Should I just pay? (BW Legal - Intent to Proceed after defence submitted)

beamerguy

Alfie_79 said:

Ok, so that was brief and confusing. The claimant's rep just reiterated the appeal against the case being struck out and the court agreed to allow it to be set aside for a hearing at some point in the future. Not sure what to make of it all. I guess we'll wait for the next bundle of documents to come through. Didn't get to make any arguments really, just had to confirm I understood what the outcome was. Call lasted about 8 minutes including introductions etc.

The appeal was not against you, it was a complaint against the judge in your first case.
I doubt the courts and judges approve these complaints and that is why Judge's are now dismissing cases and it's mostly on signs..  Telling the Judge about the fake add-ons is like a key to open the door.

You already have told BWL that the sign in their WS had been doctored and requested proof who the real Britannia is according to entity.   They know ?

Whilst this is a pain, the way things are going with covid this may well take you into Spring next year.
But, you need a voice in front of the judge and next time, with a doctored picture to show and your email to BWL, it should be a short quick case with the case being dismissed in your favour.

Alfie_79

Afternoon all,

So the latest is this, my court date is May the 4th (I know) but I am not able to make it. I've been booked on a job that has me working as part of an isolation bubble in Cornwall for 2 weeks from this Wednesday. This means I need to write in by tomorrow/Tuesday at the latest.

With that in mind, does anyone have any advice as to the contents of said letter. I'm going to reiterate the fact that I did not knowingly ignore any signage and that, as a customer of the pub, I would have had my parking refunded after spending money in the establishment anyway. I will remind them that there was no realistic opportunity to appeal and that there is no real justification to BL pursuing me for over 2 years to extort over £200. 

Any help or ideas for things to add would be greatly appreciated.

Coupon-mad

Are you saying you haven't done your WS and evidence which had to be in not later than 14 days before the 4th May?

WS & evidence stage in the NEWBIES thread is standard. For a recent example to quickly copy and adapt the style of, see the thread by @jrhys.

You will have to do it today and email it to the LOCAL court (not CCBC) and copying in BW Legal, in the morning, and surely you can attend a phone call for an hour, which is what hearings are these days?

Please no reply asking if it's too late and should you give up. I didn't say that...  I said do it today...people do it late.

Have you received theirs (i.e. they complied with the hearing letter deadlines and you didn't)?

Redx

It's Britannia Parking , not BL or anyone else !!

Britannia have an identity crisis , with different names and numbers , so bear that in mind

Surely your WS was submitted Kate last year ?

What are the court asking for ? With current deadlines ? Emails ? Evidence ? Statements ?

Is it a phone hearing ? Because they definitely have phones in Cornwall !!


We would hav expected you to have everything submitted by now

Alfie_79

This isn't the original hearing, this is after an appeal. All WS and evidence was submitted last year for the original hearing that was struck out.

And no, I will be filming a very secretive TV show and my phone will be taken from me and locked away until we wrap filming that day.

Coupon-mad

Ah, sorry -  thank goodness - OK, the claim was struck out after both sides had submitted their evidence in 2020.  Then appeal allowed it to be reinstated.

So, I would send a supplementary WS now, stating that:

- you are unable to attend the hearing, not even by phone, because you will be filming a very secretive TV show and all phones will be taken and locked away until we wrap filming that day.  As such, you ask the court to note your non-attendance and attach a copy of the defence, and WS and evidence first submitted last year by you and you ask for a decision based upon those papers, and for the court to note in addition:

- cases are still being struck out in Bradford/Leeds area, following the Excel v Wilkinson case heard by DJ Jackson who then became HHJ Jackson weeks later (transcript attached to assist the court as to the reasons why, even if a court is not minded to strike an entire parking charge claim out, the added £60 is a double recovery attempt and unrecoverable)

- ParkingEye v Somerfield is also appended (High Court stage, later ratified by the CoA) because from paras 419 to 428, HHJ Hegarty fully dealt with the matter of false added costs by a parking firm and that is why ParkingEye no longer add such costs (and why the Beavis case didn't have to consider them).  So, the Somerfield case is the only finding from a higher court that deals with the matter, albeit in an obiter comment but very relevant to what is happening with non-ParkingEye claims across the UK.


https://www.dropbox.com/s/16qovzulab1szem/G4QZ465V Excel v Wilkinson.pdf?dl=0


https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/QB/2011/4023.html

Don't give the court links, give them actual transcripts attached.  


Finish by either attaching a list of your costs, or stating that you don't intend to seek costs as you are relying upon the court to conduct the hearing in your absence based upon your submissions and statements from 2020 to date.  Copy in BW Legal as well.

By the way, in their WS from 2020, was there a landowner authority and was it in EXACTLY the right company name of Britannia that EXACTLY matches the Claimant company word for word?

Alfie_79

Thanks, this is exactly why I come to this forum.

I will include your suggestions in my letter and take your advice. I will also download the WS, transcripts, evidence etc and add them as supporting documents. I will be submitting everything via email tomorrow but will also print off hard copies and hand deliver them to Northampton Court if possible. My understanding is that the signage did not match the name they were displaying on the claim and they submitted a cropped picture as evidence. Beamerguy has helped me articulate that in my original WS.

I was looking forward to my day in court but the opportunity I'm facing is far more important.

Jenni_D

Is Northampton Court the court that has been assigned for hearing the appeal? (Just asking as Northampton is the usual admin centre for MCOL claims and that part is not a proper court).

KeithP

Jenni_D said:

Is Northampton Court the court that has been assigned for hearing the appeal?

Yes it is. See here - 5 August 2020 at 1:31PM

Coupon-mad

Don't forget to include your defence - include everything submitted by you so far - because the Judge might be working from home and we find they sometimes don't have access to the full case file, so assume not.  

Maybe reiterate in your supplementary WS at the end (one sentence) that your evidence in 2020 included the fact that the Claimant company on the signs is not the same Ltd company and legal entity as the company shown on the signs and/or PCN, and that the Claimant provided cropped images, apparently to hide the fact.  And that you wish to draw the court's attention to that conduct and question the Claimant or their rep, about that.

I wouldn't go to the expense of any printing.  Things changed due to the pandemic and electronic submission is the norm, now.

I would ring the court to check the right email address to send your electronic bundle for the hearing because you are concerned about it not being received and are relying upon your papers only, given you cannot attend the hearing even by phone.