2x Separate Court Claims from Excel

George_W12

Le_Kirk said:

Don't forget to pay! 

Don’t worry, I’m not an idiot! :-)

The CRA piece was not just about the £60, it was around paragraph 10 and the fact that the contract was impossible to adhere to and become acquainted with within the 5mins allowed. I guess not directly relevant in my case.

I’m disappointed the judge didn’t view the conduct of the claimant as a whole as unreasonable. They were unprepared (presumably not the solicitors fault) but she accused me of not providing a witness statement and accused me of not paying, both of which I firmly disproved and highlighted the inaccuracies and inconsistencies of their WS.
They also accepted that they shouldn’t try to refer to the other claim and that they knew the £60 was unrecoverable.

I would have thought all that amounted to a pretty tainted case and in the context of many people being coerced into paying inflated unenforceable charges I hoped that the bigger picture would be considered. Sadly not.

George_W12

Coupon-mad said:

Doesn't sound too awful - given there were 2 claims in play - and you certainly cost Excel a LOT more than this.

But didn't the Judge think Excel were responsible for providing a webpage payment system that worked well and quickly?

I had trouble initially as I kept getting an error from the website - a blank screen after the payment screen. I wasn’t sure if it had through but when I checked with my bank there was no record of the authorisation, so tried again and the payment was successful. I presume the ticket was issued in the intervening time. This issue re-occurred a few times over that period hence two tickets. 

Their payment system failed you.  Seems odd that you were then liable due to not managing to pay quickly one day, due to their glitch.  Or was the webpage not Excel's agent?

Yes not too bad, and thanks for all your help.
In hindsight I should have steered back on to this point rather than focussing on the payment made and the signage etc, that said it was more tenuous in the second case (which was the one being heard) because of the time between the ticket being issued and the payment (which was many hours).

Le_Kirk

George_W12 said:

Le_Kirk said:

Don't forget to pay! 

Don’t worry, I’m not an idiot! :-)

No slur intended.  You would be surprised at the number of those who don't.

Snakes_Belly

You are still no worse off than if you had paid the initial PCN's and have learnt a lot in the process. You never know when the boot may be on the other foot and you may have issues with something you have purchased or services that you have received. 

It will have also cost Excel much more to pursue these claims through the courts.

This is just an observation but I think that you should have made more of the dodgy records that they provided. They have form when it comes to this and in the same court.