Abuse of Process ... District Judge tells BWLegal

Ballymoss

The reasons are as follows:

The claim contains a substantial charge additional to the parking charge which it is alleged the defendant contracted to pay. This additional charge is not recoverable under the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule 4 nor with reference to the judgement in Parking Eye v Beavis. It is an abuse of process for the Claimant to issue a knowingly inflated claim for an additional sum which it is not entitled to recover.

Further, although the claim is brought within the limitation period, it is a claim for a small amount for an alleged debt incurred almost three years ago with no explanation for the delay in bringing proceedings. This order has been made by the court, blah blah blah.

The fact remains: we have proof that she bought a ticket for her stay in the car park and left well within the time paid for. Her crime? The machine issued a ticket without her full registration number on it and she never noticed. It still took the money from her.

legal_magpie

This would amount to a "de minimis " defence

Coupon-mad

I will add you to my allowed private message contacts if you want to discuss this and this is something I'd do free of course. I am retired and have a bit of time to spend on such things.

Ballymoss

Good evening Coupon, thats a proposal I would indeed be interested in following up. I'll message you tomorrow when I am up and about again with everything to hand. Your offer to assist is much appreciated, thanks!

Coupon-mad

Send me a pm.

Ballymoss

Did you receive my message Coupon?

Coupon-mad

Yep just too busy to look at pm's yet till I get an empty day later this week! Pm's and emails are harder work than posting on the forum while watching some trashy TV!

elwarburton

Hi,

I have read all the newbies threads and cannot find a defence that matches mine. I had a completely valid ticket but it blew upside down on my dashboard. I have just received a letter of claim. A sar request seems pointless as Armtrack has sent me all their information. Would it be deamed vexacious if I requested a copy of Armtrack's contract from the landowner (i am having difficulty in finding out who owns Sennen carpark in Cornwall). Also would like to read similar examples as want to consider if I have a fighting chance.

Many thanks

Fruitcake

If you need help with your case you need to start your own thread.
If your case includes fake add ons/abuse of process then by all means glean information from here, but this thread is not about fluttering tickets.
As for your comment anbout not sending an SAR, how do you know they have sent you ALL the information they hold about you if you haven't asked for it. We don't suggest you do things like this just for the fun of it.

Coupon-mad

elwarburton wrote: »

Hi,

I have read all the newbies threads and cannot find a defence that matches mine. I had a completely valid ticket but it blew upside down on my dashboard. I have just received a letter of claim. A sar request seems pointless as Armtrack has sent me all their information. Would it be deamed vexacious if I requested a copy of Armtrack's contract from the landowner (i am having difficulty in finding out who owns Sennen carpark in Cornwall). Also would like to read similar examples as want to consider if I have a fighting chance.

I suspect you are searching wrong as you are misspelling Armtrac, it has no 'k'.

You simply need to search the forum for: Armtrac fluttering ticket defence

Almost ALL Armtrac cases are about fluttering tickets.

It is their favourite hobby/scam, to provide flimsy tickets that are not fit for purpose, at windy coastal sites - kerchiiiing! but we defend these cases, and invariably, the good guys & girls win.

I think it is your misspelling of Armtrac that is causing you to miss it all!