DCBL appeal against order for case to be struck out

Redx

So despite the b w legal ruling https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6174939/abuse-of-process-bw-legal-win-appeal-against-strike-out#latest , dcbl lose out along similar issues , or the b w legal ruling was not involved or considered

Umkomaas

I wonder if they will appeal?  Some choppy waters potentially ahead (general observation, not aimed specifically at this case). 

Well done OP. Nice result. 👏

Castle

Umkomaas said:

I wonder if they will appeal?  Some choppy waters potentially ahead (general observation, not aimed specifically at this case). 

Well done OP. Nice result. 👏

In theory every case/claim is different and the Judge's decision may have been their own.

beamerguy

Umkomaas said:

I wonder if they will appeal?  Some choppy waters potentially ahead (general observation, not aimed specifically at this case). 

Well done OP. Nice result. 👏

I agree, the choppy waters being for the legals.  Just because one circuit judge in a particular area found in favour of BWLegal, it does not follow the same will happen in another area

beamerguy

jav12 said:

Hi all just thought I’d give an update - I received a letter from the court on Friday stating that the claim has been struck out due to abuse of process .. didn’t even go to a hearing! One down one to go! Just waiting for the set aside application to be dealt with for the other claim mentioned in my other thread! Thank you for your help in assisting me with these 

So, this was DCBL ?

Which court please
Name of the Judge
Case number

Umkomaas

beamerguy said:

Umkomaas said:

I wonder if they will appeal?  Some choppy waters potentially ahead (general observation, not aimed specifically at this case). 

Well done OP. Nice result. 👏

I agree, the choppy waters being for the legals.  Just because one circuit judge in a particular area found in favour of BWLegal, it does not follow the same will happen in another area

It's not going to stop PPCs throwing this about like confetti at every opportunity, just as they do with Beavis, anything and everything from no stopping to no entry cases, when most of the time they have no idea of its (ir)relevance!

We will need strategies for dealing with its emergence. 

beamerguy

Umkomaas said:

beamerguy said:

Umkomaas said:

I wonder if they will appeal?  Some choppy waters potentially ahead (general observation, not aimed specifically at this case). 

Well done OP. Nice result. 👏

I agree, the choppy waters being for the legals.  Just because one circuit judge in a particular area found in favour of BWLegal, it does not follow the same will happen in another area

It's not going to stop PPCs throwing this about like confetti at every opportunity, just as they do with Beavis, anything and everything from no stopping to no entry cases, when most of the time they have no idea of its (ir)relevance!

We will need strategies for dealing with its emergence. 

Are the PPC's that intelligent, it seems not ..... they are led by the legals 

Umkomaas

Alliance Parking was very quick to send the BWL statement to a poster just a couple of days ago, within hours of publication. 

Rather than the usual 'Beavis innit', it will be 'Semark-Jullien innit' (well  those who don't think that that's some sort of disease!) 😃

Coupon-mad

Please let us know:
Which court 
Name of the Judge
Claim number

and keep everything in case they appeal - read the linked thread.

nosferatu1001

Also, if yo ustill didnt get your SAR info, complaint to ICO, and consider suing them
Once paring firms realise that failing to respond to a sAR will cost them, they might treat them with more care...