Excel Parking Claim Form - Defence for Review

Le_Kirk

Good luck for tomorrow.

Fiortdunlop2020

Good Morning (Headline deferred to consolidate cases)
So I arrived at Nuneaton County Court all covid controls in place and rather quiet. Gentleman stepped into waiting room and asked if I was defendant, i replied yes and he said he only received papers last night (believe he was a Solicitors agent). Highlighted I had strong case and assumed I wouldn't want to settle. I said I didn't want to discuss until in court room.

In Court Room Deputy District Judge Fowler opened by talking about covid and then referenced the time allocated  to hearing (1.5 hr) limited in light of number of documents Claimants Witness Statement 15 pages with exhibits upto page 66). My Witness Statement (6 pages with 15 exhibits over 23 pages). My Defence 6 pages. I believe he inferred he had limited time to review all documentation.

He then raised point about consolidation of two claims and that I had duly followed court instruction to consolidate. He asked if I wished to still consolidation, I replied yes. He questioned where 2nd claim was in process, I said allocated to Warwick and he asked if  I had DQ. Then he asked the Claimants representative who was rather unaware and he said yes.

Deputy District Judge Fowler  then ordered:
"Upon a hearing Mr Snappleton Solicitor Agent for the Claimant and the Defendant in person and upon Court considering that this is insufficient time given the nature and volume of the pleadings and statement and upon noting that the defendant has requested further to the Courts letter 21st July regarding consolidation with Case Ref (2nd Claim). It is ordered this claim be consolidated with Case Ref (2nd Claim) to parties and issues being discussed the same in each case to both claims listed for trial on the first open date after 28 days . Court notes that 3 hours be set for the consolidated trial".

After which the Judge mentioned its about principle.

to be honest the Claimants representative was rather unaware of case and took back by order and stated it had wasted my time.

So I basically need to await for the next instructions on 2nd Claim which was allocated to Warwick some assume it would be witness Statement resubmitted.

I assume as DCB appointed for 2nd Claim they will now intervene?

Regards

Umkomaas

Don't forget to add today's costs to the Summary Cost Assessment for the consolidated trial. 

Castle

Fiortdunlop2020 said:

After which the Judge mentioned its about principle.

to be honest the Claimants representative was rather unaware of case and took back by order and stated it had wasted my time.

So I basically need to await for the next instructions on 2nd Claim which was allocated to Warwick some assume it would be witness Statement resubmitted.

I assume as DCB appointed for 2nd Claim they will now intervene?

Regards

Wasted his time or your time?

I presume you mean, the rep was "taken aback" by the Judge's order?

Fiortdunlop2020

Hi Castle

he said my time (as the defendant)  

Yes I sensed he wasn't familiar with case and had just landed with him and as case in Court was first case (he hadn't been briefed on second case, also that is with DCB).

To be honest, I question could we not have proceeded as the points same in both cases but that was the Order from the Judge.

Snakes_Belly

None of these reps for Excel and VCS seem familiar with the cases and at £125.00 per hour plus VAT they ought to be. I think that they must receive these documents at the last minute.  

Fiortdunlop2020

@Snakes_Belly that was definitely the case from what I understood. Would this be different from DCB would you think? They have been prompt with responding and sending DQ to date. 

Umkomaas

Fiortdunlop2020 said:

@Snakes_Belly that was definitely the case from what I understood. Would this be different from DCB would you think? They have been prompt with responding and sending DQ to date. 

DCB are relatively new kids on the block and we've seen very few of their cases hit the courts. But the last minute appointment of briefs and the even later passing over of documentation is pretty rife across the piece. I guess it's possibly to keep down costs, because if the documentation was issued a few days in advance, there may be preparation costs for case familiarisation racking up too. 

beamerguy

What DCBL are doing, is a cheap version of BWLegal, a copycat version.
DCBL RELY ON SCARING PEOPLE because of that stupid TV programme "Can't pay"

The problem DCBL has IS ADDING FAKE AMOUNTS and using "rent by the hour" legals
They will follow BWLegal and Gladstones DOWN that well trodden track

D_P_Dance

Many years ago I fought a claim for damages in a RTA.  both sides were represented by very junior barristers, both of whom were utterly useless.  I took over from mine and won.