Sunday Times Article - One Parking Solution

AnotherForumite

Not DDJ Harvey’s first error of judgement:
https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.express.co.uk/news/uk/484001/VIDEO-Judge-unrepentant-for-driving-children-on-car-roof-for-fun/amp

Umkomaas

AnotherForumite said:

Not DDJ Harvey’s first error of judgement:
https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.express.co.uk/news/uk/484001/VIDEO-Judge-unrepentant-for-driving-children-on-car-roof-for-fun/amp

Seen on this forum long ago. Many portions of fish and chips have been wrapped in that in the past 7 years!

beamerguy

AnotherForumite said:

D_P_Dance said:

Can someone save me the trouble and show me where the word "bias" occurs.  

Paras 97 - 101

'101. With great regret, I must find that the ground of appeal that there was apparent bias in this case is made good. Whether taken together, or individually, all the above points would justify a finding of apparent bias. Furthermore, the DDJ went out of his way in his judgment to praise the Defendant because she was “an English literature expert with aspirations for Shakespeare’s Globe Theatre” and made subsequent references to Shakespeare, in juxtaposition with his complaints about the way in which managers of parking sites take up a disproportionate amount of court time. Neither of these matters were of any relevance to this individual case. If low value cases are taking up a disproportionate amount of time then this is for the courts to manage not for a litigant to be castigated for in an individual case. The overall impression a fair minded and informed observer would get from the judgment would be that the DDJ had set about doing something about the number of claims brought by this Claimant. The orders inviting the various non-party entities to report to the court suggest this.'

Your gloating is going to be very short lived just as the BWLegal case in the Salisbury appeal.
What you parking guys fail to understand is who you are dealing with ?   The Judiciary is a far higher being than low life parking companies.  Complain about one judge and you complain about all judges and that is a tragic situation for all parking companies.

I'm sure BWL thought they had a magic key which they gloated on, just like you, but what has happened since which we now see all the time, judges are simply digging a bit deeper and dismissing cases.  Parking companies and their claims are normally flawed so it is easy for a judge to exploit this.  Just like the BWL appeal, this appeal will assist judges in their decision. In a nutshell more and more of these cases will be dismissed ..

For those who do not understand about Judge Mark Harvey, I have had conversations with him and rest assured he is a good judge with a good knowledge of the parking industry and he will go on to make the right decisions  ..... and that is not good news for the parking industry

What is sad is the appeals judge who seems to support scammers

Enjoy your moment of gloating, it really will not last for very long

D_P_Dance

Apparent bias,  so not necessarily true, thank you ANF, I thought so.  

AnotherForumite

beamerguy said:

AnotherForumite said:

D_P_Dance said:

Can someone save me the trouble and show me where the word "bias" occurs.  

Paras 97 - 101

'101. With great regret, I must find that the ground of appeal that there was apparent bias in this case is made good. Whether taken together, or individually, all the above points would justify a finding of apparent bias. Furthermore, the DDJ went out of his way in his judgment to praise the Defendant because she was “an English literature expert with aspirations for Shakespeare’s Globe Theatre” and made subsequent references to Shakespeare, in juxtaposition with his complaints about the way in which managers of parking sites take up a disproportionate amount of court time. Neither of these matters were of any relevance to this individual case. If low value cases are taking up a disproportionate amount of time then this is for the courts to manage not for a litigant to be castigated for in an individual case. The overall impression a fair minded and informed observer would get from the judgment would be that the DDJ had set about doing something about the number of claims brought by this Claimant. The orders inviting the various non-party entities to report to the court suggest this.'

Your gloating is going to be very short lived just as the BWLegal case in the Salisbury appeal.
What you parking guys fail to understand is who you are dealing with ?   The Judiciary is a far higher being than low life parking companies.  Complain about one judge and you complain about all judges and that is a tragic situation for all parking companies.

I'm sure BWL thought they had a magic key which they gloated on, just like you, but what has happened since which we now see all the time, judges are simply digging a bit deeper and dismissing cases.  Parking companies and their claims are normally flawed so it is easy for a judge to exploit this.  Just like the BWL appeal, this appeal will assist judges in their decision. In a nutshell more and more of these cases will be dismissed ..

For those who do not understand about Judge Mark Harvey, I have had conversations with him and rest assured he is a good judge with a good knowledge of the parking industry and he will go on to make the right decisions  ..... and that is not good news for the parking industry

What is sad is the appeals judge who seems to support scammers

Enjoy your moment of gloating, it really will not last for very long

Not gloating, thats not my style; just reporting the facts so that users are not mislead by outdated information.

BTW DDJ Harvey has retired.

JB111

Paragraph 101 of the Judgment of HHJ Simpkiss (dated the 1 February 2021) makes a finding that DDJ Harvey was bias. Furthermore, permission has also been granted on another case DDJ Harvey has adjudicated upon surrounding biasness. This has nothing to do with being a case that 'benefits' but more so a simple update. It has no bearing on future cases as this Judge has now retired.

beamerguy

AnotherForumite said:

beamerguy said:

AnotherForumite said:

D_P_Dance said:

Can someone save me the trouble and show me where the word "bias" occurs.  

Paras 97 - 101

'101. With great regret, I must find that the ground of appeal that there was apparent bias in this case is made good. Whether taken together, or individually, all the above points would justify a finding of apparent bias. Furthermore, the DDJ went out of his way in his judgment to praise the Defendant because she was “an English literature expert with aspirations for Shakespeare’s Globe Theatre” and made subsequent references to Shakespeare, in juxtaposition with his complaints about the way in which managers of parking sites take up a disproportionate amount of court time. Neither of these matters were of any relevance to this individual case. If low value cases are taking up a disproportionate amount of time then this is for the courts to manage not for a litigant to be castigated for in an individual case. The overall impression a fair minded and informed observer would get from the judgment would be that the DDJ had set about doing something about the number of claims brought by this Claimant. The orders inviting the various non-party entities to report to the court suggest this.'

Your gloating is going to be very short lived just as the BWLegal case in the Salisbury appeal.
What you parking guys fail to understand is who you are dealing with ?   The Judiciary is a far higher being than low life parking companies.  Complain about one judge and you complain about all judges and that is a tragic situation for all parking companies.

I'm sure BWL thought they had a magic key which they gloated on, just like you, but what has happened since which we now see all the time, judges are simply digging a bit deeper and dismissing cases.  Parking companies and their claims are normally flawed so it is easy for a judge to exploit this.  Just like the BWL appeal, this appeal will assist judges in their decision. In a nutshell more and more of these cases will be dismissed ..

For those who do not understand about Judge Mark Harvey, I have had conversations with him and rest assured he is a good judge with a good knowledge of the parking industry and he will go on to make the right decisions  ..... and that is not good news for the parking industry

What is sad is the appeals judge who seems to support scammers

Enjoy your moment of gloating, it really will not last for very long

Not gloating, thats not my style; just reporting the facts so that users are not mislead by outdated information.

Guess you must dream on ..... a problem of parking companies

D_P_Dance

Unless PPCs are getting massive financial support from the government they must surely be bleeding to death.  

henrik777

Post up the whole thing.

beamerguy

D_P_Dance said:

Unless PPCs are getting massive financial support from the government they must surely be bleeding to death.  

Of course they are, they are small fry to the big companies going to the wall

But hey, what we are seeing here is the expected propaganda that losers always use.

And on the subject of BIAS ....... Propaganda means ......
information, especially of a biased or misleading nature, used to promote a cause or point of view.

Who would have thought that a virus that is invisible to the naked eye could cause such devastation to those who practice devastation on others