Advice re blue badge owner

Jenni_D

The claimant's WS will (likely) have stock photos of the signs rather than the actual signs that were there. Even if they are the actual signs, the photos will have been taken with optimal lighting. If your argument is that the signs were unlit, it was dark, thus the signs could not be seen and thus could not engage a contract - make sure your evidence proves this.

Just think it through.

Umkomaas

I don't think Google Street View will be convincing on its own. You might use it to prove lack of lighting (but does GSV even have nighttime images?) at an earlier date, backed with your own contemporary, timestamped photos to show nothing has changed. 

[Deleted User]

I'm reading through BW Legal's response to my counterclaim and they state "the defendant is required to provide a factual basis why he overstayed" as well as another point stating the blue badge photograph didn't identify features, eg the defendants name.

I feel this reply is not adequate to my counterclaim.

I'm not sure if this is the relevant bit of law, but is the below relevant and can I use it in my WS? 

"(5) Subject to paragraphs (3) and (4), a defendant who fails to deal with an allegation shall be taken to admit that allegation."

https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part16

Coupon-mad

If you can (do you have time?) get new photos in the dark.  Much better evidence.  No close-ups of signs!

Re the case law, don't include:

1. ParkingEye Ltd v Beavis [2015] UKSC 67 

3. Britannia v Crosby

Beavis is Supreme Court level so as good as statute law to a Judge!  And no, you don't need statute law as exhibits, quite correct.  

Don't use the Crosby case.  It is out of date. 

The more recent WS by @ricky_balboa shows what to use re the added costs - the DLUHC's words and the Excel v Wilkinson case.

Your plan to set out separately, your case for the counterclaim is exactly what I was getting at and that's what Eminowa did.  It will be much clearer to the Judge how the law allows a counterclaim of this type, for damages for distress.  This is hard to get a Judge to understand.  Mist counterclaims are all too easily dismissed so you do have to throw the kitchen sink at your case law and rationale for compensation for distress.

Here is a typical one that wasn't based on forum advice and was refused.  This is how NOT to do it:

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6281331/dcblegal-and-vehicle-control-services-limited#latest

That person first received several letters from DCBL, which he ignored. He then got a claim from VCS for a residential car park in Bradford. He was in Cheshire on that date. He requested the PCN from VCS, which was for a black Audi, reg yyy yyyy. HIs car is a green Skoda, reg xxx xxxx. He emailed the managing agent of the car park who got the PCN cancelled. He submitted a defence and counterclaim without waiting for advice from the MSE forum. VCS submitted their defence to counterclaim. He submitted his WS. VCS discontinued, and the judge struck out his counterclaim because there was no legal basis upon which it could succeed. 

As @bargepole said at the time (and this is what you've done - correctly so far - and must continue in the right style in your WS and exhibits):

Pleading a counterclaim for ‘false accusation, mental anguish and worry suffered’ is never going to fly.

 He needed to plead it as damages under DPA 2018, and / or PHA 1997.

Coupon-mad

By contrast, exact same circumstances as the one that failed, saw a counterclaim win in VCS v Ferguson, because the OP was assisted by a BMPA colleague of mine and got £1500 in damages for distress. 

You need to cite VCS v Ferguson, Claim No. G2QZ60G1, 14/5/21 (Portsmouth County Court).   

Case was concluded (not a live case) and Mr Ferguson is OK for the BMPA to share:

https://www.dropbox.com/s/ltwe2b25i613iik/1329396-Vehicle Control Services Ltd v Ferguson-Whole Hearing-14.05.2021.pdf?dl=0

https://www.dropbox.com/s/egibrr5hflye6l0/1329396-Vehicle Control Services Ltd v Ferguson-Approved Judgment-14.05.2021.pdf?dl=0

As an exhibit, use the transcript and the whole hearing if you like (although the hearing was a muddle!).  The judgment is better - second link.

[Deleted User]

Coupon-mad said:

If you can (do you have time?) get new photos in the dark.  Much better evidence.  No close-ups of signs!

Re the case law, don't include:

1. ParkingEye Ltd v Beavis [2015] UKSC 67 

3. Britannia v Crosby

Beavis is Supreme Court level so as good as statute law to a Judge!  And no, you don't need statute law as exhibits, quite correct.  

Don't use the Crosby case.  It is out of date. 

The more recent WS by @ricky_balboa shows what to use re the added costs - the DLUHC's words and the Excel v Wilkinson case.

Your plan to set out separately, your case for the counterclaim is exactly what I was getting at and that's what Eminowa did.  It will be much clearer to the Judge how the law allows a counterclaim of this type, for damages for distress.  This is hard to get a Judge to understand.  Mist counterclaims are all too easily dismissed so you do have to throw the kitchen sink at your case law and rationale for compensation for distress.

Here is a typical one that wasn't based on forum advice and was refused.  This is how NOT to do it:

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6281331/dcblegal-and-vehicle-control-services-limited#latest

That person first received several letters from DCBL, which he ignored. He then got a claim from VCS for a residential car park in Bradford. He was in Cheshire on that date. He requested the PCN from VCS, which was for a black Audi, reg yyy yyyy. HIs car is a green Skoda, reg xxx xxxx. He emailed the managing agent of the car park who got the PCN cancelled. He submitted a defence and counterclaim without waiting for advice from the MSE forum. VCS submitted their defence to counterclaim. He submitted his WS. VCS discontinued, and the judge struck out his counterclaim because there was no legal basis upon which it could succeed. 

As @bargepole said at the time (and this is what you've done - correctly so far - and must continue in the right style in your WS and exhibits):

Pleading a counterclaim for ‘false accusation, mental anguish and worry suffered’ is never going to fly.

 He needed to plead it as damages under DPA 2018, and / or PHA 1997.

This really is amazing stuff. Thanks so much @coupon-mad

[Deleted User]

Hi all. Regarding the below two cases, is there any way to get free copies of the judgments?

I have looked at casemine and bailii, the first gives a free trial but that still doesn't let me download the judgments, i'm waiting to hear about my free trial for bailii but not holding my breath. Subscriptions are incredibly expensive.

The cases are:

Spurling v Bradshaw [1956] 1 WLR 461

Thornton v Shoe Lane Parking Ltd [1970] EWCA Civ 2

Thanks.

Umkomaas

Both easily available - Google, then go to the shown bailii.org link. 

[Deleted User]

Umkomaas said:

Both easily available - Google, then go to the shown bailii.org link. 

I have, thank you. 

I have managed to collect all other cases apart from these two, as instead of an RTF link to download for free with the other cases, there is instead a link to purchase the judgment:

https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/1970/2.html

https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/1956/3.html

Do you know of other places to download? I've found casemine, but again it requires a purchase.

Thanks.

Umkomaas

HotelUniform74 said:

Umkomaas said:

Both easily available - Google, then go to the shown bailii.org link. 

I have, thank you. 

I have managed to collect all other cases apart from these two, as instead of an RTF link to download for free with the other cases, there is instead a link to purchase the judgment:

https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/1970/2.html

https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/1956/3.html

Do you know of other places to download? I've found casemine, but again it requires a purchase.

Thanks.

When I click on those links, I get the full judgment for both cases.  I'm baffled. Is it anything to do with your browser?  Try another browser, maybe?