5 days left for premier park to respond to my SAR request

Lupo26

fingers crossed then!

Lupo26

I lost.
the judge said my evidence of the financial statement not listing land as an asset wasn't enough as the claimant argued it shouldn't matter to someone parking there if they owned the land or not. 5 minutes before the hearing they submitted evidence of some other document showing they owned the land to which I didn't receive a copy.
he also didn't agree with me stating about double recovery so didn't knock £60 off.
lastly my argument about poor signage and the argument that the parking charge notice wasn't clear enough was thrown out.
so I have to pay £261. absolute fail on all accounts.
the judge was very pleasant and said I represented myself well. can't believe it.
thank you to everyone for your advice.

Lupo26

he didn't seem very clued up on things to be honest. feel screwed over

Redx

Coupon-mad said:

It's always up to the Judge and there are some new ones drafted in, who are not au fait with parking claim scams.  And this is not 'proof' of anything as such, it might just make the Judge decide on the balance of probabilities that they haven't shown landowner authority but it might just get a shrug of the shoulders and a Judge who says: 'I am not with you on that point, anything else?'

beamerguy said:

Coupon-mad said:

It's always up to the Judge and there are some new ones drafted in, who are not au fait with parking claim scams. 

New judges, mainly out of work or retired solicitors will not have experience or knowledge of the paring scam.
One would hope that experienced judges will train them in all areas including parking scams .
There are still judges who need to be re-trained

Sorry to hear about your loss

Looks like those 2 paragraphs prophesied it

D_P_Dance

he also didn't agree with me stating about double recovery so didn't knock £60 off.

He is very likely to be wrong imo,  I suggest that you look into this. If he is wrong on that he could be wrong on the set aside fee.

Coupon-mad

We are seeing clueless Judges a few times now and I honestly think some have never seen a parking claim.  Any Judge worth their salt would realise that you can't add 'costs for sending aggressive letters' on top of a parking charge which is already enhanced for 'sending the letters'.   

I think you got unlucky and that DDJ Lottery  is a bit worse at the moment. 

I am so sorry this happened to you.  He was wrong about the added £60 but he must have thought 'of course the Claimant can add costs' and hasn't seen enough parking cases to realise there are none.

Lupo26

I was really confident with all my points and had supporting evidence. can't believe it. I think he was a retired judge as he was older and kept asking for clarification on things.

Lupo26

ironically I think I'll be getting another parking ticket for an overstay as I was late back to my car as the hearing went on ages

Coupon-mad

They are always older and I have had similar Judges who were clueless. 

Sounds like none of us could have done any better and you did your best.  But it is particularly galling when they get the added £60 hopelessly wrong in law, despite a WS that tells them which laws and authorities it falls foul of. 

Jeez I doubt the crappy signs even quantified the 'added costs' (not recoverable then - indemnity costs fall foul of the CRA 2015).

Redx

This is why it's called judge bingo , nothing can be guaranteed in these court cases , but it costs money to appeal and only if he erred in law

I did mention long ago that you would have given birth long before any court case , so hope that went better !!

Ensure that you pay it in full ASAP