Abuse of Process ... District Judge tells BWLegal

beamerguy

The abuse of process thread has been updated regarding BWLEGAL/BRITANNIA LOSING THEIR APPEAL

POST #1

legal_magpie

It wasn't technically an appeal. They were applying to a District Judge, albeit a very senior one, to set aside an order made on paper. An appeal would be to a circuit judge. For example they could appeal against this decision and this would be heard by a CJ

Coupon-mad

If they do, we will face it.

Snakes_Belly

legal_magpie wrote: »

It wasn't technically an appeal. They were applying to a District Judge, albeit a very senior one, to set aside an order made on paper. An appeal would be to a circuit judge. For example they could appeal against this decision and this would be heard by a CJ

The Senior Circuit Judge must have seen the paperwork to agree an oral hearing rather than on papers. They obviously thought that the case warranted an oral hearing. They must discuss cases between themselves.

Ballymoss

Just happened across this thread whilst looking up District Judge Grand, who threw out yet another of these applications by BW Legal on behalf of Premier Park on 25/10/19 as an abuse of process (exactly the same wording as the others I have read on here).

Several years ago my other half was in a bit of a hurry and parked at a car park operated by Premier Park. This car park was a pay and display car park, monitored by ANPR (why any need to display a ticket then?) She actually paid for two hours parking but left after 56 minutes. Nevertheless, a ticket was issued - reason? Premier Park said that her registration number had been incorrectly entered.

I decided that since they had subsequently seen a copy of the purchased ticket (she located it amazingly in her four wheeled landfill) and still refused the appeal that we should ignore any further threats and see where we went. (They still dont know who was actually driving the car on the day, because they never asked).

Anyway, long story short is they tried it on and failed. BW Legal once again have a bloody nose. Had it not been for threads like these I probably wouldnt have had the confidence to take it this far so many thanks.

Umkomaas

Just shows what can be done without any handholding whatsoever from the forum. In sharp contrast to some threads that are into treble figures and have hardly moved forward.

beamerguy

Ballymoss wrote: »

Just happened across this thread whilst looking up District Judge Grand, who threw out yet another of these applications by BW Legal on behalf of Premier Park on 25/10/19 as an abuse of process (exactly the same wording as the others I have read on here).

Several years ago my other half was in a bit of a hurry and parked at a car park operated by Premier Park. This car park was a pay and display car park, monitored by ANPR (why any need to display a ticket then?) She actually paid for two hours parking but left after 56 minutes. Nevertheless, a ticket was issued - reason? Premier Park said that her registration number had been incorrectly entered.

I decided that since they had subsequently seen a copy of the purchased ticket (she located it amazingly in her four wheeled landfill) and still refused the appeal that we should ignore any further threats and see where we went. (They still dont know who was actually driving the car on the day, because they never asked).

Anyway, long story short is they tried it on and failed. BW Legal once again have a bloody nose. Had it not been for threads like these I probably wouldnt have had the confidence to take it this far so many thanks.

This is the problem of running a sausage machine like BWL.

BWLegal fail in good practice, they fail the principals of the SRA and the result is, being failures in the parking scam.
What a way to ruin a reputation ???

Ballymoss

I actually called them up to tell them 'im more thqn happy to see you in court'. The cocky tw4t I spoke to made Arthur Daley appear respectable. Im actually rather dissapointed I never got my day in court, my aim was to cost them as much money as possible then produce the original ticket purchased for the judge.

Umkomaas

my aim was to cost them as much money as possible then produce the original ticket purchased for the judge.

That could have cost you. All evidence must be shared in advance with the opposition - ambushes are not permitted.

henrik777

Umkomaas wrote: »

That could have cost you. All evidence must be shared in advance with the opposition - ambushes are not permitted.

Not only that, it carries potential cost penalties for unreasonable behaviour.