEWBIES know from reading this thread to pay £100 at court stage, NOT defend, but instead CONTEST JURISDICTION? If you don't, then can I suggest you simply read the thread more slowly! This thread even tells you what words to use.

@Paulstevens64 this is not correct, this is the group thread for COURT CLAIMS an most are ahead of him and well past defence or contesting jursdiction stage:

Just to be clear: Do you have a Newcastle Airport UKPPO ticket? If you are at court stage you are ahead of all of the "victims" here. You need to urgently start your won thread to get some specialist individual advice.

BountyHunter

Quick question - a couple of us have received response to our defences which state

"It is fundamental to note that the Byelaws do not prevent our Client from entering into a contract with a motorist. As such, any material breach of the terms and conditions (stated below [i.e. the wording of the signs]) gives rise to a contractual claim which can be brought under civil proceedings (i.e. in a county court). You are put strict to proof to the contrary."

Is this a load of rubbish or does it need addressing in the witness statement - the defence already covers the changing nature of the claim.

The PCNs state Breach of byelaws, yet the letter of Claims state breach of contract.

The first point will be Abuse of process for the extra £60 - the above is to cover all bases.

Thanks

BountyHunter

Oh and apologies btw for not responding to the PMs to join the WhatsApp group - I didn't have the notification by email checked in the settings.

All replied to tonight though a little late.

Coupon-mad

You need to address it in your WS because you need to assume you will have a clueless Judge, and that UKPPO will send a rep who will try to steer that Judge.

There is a DVLA communication somewhere that tells PPCs that they can't have it both ways, and must make it clear to a motorist if the charge comes under byelaws or contract or trespass.

I can't recall where/what it was, though - maybe within an FOI in the public domain?

The point being, if the PCN said it was for breach of byelaws, they cannot now pretend it's a contractual charge and change the entire basis of enforcement to suit them and mislead a motorist from the outset.

Kamdee

Can I join the Wattsapp group please. I have won the set aside judgment. 07732515997

BountyHunter

Coupon-mad wrote: »

You need to address it in your WS because you need to assume you will have a clueless Judge, and that UKPPO will send a rep who will try to steer that Judge.

There is a DVLA communication somewhere that tells PPCs that they can't have it both ways, and must make it clear to a motorist if the charge comes under byelaws or contract or trespass.

I can't recall where/what it was, though - maybe within an FOI in the public domain?

The point being, if the PCN said it was for breach of byelaws, they cannot now pretend it's a contractual charge and change the entire basis of enforcement to suit them and mislead a motorist from the outset.

Thanks I recall reading it somewhere too in research for the defence - that will be tonight’s job trying to find it again

Caoimhe

With regards to BW stating that the byelaws do not negate UKPPO entering into a contract... people have previously appealed around the illegitimacy of the contract, for UKPPO to reply woth the following:

"the charge is not issued under contract law and is not an attempt to recover damages for breaching a contract. The charge is an alternative to prosecution in the Magistrates Court for breaching airport byelaws"

Anyone still got those letters?

Quentin

Kamdee wrote: »

Can I join the Wattsapp group please. I have won the set aside judgment. Xxxxxxxcc

Best edit your post and remove your private details. Never a good idea to post them on a public forum

PM the OP to join.

Also edit them from your other post you made!

Computersaysno

Please, please, please people remember to get it in your defence that the airport should be passing any monies onto the courts as all 'penalties raised under byelaws' are due to the court.