National Parking Enforcement - County Court Claim

w12ee3e

Just read the entire thread as a lurker, and this is terrible. Sounds like the Judge is completely out of order! Who are they?

Jenni_D

You said the judge ruled £70 costs plus interest = ~£75 ... the Claimant claimed £100 + 60 + court costs + interest = ~£240 ........ BWL wouldn't be very happy to get only a third of what was claimed. That's why I said "wait for the letter".

I'm out now - we're just going round in circles.

milo_2020

@Jenni_D I very much would be happy if I was BWLegal and I went into this thinking I was getting nothing but came out with 75.

I will wait for the letter, but I don't know what you mean by doesn't add up, it could not have been any more clear as day that was the decision with appeal rejected.

My partner is !!!!!! off belief and wants to know if he can contact a solicitor company to get involved at his expense.  

Jenni_D

It's a turn of phrase ... I've explained my reasoning. I'm out.

milo_2020

So I just pay the 75 and move on pretty much. Entire process was pointless and should have paid the 60 in the first place when it came through my door.

Will update the thread when the letter comes through, but I can see I am in a corner here and my options are none.

milo_2020

w12ee3e said:

Just read the entire thread as a lurker, and this is terrible. Sounds like the Judge is completely out of order! Who are they?

Who are who? Co-Op was the retailor, National Parking Enforcement Limited were the car park company, BWLegal were the legal company and this was a pre-liminary 30 minute hearing in Chelmsford County Court.

w12ee3e

milo_2020 said:

w12ee3e said:

Just read the entire thread as a lurker, and this is terrible. Sounds like the Judge is completely out of order! Who are they?

Who are who? Co-Op was the retailor, National Parking Enforcement Limited were the car park company, BWLegal were the legal company and this was a pre-liminary 30 minute hearing in Chelmsford County Court.

What was the judges name?

milo_2020

I do not recall, it was very quick and very stressful (46 minutes in total) and the line was unbelievably poor. 1 hour and 20 minutes late. I will know hopefully from the letter and I will post it here if I am allowed. 

Redx

milo_2020 said:

So I just pay the 75 and move on pretty much. Entire process was pointless and should have paid the 60 in the first place when it came through my door.

Will update the thread when the letter comes through, but I can see I am in a corner here and my options are none.

The reason it doesn't add up is that the original PCN was £100 , plus legal and court costs of say £75 , total £175

So £175 to £200 is a typical loss in court for one PCN , so I predict a figure of £175 , or more , on the judgment

An appeal costs money , plus you need to pay for a transcript I believe , so it won't be cheap and the judgment can only be challenged on a legal basis , like the judge erred in law for example. @bargepole has posted previously about this aspect so read his posts ( it won't be cheap and no guarantee of success , but Jopson did win on appeal  , whereas Barry Beavis lost his appeals )

milo_2020

OK I see, wait for the letter means it might be 175 not 75. After saying I wanted an appeal and have the right to a fair trial he changed subject from me and attacked the signage and the claimant. He said it was grossly unfair to charge that amount given the time spent in the bay and that the sign did not state on it a number (referenced beavis case?) which will be charged when going to court. He said is not willing to add on any further charges on top of the original 100 which is on the sign because the body sets its own limit and he doesn't agree with it. The debt recovery costs would also not be added on because the costs were not on the sign, they were provided in the letters after the event and thus he again doesn't agree that these can be added on where the sign is not clear on what and how much will be added on. 

He said that he only deems 60 pounds fair taking this into consideration and then the claimant's solicitor piped up and said that the limit was proven fair in a recent case was 70 and not 60. There was a pause the judge asked what case that was, he was told (I don't recall) and there was some silence then the judge came back to agree that 70 is a fair limit and interest on top of this.

The part I do not find fair here is he explicitly said that it didn't matter that the WS for the claimant referenced the driver in all of their points, they clearly made a mistake and mistakes happen.????????????????????

I will look at bargepoles posts, money isn't the issue, its the principle, I may even look at actual solicitor's to handle this if I do decide to go down the appeals process.

Edit: It may not add up, but how many trials get decided at the preliminary hearing and the appeal rejected there and then? Is that common along with the typical loss process of funds?