TWO Multiple PCN Court Hearings - Gladstones - Horizon

Coupon-mad

Paras 98, 193 and 198 of Beavis are quoted in full by DJ Grand in his Southampton approved judgment that no doubt you are already putting in as an exhibit like everyone does.  The one linked in the template defence sticky thread.

Your case in itself is a clear case of 'fly parking' so you have less chance of a full 'win' than most (unless they discontinue, or the signs are shocking or they fail to show landowner authority).  But presumably, you do understand why they can't add £60 per PCN?    As explained by Judge Grand at Southampton.

Also Horizon can't hold registered keepers liable because they don't use the POFA but it sounds like you are admitting to being the driver on every occasion (DO NOT LIE - no trying to unpick that now unless you were not the driver!).

You need to slow down and look over the weekend at examples of what others submitted.  How about looking at the threads by @keypulse and @Chefdave first, as they showed their court bundles and both won.

Please do that prep & reading, whilst giving us a chance to look at all this and your draft over the weekend:

CLAIMANT WITNESS STATEMENT 
https://imagizer.imageshack.com/img923/2295/PLORjY.jpg
https://imagizer.imageshack.com/img922/6646/sv3fpx.jpg
https://imagizer.imageshack.com/img924/6566/izJKjL.jpg
https://imagizer.imageshack.com/img924/712/73LRb8.jpg
https://imagizer.imageshack.com/img924/8262/UwgOxT.jpg

TolsBols

Good morning all,

I thought I'd keep you updated with how my hearing went last Friday. As described on the Pepipoo forum, I'm very relieved to report I won!

You can read the details from this link, but in a nutshell the Judge wasn't happy that no Horizon rep showed up and as a result, he declined any questions to be asked of me. He also took issue with the visibility of the signs, as well as commenting the ANPR showed no evidence of actual parking. I also got lost income costs of £95 + £6 for parking.

 I got the impression the Judge had made up his mind on the ruling even before we entered the courtroom.

Now the second hearing for the other 3x Horizon PCNs (non-ANPR) is scheduled for tomorrow afternoon. I'm less nervous than I was before the first one, but I'm rather surprised Gladstones have not issued a Notice of Discontinuance.

I'm also a bit wary of getting the same Judge as the first hearing. On the one hand, he may apply the judgement of the first hearing as a precedent, but on the other if he sees me again for another claim related to 3 more PCNs, he might not take me so seriously this time!

Gladstones also sent a supplementary Witness Statement challenging my use of Britannia vs Crosby, with the recent judgement from Judge Parkes in Salisbury that the Southampton ruling on Abuse of Process was wrong. Does that make my reliance on the Southampton judgement invalid?

KeithP

TolsBols said:

Gladstones also sent a supplementary Witness Statement challenging my use of Britannia vs Crosby, with the recent judgement from Judge Parkes in Salisbury that the Southampton ruling on Abuse of Process was wrong. Does that make my reliance on the Southampton judgement invalid?

You can challenge that by pointing out that that strike out was overturned because it was deemed that the first judge had insufficient information on which to strike out the claim. In that case the Defendant hadn't even filed a Witness Statement.

That of course isn't your situation and it would be unsafe for your judge to follow that Judge Parkes ruling.

If that Judge Parkes ruling could be applied across all strike outs, don't you thing we would have seen an avalanche of similar appeals?

DoaM

As per above, BWL were "cute" in their appeal. The DJ Grand strike out was based on two cases being merged (which nobody knew about until the hearing) ... the BWL appeal only addressed one of the defendants (an FMOTL who didn't file a WS); if they'd appealed the whole judgment then the other defendant (Lay repped by bargepole I think?) would have been involved and the appeal would have been properly contested (and probably rejected).

TolsBols

DoaM said:

As per above, BWL were "cute" in their appeal. The DJ Grand strike out was based on two cases being merged (which nobody knew about until the hearing) ... the BWL appeal only addressed one of the defendants (an FMOTL who didn't file a WS); if they'd appealed the whole judgment then the other defendant (Lay repped by bargepole I think?) would have been involved and the appeal would have been properly contested (and probably rejected).

At court now. The lady representing the Claimant asked if I'd like a chat. I said No, then she asked if I'd read the supplementary doc about the Salisbury hearing. I said Yes and have a couple of things to say about that. She says obviously it's difficult to go against a High Court judge! 🙄

KeithP

TolsBols said:

DoaM said:

As per above, BWL were "cute" in their appeal. The DJ Grand strike out was based on two cases being merged (which nobody knew about until the hearing) ... the BWL appeal only addressed one of the defendants (an FMOTL who didn't file a WS); if they'd appealed the whole judgment then the other defendant (Lay repped by bargepole I think?) would have been involved and the appeal would have been properly contested (and probably rejected).

At court now. The lady representing the Claimant asked if I'd like a chat. I said No, then she asked if I'd read the supplementary doc about the Salisbury hearing. I said Yes and have a couple of things to say about that. She says obviously it's difficult to go against a High Court judge! 🙄

Yes, as you know, you can challenge that. 

Keep this in mind...

KeithP said:

TolsBols said:

Gladstones also sent a supplementary Witness Statement challenging my use of Britannia vs Crosby, with the recent judgement from Judge Parkes in Salisbury that the Southampton ruling on Abuse of Process was wrong. Does that make my reliance on the Southampton judgement invalid?

You can challenge that by pointing out that that strike out was overturned because it was deemed that the first judge had insufficient information on which to strike out the claim. In that case the Defendant hadn't even filed a Witness Statement.

That of course isn't your situation and it would be unsafe for your judge to follow that Judge Parkes ruling.

If that Judge Parkes ruling could be applied across all strike outs, don't you thing we would have seen an avalanche of similar appeals?

Good luck.

TolsBols

Dang, I lost this one.  The judge was a much younger bloke than the first one, and quite amenable. Unlike the first judge though, he allowed the Claimant's rep to ask me questions and she referred to photos in her evidence pack where PCN tickets were stuck to my door. I think ultimately where I went wrong is getting sideballed by that and inferring I was the driver, which meant I wasn't protected by POFA anymore.

I was ordered to pay 3x £60 plus court and legal fee coming to £300. That is at least offset by the £100 in costs I won from winning the first hearing, but still a bit of a kick in the nuts.

Castle

TolsBols said:

I was ordered to pay 3x £60 plus court and legal fee coming to £300. That is at least offset by the £100 in costs I won from winning the first hearing, but still a bit of a kick in the nuts.

I thought each PCN was for £100?

TolsBols

Castle said:

TolsBols said:

I was ordered to pay 3x £60 plus court and legal fee coming to £300. That is at least offset by the £100 in costs I won from winning the first hearing, but still a bit of a kick in the nuts.

I thought each PCN was for £100?

No, each PCN was £60. Their claim was for £130 p/PCN, but the Judge ruled only the original charge was valid.

He also didn't believe the signage was unnoticeable or illegible, and I knew I was sunk the moment he said that.

When I brought up POFA, he also seemed to infer the NtKs did invite the Keeper to pay the original charge.

On top of the £180 for the Pcns, I also have to pay 3% interest on that, £35 Court fee and £50 legal cost which came to £301.70 I won £101 in costs from the first hearing, so effectively I only have to pay £201. That's still a lot of money though, and I'm just kicking myself I didn't keep my wits about me and not infer I was the Driver.

nosferatu1001

£200 for that many PCNs isnt awful. 
It will have cost them over £400 for both hearings rep hire.