Britannia Parking Ltd (BWLegal) - County Court Claim

Redx

well done , another Britannia failure in court

Another one bites the dust !!

I bet the company name was incorrect too

yettoexist

Redx wrote: »

well done , another Britannia failure in court

Another one bites the dust !!

I bet the company name was incorrect too

Thanks - I couldn't have beaten them if it were not for the help of the forum regulars, the sage advice was appreciated!

All of the footers had the same text:

Britannia Parking is a registered Trading Name of Britannia Parking Group Limited and any of its wholly owned subsidiaries.
Registered office: Britannia Parking Group, 7th Floor, County Gates House, 300 Poole Road, Poole, BH12 1AZ
Registered in England No. 08182990

Landowner permission had Britannia Parking Services or its parent company Britannia Parking Group Limited.

Castle

yettoexist wrote: »

The bwlegal rep was polite and said he had travelled all the way down from Nottingham, not sure if that was true or not though.

The judge also awarded the full £95 in loss of earnings and £2 in mileage / £2 for parking near court. No costs were awarded for Litigant in Person rates.

Britannia are looking at a loss of at least £450 on this case, even before you account for BW Legal costs. (Rep fee £180, mileage £72, Court fees £50, Solicitor fee for filing the claim £50 plus your costs of £99.)

yettoexist

Castle wrote: »

Britannia are looking at a loss of at least £450 on this case, even before you account for BW Legal costs. (Rep fee £180, mileage £72, Court fees £50, Solicitor fee for filing the claim £50 plus your costs of £99.)

If the costs are anywhere near true then it's astounding that these companies gamble on taking these cases all the way to a Small Claims Court. The rep didn't seem bothered about the outcome, either way, he said he was 'just there to do his job'.

Coupon-mad

Haha, very well done! ANOTHER BRITANNIA ONE BITES THE DUST!

Landowner permission had Britannia Parking Services or its parent company Britannia Parking Group Limited.

What, it can't have done? 'Britannia Parking Services Ltd' is a Limited company in its own right and not the same company number as the one on the NTK letters and signs.

Remind us which site this was about and who exactly is the party to the landowner contract there please? It may help others if you give a scan of the landowner contract (or part of it) as it is not personal data as long as you don't show the signatories and names at the end.

yettoexist

Coupon-mad wrote: »

Haha, very well done! ANOTHER BRITANNIA ONE BITES THE DUST!

What, it can't have done? 'Britannia Parking Services Ltd' is a Limited company in its own right and not the same company number as the one on the NTK letters and signs.

Remind us which site this was about and who exactly is the party to the landowner contract there please? It may help others if you give a scan of the landowner contract (or part of it) as it is not personal data as long as you don't show the signatories and names at the end.

The landowners permission is on page 13 of the Claimant's WS on this link

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1592FADpYhWSeEzdXeQKEyDAfwWgnzXOf/view

This is for Avebury Boulevard Multistory Car Park operated by Britannia Parking. In the document it appears that the landowner is Hammerson Ltd?

Castle

yettoexist wrote: »

The landowners permission is on page 13 of the Claimant's WS on this link

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1592FADpYhWSeEzdXeQKEyDAfwWgnzXOf/view

This is for Avebury Boulevard Multistory Car Park operated by Britannia Parking. In the document it appears that the landowner is Hammerson Ltd?

That's not the landowner's agreement as it refers to the original agreement which apparently started on 10th May 2006. Problem is; Britannia Parking Services Ltd and Britannia Parking Group Ltd were not incorporated until August 2012, so they couldn't be parties to the original 2006 agreement.

Coupon-mad

The fragrant [Removed by Forum Team] efforts with 64 points in her WS were wasted, because the entire premise of this 'PCN' was flawed and unfair due to the app not working.

And as Castle rightly says, that letter was never valid authority for the Claimant, who are not Britannia Parking Services Ltd (a Limited company who cannot be a trading name of another Ltd company 'Britannia Group Ltd', even though 'Britannia Parking' is).

All very interesting for anyone with a PCN from Avebury Boulevard Multistory.

beamerguy

yettoexist wrote: »

Just a quick note to say that my case was heard today at Milton Keynes County Court.

Good news, it was dismissed by the District Judge! The claim was dismissed as I had provided enough evidence to suggest that I would have extended the parking time if the PayByPhone app had been working correctly on the alledged day.

Very well done :beer:
These claim forms by BWLegal are getting worse with [Removed by Forum Team] using the same ridiculous language they use in scary letters.. IE ... nonsensical

The judge did not think that hence you won and BWLegal lost

I also see they still do not understand the Beavis case

The judge would have seen the £60 fake but decided on that decision. Probably because the courts don't want any more timewasting if BWLegal appealed as they did in Southampton

yettoexist

beamerguy wrote: »

Very well done :beer:
These claim forms by BWLegal are getting worse with [Removed by Forum Team] using the same ridiculous language they use in scary letters.. IE ... nonsensical

The judge did not think that hence you won and BWLegal lost

I also see they still do not understand the Beavis case

The judge would have seen the £60 fake but decided on that decision. Probably because the courts don't want any more timewasting if BWLegal appealed as they did in Southampton

Thank you Beamerguy, I did have a look at the number of hearings listed for today related to potential Parking cases. There were 2 other cases before mine @ 14:00, 1 as PPC -vs- Business, the other the same as me PPC -vs- Named Defendant.

I wanted to be dismissed over the £60 fake add-on so it would strengthen other user's cases, but I wasn't going to argue with the judge on why it was dismissed!

Once I receive the paperwork I'll be able to share the Judge's name (I forgot after reading the sheets for the day), but she was awesome and cut out almost all of the Claimant's waffle in their WS and got straight to the facts. Total time from being summoned to walking out of the court was a full hour.

Thanks again for all of your help