Sunday Times Article - One Parking Solution

D_P_Dance

 it has cost OPS a lot of money

What about the judge, does he get away scot free?  Can the PPC go  after him for libel/defamation?

bargepole

Can the PPC go  after him for libel/defamation?

No, anything said in the course of court proceedings is covered by legal privilege, in the same way that MPs can't be sued over things said in Parliament.

bargepole

Although this was something of an unusual case, with the first Judgment being expressed in far more forthright and far-reaching terms than is usual, it does illustrate the perils of taking a case to appeal.

Often, when a poster on here loses their case and believes the DJ got it wrong, there is a chorus of 'Appeal!' from many of regulars.

Once you go down that route, you are in the big boys' court, in front of a Circuit Judge with no automatic right of audience for a lay rep (HHJ Simpkiss exceptionally granted me ROA at the costs hearing). Although the case remains on the small claims track, there can be further costs implications, and the sums involved may not be trivial.

D_P_Dance

Often, when a poster on here loses their case and believes the DJ got it wrong, there is a chorus of 'Appeal!' from many of regulars.

If you do not speculate, you do not accumulate.  

Snakes_Belly

D_P_Dance said:

Often, when a poster on here loses their case and believes the DJ got it wrong, there is a chorus of 'Appeal!' from many of regulars.

If you do not speculate, you do not accumulate.  

I think that the view from the regulars regarding appeals is measured on this forum.  

Fruitcake

AnotherForumite said:

As requested: https://www.mediafire.com/file/e9l8862x0q9dc58/One_Parking_v_Wilshaw.pdf/file

I understand that this was handled by the most prolific members of this forum, and the motorist now has a bill for over £3k to pay due to being pushed to defend.

I guarantee that the motorist now wished they had just paid £60 instead of listening to the anti-parking enforcement enthusiasts.

I take issue with your comment.  Like many others on here I have told posters straight that fly parking, bilking, and misuse of disabled bays is unacceptable in my opinion.
I do not consider myself to be anti-parking enforcement. I am however, anti-unfair parking enforcement.

I first came here because two of my colleagues at work had received unfair parking charges. Thanks to this forum I got both charges cancelled. One of them was for a hire car where the motorist had already handed the car back to the hire company yet still got a charge.
In the other case, the landowner had the charge cancelled stating it was unfair and the motorist should never have received it in the first place.
I have continued to come here to help others who have received unfair parking charges, and irrespective of this appeal court case, I will continue to do so.

D_P_Dance

I too take issue with this phrase.  I have no problem with the prosecution of bilkers, residential cuckoos, and chancers who park in disabled bays, but I will fight to my last breathe to defend own spacers, double dippers, badgeless disabled persons, and those with genuine mitigation.

My wife has been ticketed three times recently in Asda for overstaying,  (all cancelled) .  She has difficulty making decisions and can easily take over two hours to do her shopping.  

The industry is rotten to the core, we are the good guys here. 

Snakes_Belly

I take issue with the comments made by AnotherForumite. There has been a lot of success on this board. People who have no legal experience have with the help of the regulars attended court for the first time and come up against legally trained people and won. That is something to be very proud of.

Occasionally it goes wrong however it has always been made clear that going to court is a lottery.

The judge had the measure of the PPC's and did not hide the fact.  Being a deeply religious man he would be diametrically the opposite to the likes of the directors of the PPC's for whom mammon is their god. They are the embodiment of greed.

The PPC's may have won a minor battle but they have certainly not won the war. 

Johnersh

@bargepole thanks for that. @AnotherForumite see how easy that was to add context? 

Agree both sides are out of pocket. A large chunk of the bill will have been the brief fee and Counsel obviously doesn't have to agree to suck up the reduction, which is then left with the Claimant to pay. That's cheap compared with the cost of fraud allegations. In essence the ppc had to appeal. 

Notably a significant upgrade in their quality of representation for their endeavours at appellate level. Hardwicke are a decent set. 

Looks like the schedule was sensibly trimmed. But bottom line, this is litigation, there are never guarantees. It's why when very significant costs are at stake the parties insure the costs risk. 

Redx

Add my pseudonym to the above list , I came here for similar reasons where family and friends were being SC*mmed by various Parking companies , proven by initial appeals , or by Popla , or by landowner cancellations. None of the ones I was involved with made a penny for these parking companies because the appellant was proved to be without fault.

I too have warned a few newbies here they are fighting lost causes , especially if a parking company has complied with POFA and or had a valid case against either the motorist or the keeper and complied with both the laws and the relevant CoP , usually parking eye cases

In this case the encouragement to appeal must have come from Parking companies to OPS 

It's time that parking companies put their own houses in order and realise they need to be beyond reproach and concentrate on the core business , parking , not litigation. Most of these companies and their contractor's haven't a clue about litigation surrounding parking , proven by their ridiculous and inflated claims , one typical exception being Parking Eye who may have complied with POFA , the CRA and are claiming £100 for the PCN plus legal fees and costs , typically £175 , so no abuse of process or double recovery.

I doubt that was the court claim total against Ms W !!!