Bw legal portswood car park, southampton

Umkomaas

Just as an aside - is the OP going to fund the transcript? Given the cost of transcripts, I wonder whether he wants some financial help and maybe set up a 'Go Fund Me' page?

I'd be more than happy to throw in some Rands?

Coupon-mad

Thanks Umkomaas, I have seen other offers of money to contribute towards a transcript as well so rest assured we will get one.

RobinofLoxley

Well done all and hats off to Coupon Mad for taking the trouble to travel to Southampton. BW Legal sent out their 'big guns' and you sent them packing :T

I bet you felt you were winning as soon as Mr. M tried to get you to agree to an adjournment, he was on the back foot straight away. They don't like it up em Mr. Mainwaring :rotfl:

I missed a beat a little in trying to directly ask the other side what exactly the £60 was for, and how the whole £160 was constructed? DJ Grand corrected me to address the court/him, and not Mr Mainwaring, so I had to change it to observing that the Claimant's skeleton had one single line buried in the middle, that suggested that the £60 was being argued as this:

''40. It is thus submitted that there is nothing in principle abusive about the £60 which the Claimant seeks to recover in respect of the additional administrative costs which were incurred before each matter was handed over to the Claimant’s solicitors.''

It's a shame you didn't get chance to push him on the £60 and what Britannia actually spent it on. The only 'additional administrative costs' that could possibly be incurred before the matter was handed to solicitors would be to debt recovery companies. As we know if solicitors are involved and a claim is begun it means the debt recovery company has failed to recover the alleged 'debt' and there is no charge by them to the PPC.

It would have been good to see Mr. Mainwaring squirm in his chair when trying to account for the £60 costs and show exactly how they were incurred and provide proof.

MistyZ

Ken Loach's next film .... a bit niche but not as niche as all that given the numbers involved and the impact ranging from a spot of bother to misery & fear.

What d'ya reckon Ken??

Egbert_Nobacon

Brilliant result, congrats to all involved.

I fear this won’t be the end of the matter as there is so much cash involved.

It would seem quite simple for the scammers to justify the £60 debt recovery charge - not that I’m going to help them here.

Coupon-mad

Personally, because their case is so flawed, I am not worried if they do appeal.

Snakes_Belly

Coupon-mad wrote: »

Personally, because their case is so flawed, I am not worried if they do appeal...a pain for the Defendants to attend another appeal and keep being dragged around at the whim of BW Legal/Britannia, but if that's what it takes, we'd then get a persuasive judgment.

If they appeal would it be to the Circuit Judge that has already looked at the case when BW Legal wanted it heard on papers?

bargepole

RobinofLoxley wrote: »

...It's a shame you didn't get chance to push him on the £60 and what Britannia actually spent it on. The only 'additional administrative costs' that could possibly be incurred before the matter was handed to solicitors would be to debt recovery companies. As we know if solicitors are involved and a claim is begun it means the debt recovery company has failed to recover the alleged 'debt' and there is no charge by them to the PPC.

It would have been good to see Mr. Mainwaring squirm in his chair when trying to account for the £60 costs and show exactly how they were incurred and provide proof.

The barrister was there as an advocate, not as a witness. As such, he cannot be questioned on facts of which he has no first-hand knowledge, he can only make legal arguments based on the instructions he has been given.

This is why PPCs rarely send one of their own staff to such hearings, they don't want to have to answer awkward questions.

BountyHunter

Brilliant stuff Coupon Mad - been following along for the Newcastle Airport cases and enjoyed reading your report well done.

Coupon-mad

Snakes_Belly wrote: »

If they appeal would it be to the Circuit Judge that has already looked at the case when BW Legal wanted it heard on papers?

It seems so. DJ Grand said something like this, as ParkingMad who was watching the case, made some notes:

''it was placed before a Circuit Judge - His Honour Iain Hughes QC - who is the designated civil judge for this area''.