We'd like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum... Read More »
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are - or become - political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
IMPORTANT: Please make sure your posts do not contain any personally identifiable information (both your own and that of others). When uploading images, please take care that you have redacted all personal information including number plates, reference numbers and QR codes (which may reveal vehicle information when scanned).
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
DCB Legal & Premier Parking Logistics (Hearing Day 😞)
I've paid DCB Legal now and they've said that they'll notify the court. Will the court notify me that this has now been resolved?
You should get a receipt from DCB legal. You will also get a notification from the court regarding the judgment.
I would send them a copy of the receipt.
Yes, I have an email receipt from DCBL; I'll gladly forward this on to the court. The deadline for payment was 25th August, but I've paid today to get it out of the way.
As for the rep, they said very little. As far as I recall, their only comment was correcting some dates that the judge read incorrectly and then agreeing the verdict at the end. Hardly anything was asked of them; all the questions came my way and it, in my opinion, were very biased to the judges views.
I would send it to the court to be on the safe side.
Now I've had the afternoon to reflect and calm down, I have a few thoughts:
1) The judge was so focussed on me buying a ticket on the day and it's subsequent disappearance that he all but ignored every other point in my WS. Every time I tried to bring up anything to do with the contract (frustration of contract, no landowner agreement, signage, forbidding offer etc.) he argued that it was all irrelevant, as if I had paid to park then I must have agreed to all T&Cs. He was so insistent on this one point that it seemed as though he hadn't even read the WS all the way through. Is it possible that DCB Legal sent a different version of the bundle to the court than the one that I received? If so, am I able to obtain a copy from the court? I know that's a bit 'tin foil hat' and it could be the frustration leading me down this path, but the focus on a single point made me think.
2) It was so obvious that the judge disbelieved my story that he may as well have shouted "liar, liar, pants on fire" at me. I felt like the hearing was unfair and ultimately, like I was getting a telling off. I understand that the courts probably get a lot of people trying it on and it must grow thin after a while, but even so... He even questioned why I didn't notice that the ticket was missing when I got back to the car. 🤬
3) I've realised that what has annoyed me the most about this whole thing is not the money, or the time, or the even the principle, but the fact that all the people that told me "I'd just pay it", way back at the NTK stage will now feel justified in their decision. No one likes being told "I told you so" and I've had a few already today 😄.
4) This whole ending has left a really sour taste and although I said earlier that I'd do it again, in reality this would make me think twice about it, knowing I could end up with a similar judge. It just makes me so angry, especially as I was quite confident going into this. However, nothing has gone as expected based on what I've seen on this forum - i.e. no reduced offer, no late discontinuance - so I should have seen it coming.
Sorry for the long post, I just wanted to get my thoughts off my chest.
I'll be completing the public consultation later this week!
1) The combined bundle should have also been sent to you - was it?
Yes, I received the bundle with a note saying that it had been filed with the court. I checked it over and my stuff was fine, but now I'm questioning if they could have sent a different version to the court.
3) I've realised that what has annoyed me the most about this whole thing is not the money, or the time, or the even the principle, but the fact that all the people that told me "I'd just pay it", way back at the NTK stage will now feel justified in their decision. No one likes being told "I told you so" and I've had a few already today 😄.
Pastor Martin Niemöller was so right in war-torn Europe during WWII. But sometimes it doesn't always work out. Trying to do the right thing has to occupy the moral high ground. Be proud that you stood up to this shower.
First they came for the Communists And I did not speak out
Because I was not a Communist
Then they came for the Socialists And I did not speak out
Because I was not a Socialist
Then they came for the trade unionists And I did not speak out
Because I was not a trade unionist
Then they came for the Jews And I did not speak out
Because I was not a Jew
Then they came for me
And there was no one left
To speak out for me
Please note, we are not a legal advice forum. I personally don't get involved in critiquing court case Defences/Witness Statements, so unable to help on that front. Please don't ask. .
I provide only my personal opinion, it is not a legal opinion, it is simply a personal one. I am not a lawyer.
Give a man a fish, and you feed him for a day; show him how to catch fish, and you feed him for a lifetime.
"I've realised that what has annoyed me the most about this whole thing is not the money, or the time, or the even the principle, but the fact that all the people that told me "I'd just pay it", way back at the NTK stage will now feel justified in their decision. No one likes being told "I told you so" and I've had a few already today".
People said the same to me. My case resulted in me paying very little so a bit like a drop hands scenario. I had though spent money and time on the case.
It had cost the PPC a lot to take me to court as there were two hearings. The second one was allocated for two hours and they hired a barrister.
What did particularly upset me was that I missed out on a property that was exactly what I was looking for whilst I was working towards the hearing. It had just been sold.
Fast forward to August 2019 and the dam at Whaley Bridge was in danger of breaching. If it had breached the property in question would have probably been washed away. The people living there were evacuated for a while. The dam did not breach but I would have not bought that property now especially after seeing the flooding in the Severn Valley and in Germany. So as a result of spending time preparing for the hearing I dodged a very big bullet.
But you are not complaining about the verdct, you are complaining about the behaviour of the judge Accuse him or her of bias, ignorance of the appropriate law, failure to consider your arguments etc.
You never know how far you can go until you go too far.
But you are not complaining about the verdct, you are complaining about the behaviour of the judge Accuse him or her of bias, ignorance of the appropriate law, failure to consider your arguments etc.
This.
Now you are calmer, write down what happened, especially where the judge said your evidence was irrelevant. You were a witness to the event. Yo were the only witness. Your WS should therefore have carried weight, but the judge ignored and refused to let you properly put your case.
Thanks you all for your comments. It's nice to be reassured that I've done the right thing; I'm not getting a lot of that feeling right now!
After careful consideration, I've decided that I will make a complaint based on the judges behaviour and apparent lack of knowledge on this particular issue. I felt that the judge was quite aggressive (the questioning was very intense) and I think that someone with less confidence would have felt intimidated by the situation, which is not right.
I've replayed the hearing back in my mind several times over the last 24 hours, and in my opinion, what happened is that the judge decided on the balance of probabilities that I hadn't purchased a ticket and that all of my arguements were an attempt to 'get off' on a technicality. He kept referring to the facts of the matter, i.e. that I bought a ticket but the evidence showed that I didn't, and ignored everything else (almost like he hadn't even read it). I tried to argue poor signage, forbidding offer, frustration of contract, unlawful additional charges, the lot, but all they would say is that by paying to park I must have agreed to all T&C's and that if I'd had an issue I should have appealed sooner. The rep must have been delighted; easiest few quid they've ever made.
