Abuse of Process thread --- PART 2

beamerguy

Google Street View (GSV) Tutorial ...... thanks to Fruitcake

Google Streetview (GSV) can sometimes be a very useful tool when fighting an unfair parking scamvoice. Do not try this on a 'phone. 
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6252019/google-street-view-gsv-tutorial#latest
=============================================
EXCEL v WILKINSON ..... claim struck out for ABUSE OF PROCESS.  DDJ Jackson who is now HHJ Jackson made this ruling.  
https://www.dropbox.com/s/16qovzulab1szem/G4QZ465V Excel v Wilkinson.pdf?dl=0
=============================================
What you need to know if you get a claim after 6 years (England & Wales)
The Limitation Act 1980
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6225115/bwlegal-limitation-act-1980-query/p1
==============================================
DRP (Debt Recovery Plus) ...  The following thread tells you all you want to know
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6227874/debt-recovery-plus-and-euro-car-parks#latest
===============================================
Brighton Dec 2020.  OPS with a little help from DCBL .... LOST AGAIN 
Another Coupon-mad victory ..... THE COURT REPORT
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6223743/court-report-coastway-vets-predatory-ticketing-no-grace-period-ops-lose-at-brighton-court-again#latest
================================================
UPDATE DEC 2020.    EXCEL AND DCBL LOST AGAIN >>> COURT REPORT
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6222982/court-report-excel-vs-mr-c-excel-lose-another-sd-gym-claim-at-skipton-woeful-evidence-bundle/p1
================================================

PLEASE READ:  In view of the BWLegal appeal in Salisbury (search forum), the words "Abuse of Process came into doubt.  Adding fake amounts is still abuse of process but the appeals Judge stated that this needs to be proven and auto strike outs does require PROOF.

Therefore, it is suggested that with all added charges now be called DOUBLE RECOVERY.
Double recovery is the county court's own ruling which a Judge must consider.  Whatever the ruling is, the judge can still say it is Abuse of Process.  We support the courts own ruling of Double recovery
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6185114/a-name-change-abuse-of-process-is-now-double-recovery/p1?new=1
It is important to read through this thread as apart from DOUBLE RECOVERY, you can see what the High Court said about the recovery of the add-on £60 (or higher) ....... PLEASE USE THIS
===================================================
Main ABUSE OF PROCESS thread
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6014081/abuse-of-process-district-judge-tells-bwlegal/p1?new=1
POST # 1 in the above link is long and it appears this new forum limits the amount of text in a post.  This will now continue in this thread ..... PART 2 ABUSE OF PROCESS
==================================================
UPDATE:  CSTLAW taking on old parking tickets with fakery,  READ THIS if you have received a letter from CSTLAW
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6165741/cstlaw-scam-alert/p1?new=1

CST letters' forum group thread

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6166004/cst-letters-forum-group-thread/p1
======================================================
DCBL letters ... forum group thread
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6237177/dcbl-letters-forum-group-thread#latest
=======================================================
EXCEL and DCBL SPANKED IN NUNEATON COUNTY COURT   Deputy District Judge (DDJ) Mitchell
** Defence, additional charges of £60 'Admin Fee' find unreasonable behaviour
** Route of claim suspect no demonstrable loss as result of way vechicle parked.
Concluded unreasonable behaviour primarily failing to attend hearing today.

Read the full story here
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6117334/excel-parking-claim-form-defence-for-review/p1
======================================================
BWLEGAL ... ABUSE OF PROCESS with a TWIST IN Darlington
Darlington County Court - District Judge Read - Case Number F0DP1T3F
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6073442/pcn-escalated-to-court-proceedings-edit-i-won/p1
======================================================
UPDATE:  BWLEGAL / BRITANNIA ... Struck out for Abuse of Process
Northampton Court, Judge Elsey
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6143001/should-i-just-pay-bw-legal-intent-to-proceed-after-defence-submitted/p1
======================================================
UPDATE:   VCS LOST AGAIN ..... STRUCK OUT FOR ABUSE OF PROCESS
DJ Hickinbottom at Bradford County Court-claim ref: VC04587373
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6176818/success-thank-you-to-this-community-for-helping-me-win/p1
=======================================================
UPDATE ..... Gladstones / UKCPM .... Spanked in Bromley, Kent by Deputy District Judge MacKenzie for ABUSE OF PROCESS
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6102778/ukpcm-gladstones-claim-form-received-parking-in-visitors-bay/p1
======================================================
UPDATE:  BWLegal/Premier Parking lose case in Bath. DJ Brown dismissed the case, advising BWLegal to tell their client that any further such cases will be struck out
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6085320/premier-park-ltd-ccbc/p1
=======================================================
UPDATE:   See this thread. BWLegal discontinued their case at Truro County Court.
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6101409/armtrac-kbt-bw-legal-lbc-update-claim-discontinued/p1
The court said that most get discontinued in the court now, or thrown out by judges
=======================================================
BWLegal discontinued their case at Truro County Court ....... another one ?
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6094351/letter-of-claim-from-bw-legal/p1
=======================================================
GLADSTONES / HORIZON . V daniellog Case dismissed for Abuse of Process
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6057026/court-claim-form-horizon-parking/p1
Gladstones did not even pick up the BT Meet call from the court.
And Gladstones was the legal Horizon chose ???? OH DEAR HORIZON ??
York County Court District Judge Mark
=======================================================
HAVE YOU RECEIVED A "CHASE UP LETTER" .... "LETTER BEFORE CLAIM" THAT SHOWS A FAKE UNLAWFUL ADD-ON OF £60  ?????  HAVE YOU RECEIVED A COURT CLAIM ADDING THE FAKE £60 ?
Here is letter you can respond with. If they respond you can show the court and if they ignore you can tell the court showing your letter
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6129744/bwlegal-the-scam/p1?new=1
=======================================================
THE FAKE - FALSE - UNLAWFUL £60
Despite the courts constantly telling the legals acting for parking companies that the add-on of £60 is unlawful, the legals continue in abusing you and the courts.

If you receive any one of these from any legal adding the fake £60 you MUST report them to the SRA
1: A letter from a legal claiming you owe an amount plus £60 add-on
2::A letter before claim adding the fake £60
3: A court claim which includes the fake £60
Send the paperwork to  the SRA  complaining about the unlawful add-on.
PS: Regarding debt collectors like DRP who claim the fake £60 ..... these odd bods just live in the sewers and you can totally ignore their idiotic claims and lies
========================================================

One Parking Solution warned by a Judge that they may face an application for a civil restraint order

One Parking Solutions -- QDR and LPC ...... SPANKED IN BRIGHTON COURT
OPS have been warned that they face a Civil Restraint Order application by the court if they file a case like this again.  Judge Harvey made specific reference to ABUSE OF PROCESS
THE THREAD LEADING UP TO THE CASE
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6010750/one-parking-solution-nltd-zzps-ltd-qdr-solicitors/p1
THE JUDGMENT BY DISTRICT JUDGE HARVEY
https://www.dropbox.com/s/ejv0ytejgnu4f57/One%20Parking%20Solution%20v%20Ms%20W%205%20Feb%202020.pdf?dl=0
========================================================
IMPORTANT INFORMATION IF YOU ARE GOING TO COURT
This information with thanks to henrik777 and Castle
As from the 6th April 2020 there is a change in witness statements for telling the truth. We already know that witness statements from legals representing parking companies are fabrications. Especially the fake £60 add-on. This now means claims for the unlawful £60 could mean the legals will be in contempt of court. It also means that spurious claims on behalf of their client without knowing if the claim is valid will be contempt.

Therefore, you scrutinise their witness statement and alert the court  if you believe it is false

Amendments to the Civil Procedure Rules bring mandatory changes to statements of truth

https://www.dacbeachcroft.com/en/gb/articles/2020/march/amendments-to-the-civil-procedure-rules-bring-mandatory-changes-to-statements-of-truth/
========================================================

Abuse of Process -- supplementary

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6110391/abuse-of-process-supplementary/p1?new=1
=======================================================
BRITANNIA PARKING , CLAIM ISSUED BY BWLEGAL.  LUTON COUNTY COURT
CASE STRUCK OUT FOR ABUSE OF PROCESS   13th March 2020
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6082895/court-claim-received-britannia-bw-legal/p1

============================================================ 
BWLEGAL/BRITANNIA .... Claim nos. F0DP806M and F0DP201T    Crosby and Anor

Britannia Parking v Crosby - Southampton judgment - attach to defences or witness statements

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6107909/britannia-parking-v-crosby-southampton-judgment-attach-to-defences-or-witness-statements/p1?new=1
=============================================================
TRANSFERED FROM THE MAIN "ABUSE OF PROCESS" THREAD
VCS CASE STRUCK OUT FOR ABUSE OF PROCESS

NOTE THE COMMENT BY THE COURT ..... "It is nothing more than a poor attempt to go behind the decision of the Supreme court" 
=============================================================
VCS LOST AGAIN, THIS TIME THEY HAVE TO PAY £510.64 ???   The judge blasted the IPC/IAS for their failure to understand the appeal.  We call it a scam
READ ALL ABOUT IT HERE
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6108209/my-hellish-day-in-court-with-the-threat-of-a-possible-appeal#latest
==============================================================

Excel lose application to set aside SIX struck out parking charge cases where £60 was added

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6108540/excel-lose-application-to-set-aside-six-struck-out-parking-charge-cases-where-60-was-added#latest
===============================================================
VCS (Sister company of Excel) owned by Simon Renshaw-smith, the infamous ex clamper was spanked in court on the 25/02/20 in a residential case. Whilst not the usual abuse posted here, VCS abused the motorist and paid the price, costing them £600 +
Claims E3QZ84VY and E4QZ75VY on 25/02/2020 at SheffieldCC before DDJ Royle
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6110171/another-one-bites-the-dust#latest
================================================================

Win against BW LEGAl/Brit Park

Derby County Court ........... posted by Brown Trout
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6109261/win-against-bw-legal-brit-park#latest
================================================================
PREMIER PARKING / BWLEGAL --- CASE STRUCK OUT --- ABUSE OF PROCESS --- AND A CASE THAT WAS POORLY PUT TOGETHER
Dan_8 in Southampton Court in late February 2020.  Judge Taylor, Case number F5DP9F8P
Judge Taylor struck out the case within 10 mins commenting "the case from them was poorly put together and a was as surprised the case was even allowed to get to court . He was also very dismissive of all of the parking companies the they way they bring bogus claims to court , said it was getting to be a big waste of court time and they may have to do something about it"

READ THE FULL STORY HERE
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/5652862/scs-law-court-threat/p1
===============================================================
BWLEGAL FAIL AGAIN ....... Judge makes them a mockery .... who is this Shapla Begum who signs a statement of truth ?????   Means nothing to the Judge
keypulse wins £414.50 costs against the BWLegal claim
THE FULL STORY ABOUT THE BWLEGAL Massacre can be seen here
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6058392/link-parking-bw-legal-beaten-in-court/p1
===============================================================
GLADSTONES SPANKED AGAIN, THIS TIME BY THE WORTHING COURT ?
Claim number F0GF1K4A and we think it was D.J.Harvey
Gladstones did not bother to turn up again (such a rude bad habit). 
proudsonofduck was awarded £293.02 with the judge quoting Judge Grand's reasons being ABUSE OF PROCESS and adding ....
"Deliberate attempt to mislead the court"
"In contempt of court"
"Cut and paste witness statement with no attempt to address the defence"

READ ABOUT THIS HERE
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6113071/win-vs-uk-cpm-gladstones-today#latest
================================================================
EXCEL with the help of Elms Legal got spanked for 3 failures
Caspar7 was in Nottingham CC today in front of Judge Lam.    IT' WAS A WIN
Again EXCEL added the fake £60 and again Judge Lam said it was unlawful
A 3 POINT FAILURE BY EXCEL and the spanking included the fake £60
READ THE FULL STORY HERE
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/5995545/county-court-claim-form-from-excel-parking-services/p12
================================================================
BWLEGAL SPANKED AGAIN IN BRISTOL COUNTY COURT
Fenners79  won, BWLegal lost
Deputy District Judge Angliss.  Bristol County Court
Whilst the judge had options to dismiss the case, it was said that "he would have dismissed on the basis of 'Abuse of Process'
READ HERE
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6045943/bps-bw-legal-claim-form-invalid-permit#latest
=================================================================
WHY IS IT POINTLESS TO APPEAL TO THE IAS (run by the IPC) ?  Firstly, it is kangaroo court set up by Gladstones Solicitors, and we all know the appalling operation they run.
BUT ... there is a huge conflict of interests AND HIGHLY detrimental to the motorist.

That is Simon Renshaw-smith who owns Excel and VCS AND WHO IS ALSO PART OF ....

International Parking Community Steering Committee

https://theipc.info/people
Unsure however what they think they are steering but rest assured it will mean your appeal will be denied
It's a mini cartel and whatever size of a cartel. THEY ARE ILLEGAL. 

Something for your MP to raise and question the validity of the IPC being an ATA
=================================================================
BWLEGAL SPANKED AGAIN ..... AND, IT'S SOUTHAMPTON AGAIN ....
Deputy District Judge Avis
IT IS ORDERED THAT
1. The claim be struck out as an abuse of process as it contains, and is tainted by an additional charge of £60.00

BWLegal have not yet woken up and smelt the coffee ?????

nobodygotimeforthat
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6028938/bw-legal-premier-park-limited-loc-unauthorised-entry-parking#latest

Umkomaas

@BG - do you think it would help to copy and paste CM's post #14 here then it will be easier to find - 'second post from the top' rather than saying scroll and find the 14th post (on the original thread)?  Just a thought. 

beamerguy

Suggested template defence to adapt for all parking charge cases where they add false admin costs  

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6108153/suggested-template-defence-to-adapt-for-all-parking-charge-cases-where-they-add-false-admin-costs#latest

PROVIDED BY coupon-mad

beamerguy

An interesting tale regarding BWLegal and the OP not_the_messiah
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6034425/bw-legal-loc/p1

The OP wrote to BWLegal and asked about the legal authority they had to add the £60 charge. Their response is as follows:

"As you are aware we act for ‘KBT Cornwall Ltd t/a Amtrac Security’ in relation to a parking contravention that occurred on XXXXXXXX. The parking charge notice (PCN) was issued as you failed to display a valid pay and display ticket, which was a breach of our client’s terms and conditions of parking.
 
As a result of your failure to pay the PCN the claim against you has been issued. The balance of our Client’s claim is broken down as follows:
 
                PCN: £100.00
                Contractual Costs: £60.00
                Fixed Costs: £50.00
                Fee: £25.00
                Interest: £4.30
 
Whilst your reference to other cases is noted, each case has its own merits and the above breakdown can be summarised as follows.
 
PCN
 
The PCN charge is regarded as a charge for contravening the terms and conditions. The sum payable following the issue of the PCN occurs on the happening of a specific event (i.e. a material breach of the terms and conditions) and is therefore a core term of our Client’s contract with you. Our Client relies on the leading authority of ParkingEye Limited v Beavis [2015] UKSC 67, where the Supreme Court held that PCN charges, like this charge, serve a legitimate commercial interest. The relevant car parking Codes of Practice, also give guidance that £100.00 is a reasonable sum to charge. The Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (POFA) also states that the maximum amount that can be recovered for the PCN itself is the amount stated on the initial PCN, in this case being £100.
 
Contractual Costs
 
We refer you to paragraph 4(6) of Schedule 4, POFA which says “Nothing in this paragraph affects any other remedy the creditor may have against the keeper of the vehicle or any other person in respect of any unpaid parking charges (but this is not to be read as permitting double recovery)”. It is our client's position that this does not prevent the parking operator from claiming debt recovery charges/contractual costs.
 
The signage in situ at the car park makes provision for our Client to recover any additional costs (Contractual Costs) incurred by them in relation to the PCN. The Contractual Costs referred to above formed part of the terms and conditions (of the parking contract) which were accepted by you in the course of staying at the Car Park. Save for the fact that the sum of £60.00 attributable towards these costs are entirely reasonable for nature and type of work involved in recovering the parking charge, such costs are recoverable under the International Parking Community (IPC) code of practice.
 
The Contractual Costs provision is an express term to compensate our client for any loss or damage after the relevant period to pay the discounted amount of the PCN has lapsed– one could equate this to be treated in the same vein as a late payment charge. It is essentially a promise to pay money on the happening of specific event in the form of an indemnity vis-à-vis to protect our client from suffering financial loss arising from your conduct, or at the very least where you have control over such an event. Given that our client has had to chase the PCN, the indemnity clause has kicked in. Our client, being the innocent party, has therefore suffered financial loss as a result of your direct failure to perform your contractual obligations.
 
In any event our Client relies on section 67 of the Consumer Rights Act 2015 which confirms that the PCN charge and Contractual Costs are separate elements to this claim and the parking contract continues so far as practicable to have effect in every other respect. Therefore our Client does not accept the outcome of the cases you have provided as precedent for this case.
 
It is our client’s position that you remain liable for the PCN and the entire claim should not be struck out on the basis of Contractual Costs.
 
Fixed Costs and interest
 
Our Client is entitled to add fixed costs under the Civil Procedure Rules (CPR 45) and interest under section 69 of the County Courts Act 1974.
 
Our client is satisfied that you remain liable for the PCN and will be proceeding with the claim against you.

NOTE: This is the interpretation by BWLegal to substaniate the fake £60

The OP then sent BWLegal the following letter :-

Dear Sirs,

Further to your letter dated xxx.   You appear to be in total denial of reality.  The reality is that you have not once explained your legal authority to add £60 ?  You are in denial of POFA2012, you are in denial of the Supreme court ruling 198, you are in denial of the S71(2) of the Consumer Rights Act 2015 and you are in denial of the Court's own ruling regarding double recovery.

You state that your Client does not accept the outcome of the cases you have provided as precedent for this case?
That indeed is to be expected but as you continue to add unlawful amounts to your claim, your client should expect that this will be yet another case that will rest on Abuse of Process. It will not be a court that sets a precedent but your persistence in adding an amount of £60 when you fail entirely to explain your legal authority ?

You make reference to the IPC code of practice as if this was lawful when infact the code invites members only to act in an unlawful manner.  This code is not for a motorist and is not a contract or an excuse for legal authority

Furthermore, I require you to explain how a valid ticket has given rise to a charge and the course of harassment you are currently engaged in.

I of course reserve the right to show this letter and your letter to the court and will require you or your agent to explain your legal authority to a judge.  I will also highlight to the court the numerous cases you bring whereby the courts strike out such cases as Abuse of process for adding unlawful amounts.

The opportunity is still available for you to discontinue and you bear your own own costs as I will bear my own costs.  If you wish to proceed to court, I will expect you to comply with the new CPR rules and in particular your legal authority to add amounts you are not entitled to. As you will expect, I will claim costs against your client.

Your urgent response is required as I have no desire to play ping pong letters with you

Yours faithfully,

Shortly after the OP received a letter from BWLegal who discontinued their claim .......

Thank you for your email.

Since your last contact we have been discussing the matter further with our Client and were waiting to receive a full response from them before replying to your emails. After these discussions it was agreed that this matter should be discontinued and a letter was sent out to you on 1 May 2020 to inform you of this.

Please see the attached copy of our letter and notice of discontinuance in case you did not receive it.

The court have been informed accordingly and no further action will be taken against you.

This is a case of BWLegal attempting to mislead a novice for financial gain. Once they realise they are not dealing with a novice and the facts are presented to them which will result in a failed claim, they gently back off with whatever excuse they deem fit, as you can see above ???

beamerguy

"Reserved for future growth"
As we expect that in 2020, post #1 above will fill up, this will continue in this post

beamerguy

Umkomaas said:

@BG - do you think it would help to copy and paste CM's post #14 here then it will be easier to find - 'second post from the top' rather than saying scroll and find the 14th post (on the original thread)?  Just a thought. 

OK, agreed see above because the text is too long for this forum. Waiting on advice from coupon-mad to see if it can be condensed. Thanks, 

The other 2 posts marked "Reserved for future growth" was suggested by KeithP so we really do have room for growth

beamerguy

Due to the changes of this forum, the defence for ABUSE OF PROCESS by coupon-mad, can now be quickly found in the first post of this thread