LBC received from BW Legal

on.wheels

@Coupon-mad have you received the emails from either @beamerguy or myself? I would love your input on my Crib sheet as you said there was tons to add 

Coupon-mad

Yes but a bit busy this week!

on.wheels

No problem, as you know the hearing is Friday next week so hopefully you’ll have time to add anything you’ve noticed!

Thanks again.

on.wheels

Well, almost there - this time tomorrow I'll be waiting to go in to the hearing, no doubt having declined a chat with their rep!

Le_Kirk

Good luck.

nosferatu1001

Best of luck

beamerguy

Good luck, go ahead and zap them

on.wheels

As @beamerguy and @Coupon-mad already know, I lost. I was actually astonished. The judge didn’t really engage in too much nor did she mention a lot of what I said when it came to her judgement.

The rep introduced herself in the waiting area. She asked if I wanted to discuss anything to which I declined.

I don’t believe the judge introduced herself, and it wasn’t the John I was expecting. She wasn't that old and was not that friendly. She was stern - challenging me and stopping me at times, not at all bothered that I hadn't been to a court before, nor giving me any leeway for this. I really felt like this was my case to go out and win and felt I was against it from the start.

She first stated she had read our WS etc. and also the Sailsbury case and the appeal case but is not bound to it.

She asked the rep to speak to which she summed up their argument and the charge.

She then asked me to which I said I have lots to discuss if I may, madam.

She steered me first to talk about the signage, when I mentioned how bad they all were. I highlighted the entrance signs and the fonts, the wording, positions, the inabuguity, the old images, the company information being missing/incorrect, everything.

We kept coming back to the blue sign with me repeatedly saying how I haven’t breached the terms. This didn’t matter, she was happy the other signs were adequate and that I knowingly entered into a contract. It didn’t matter about the incorrect company information or anything else.

I next tried to discuss abuse of process and she stopped me straight away and said “I am not going to rule against this on abuse of process.” I didn’t really know where to go - I had lots to say but did manage to come back to it later.

She wasn’t happy when I suggested the map doesn’t state which car park it is, forcing me to accept it. I proved the inaccuracy of the map pointing out a sign that isn’t on it.

She accepted that I correctly pointed out that their WS statement was not true with the wording on the ticket but did not like it at all when I suggested it doesn't state which way up it should be.

I feel she didn’t really understand the appeals case as I pointed out more than once the appeal was against the fairness of the abuse of process dismissal without evidence but she had already made her mind up on that I think. There was no convincing her.

I pointed out the differences in the Beavis case which she agreed with but seemingly didn’t care about.

I then asked if I may talk about the contract. I pointed out everything wrong with it - the mention of the BPA on it, the fact they are now a member of the IPC, the client’s signature/address not matching to a company with the right name. She was really not happy when I mentioned that the dates next to the signatures were written by the same person. I pointed out that the contract doesn’t comply with section 44 of the companies act.

I mentioned the ’on behalf of’ wording and focussed on the wording of suing for trespass. Later, the rep came back to this and repeatedly attempted to point out that the contract says they can sue for falling to display a valid parking ticket. I pointed out a few times it says they can issue a PCN for this but does not say they can sue in court for it.

I asked what happened to my money and the Judge said “it’s probably in their account”.

In her judgement she noted that I had prepared a lot for the hearing, almost rolling her eyes a little as she said it.

She failed to mention my pointing out of the inaccuracy of the map and listed the sign positions as fact, counting them aloud for the recording.

She said it was not abuse of process. 

She said the signs were fair and adequate, and it was clear what the consequences are if you look carefully. She did not mention the poor positioning.

She agreed the contract is ok and enforceable.

She said she cannot fathom how I didn’t know which way to put the ticket. Even saying that I strike her as being very intelligent and organised. I don't think I said that I didn't know which way up it should go, only that it isn't stated.

And said I should have checked when leaving the vehicle. At this point I asked if I may interrupt and she allowed me to say that I did check it was up the right way when I left. Didn’t matter. Didn’t sympathise at all.

She made it clear that the issue here is the ticket being upside down. 

She said the car park companies are not responsible for making sticky backs.

She awarded to the Claimant the charge of £100 and the rep said then said they also wanted the interest but the Judge said interest rates are so low she is not going to allow it.

She then said she will also not allow the £60, looking at me almost sympathetically.

I feel that she was just not willing to go against the appeal case, but I don’t think she fully understood it.

I feel that I had no chance and anything I said was not really considered, almost like she had already made her mind up. Or that she accepted it but forgot about it pretty quickly.

I really do feel hard done by, I don't think this is fair or consistent. I think I just got a bad judge.

nosferatu1001

Yep, sounds like a bad judge. A contract that isnt valid should be an instant loss. 

Given they have no authority - you can prove it - yo u might consider a claim aganist them. DPA breach

on.wheels

I'm not sure I have the time/energy to continue this any further. What exactly would I claim against them?