Court Summons Received - ignored all previous letters - what now?

MiguelCotto

Can someone adda bit of clarity to this - para 287 in the Beavis case seems to say that £85 is an ok cost and not unconscionable - is the basis of including this trying to say that the £180 CEL are charging is too much / unconscionable as it's not in the region of £85?

Redx

No , because cel are not charging £180 , it's probably £100 as seen on any PCN or NTK or the signage , so the £85 is considered ok and £100 is the normal default daily tariff , so it's stating that including recovery it's a charge considered reasonable , so any added sums are not allowed due to the Beavis case indicating what is considered reasonable and so any made up figure of double the Beavis case rate is not reasonable and therefore a penalty , engaging the Penalty rule , so is objectionable

See the 4th post by Doam in this thread to explain it https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6101775/outside-bay-now-got-letter-of-claim-claiming-100-fine-instead-of-the-signaged-90#latest

MiguelCotto

Did I see there is an upper limit to what you can claim for costs? I can't find it....?

DEFENDANT'S SCHEDULE OF COSTS

Ordinary Costs

Loss of earnings/leave, incurred through attendance at Court 28/02/2020 £130.00 (£65PH)
Return mileage from home address to Court (e.g. 22 miles x £0.45) £9.90
Parking near Court £5.00

Sub-total £144.90 ======

Further costs for Claimant's unreasonable behaviour, pursuant to Civil Procedure Rule 27.14(2)(g)
Research, preparation and drafting of documents (3 hours at Litigant in Person rate of £19 per hour) £57.00
Stationery, printing, photocopying and postage: £15.00
Sub-total £72.00 ======

£ 216.90 TOTAL COSTS CLAIMED

KeithP

MiguelCotto said:

DEFENDANT'S SCHEDULE OF COSTS

Ordinary Costs

Loss of earnings/leave, incurred through attendance at Court 28/02/2020 £130.00 (£65PH)

I think you are limited to half a day's pay, five hours, at £19 per hour for attending a hearing, but I don't know where that is spelt out.

Everything else looks fine.

Coupon-mad

I wrote in more detail about costs on 24th January on two threads.  Good luck in making the new forum search work to find them but there was some detail there about what can/can't be claimed.

is the basis of including this trying to say that the £180 CEL are charging is too much / unconscionable as it's not in the region of £85?

No, the point of the Beavis case quotes from para 98, 193 and 198 is what those 3 sections say, very clearly when you read them - that a parking charge MUST already include the operational/business costs and that was part of the reason why the Supreme Court decided the £85 was justified, necessary and not a penalty.  
ParkingEye never add damages or extra operational costs to their claims.    They know they can't.
All the other firms try it on, and you need to use those 3 Beavis quotes, AND the POFA 4(5) AND the CRA 2015 Sch 2 (para 6, 10 and 14) to show why parking charges already contain all the business/letter/debt collection costs and in any case the signage fails to prominently state the charges, so the 'damages' added on are double recovery and are ALSO kicked out by the CRA test of fairness.

I've just heard from a contact that DJ Faye Wright at Skipton is also striking out claims citing the same stuff that was said at Southampton, including the CRA 2015!  So that's Skipton added to the list of good courts, like Warwick.

KeithP

Coupon-mad said:

I've just heard from a contact that DJ Faye Wright at Skipton is also striking out claims citing the same stuff that was said at Southampton, including the CRA 2015!  So that's Skipton added to the list of good courts, like Warwick.

Yes, reported earlier this evening here:
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/76834345#Comment_76834345

MiguelCotto

Hi -  my court date is fast approaching (1 week). I've been looking at various threads trying to prepare. I thought I'd seen a particular one about your day in court and what to expect but can't seem to find it now. Is there anywhere that gives some indication of what I should do or say. Do I just verbally reiterate my skeleton argument?  Stay quiet until I'm questioned?
I'm getting a little nervous as I don't feel overly confident talking about the legal parts of my argument and I feel I've created a lot of artefacts and points and I'm assuming I don't just go over all of it again in court. Any help much appreciated.

Also interested if there is any point mentioning to the judge any non legal aspects which may gain sympathy - "We shop at this place regularly, spend a lot of money there, loyal customers, asked owners not to support the fine...." and so on... or if that is just wasted words/time.

Redx

read the latter part of this thread

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6034277/parking-fine-gladstone-solicitors/p6

Coupon-mad

Also interested if there is any point mentioning to the judge any non legal aspects which may gain sympathy - "We shop at this place regularly, spend a lot of money there, loyal customers, asked owners not to support the fine...." and so on... or if that is just wasted words/time.

No that is fine it makes you an honest witness.

The Judge will guide you and will probably let their rep put a summary of their case first (you can make a few notes and if they say anything you want to come back on - do!).  

Then it's usually your turn to summarise your points, and you will pick up from the Judge's face if they are with you or not on each point.  Some Judges even help by handing you the 'baton' as a big clue as to what they think has the most merit in your defence, saying something like:

'So Mr Cotto, I have read your defence and understand you wish to raise the POFA 2012 (or signs...or whatever), am I right that you plan to start with that point?'

Take that as a huge cue.  The answer is ''yes sir'' or yes madam'' and off you go!

Le_Kirk

Coupon-mad said:

I wrote in more detail about costs on 24th January on two threads.  Good luck in making the new forum search work to find them but there was some detail there about what can/can't be claimed.

Was it this one: -
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/76759005#Comment_76759005