Premier Parking Solutions Limited & BW Legal - 2016 - Another One Bites the Dust!

Coupon-mad

They lost a case and appealed, they lost the appeal as well.

They didn't. They won the appeal.

They had a case struck out without a hearing and made an application to set that decision aside (not an appeal).  I attended and won that hearing (it wasn't an appeal hearing) so the case remained struck out.

They then appealed a different case than the guy I represented, and they won that appeal and he had no defence, didn't bother to try anything more than 'FMOTL wet signature' rubbish and of course, lost his case and paid.  My Defendant didn't pay and his case remained successful but the decision of DJ Grand covered both the cases so that judgment is not much use nowadays.

However, the Judges at Southampton are good.

I only have 28hrs to submit my ws ... stressful time.

Add this into the usual WS adapted from the one posted by @jryhs, near the end where it talks about the £60 and the Excel v Wilkinson case (and attach BOTH transcripts of course AS PDF EXHIBITS - NOT JUST LINKS LIKE BELOW):

The fairness of terms where no sum is specified, was recently ruled upon by Recorder Cohen QC, sitting at the Central London County Court, in the case of Chevalier-Firescu v Ashfords LLP [2021] F83YX432, where it was held that a term stating that the appellant would be held liable for costs on the indemnity basis was improper in purpose and thus unfair pursuant to s62 of the CRA, as it created imbalance between the parties.  Such a ‘contractual indemnity costs’ clause sidesteps the Civil Procedure Rules and cannot be recoverable, absent unreasonable conduct by the Defendant.

Recorder Cohen held that: ''it does seem to me to be clear that this clause has an effect which is unusual, perhaps even abnormal in effect'' and at [13] he summarised the two issues arising from this remarkably similar clause to that in this case, which had the object or effect of creating a more generous basis of costs recovery than there would ordinarily be, in the case of both default judgments and defended cases, whereby consumers stood to be penalised as if CPR 27.14(g) applied.

Explained here:

https://www.associationofcostslawyers.co.uk/News/court-overturns-decision-giving-solicitors-contractual-entitlement-to-indemnity-costs

Transcript:

https://www.civillitigationbrief.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/02/Chevalier-Firescu-Central-London-CC-Judgment-20210129-V-Final.pdf

Enjoy reading that case, everyone. I like it a lot - first case we've seen to apply the CRA 2015 in this way - and not even a parking one - so it's a completely independent consideration of the consumer law we keep banging on about.

I am about to start a new thread giving everyone the heads up about using that appeal judgment.

I really want the Judges at Southampton to see that transcript.

Coupon-mad

Explained in this thread:

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6279348/witness-statements-2-transcript-exhibits-re-parking-firms-falsely-added-contractual-costs/p1

Please get this in front of a Southampton Judge...

beamerguy

 I attended and won that hearing (it wasn't an appeal hearing) so the case remained struck out.

Yes, it was your intervention I was talking about. I thought it was an appeal, wrong word, but they lost anyway.

Wonder what the judge will think of this one, you could drive a bus through the holes

mixMZ

I called yesterday court to query claimant's fee that were supposed to be paid before 4pm 16/July and I apparently they still not done this, and I was advised that in next couple days I will most likely receive letter about case being dismissed. 

do we have here any template I could send to court reminding them - about claimants unreasonable behaviour and defendants fees claimant was aware as per defence / ws bwlegal decided to ignore and quietly choose that route ?

much appreciated. 

Umkomaas

mixMZ said:

I called yesterday court to query claimant's fee that were supposed to be paid before 4pm 16/July and I apparently they still not done this, and I was advised that in next couple days I will most likely receive letter about case being dismissed. 

do we have here any template I could send to court reminding them - about claimants unreasonable behaviour and defendants fees claimant was aware as per defence / ws bwlegal decided to ignore and quietly choose that route ?

much appreciated. 

You only really have the prospects of an unreasonable behaviour costs order if the case is discontinued by the claimant within a week of the hearing. Frustrating, but so many of them fail to pay the court fee when they realise the motorist isn't going to be a pushover. The case evaporates. 

Jenni_D

If you had counter-claimed (and paid the CC fee) then the hearing couldn't simply be vacated by them discontinuing as your CC would still need to be heard. But I presume you didn't do this ... and it's not the sort of tactic that applies to everyone.

Coupon-mad

There was a thread I linked again only this week where an OP showed the letter they submitted and successfully got costs awarded, when a PPC unreasonably discontinued one day before the hearing.

Jenni_D

Which is similar to what @Umkomaas was saying ... but discontinuing prior to paying the hearing fee is not the same thing, unfortunately.

mixMZ

Hmm, what about the option for paying claimant fees by defendant? Is it technically possible?  

KeithP

mixMZ said:

Hmm, what about the option for paying claimant fees by defendant? Is it technically possible?  

Are you actually considering paying the Claimant's court fees for them?

Why would a Defendant want to do that?