Excel - Set aside WON & CASE WON - Excel defeated AGAIN!

milkybk

On the plus side, the fact they've acknowledged they've received my electronic WS and Evidence means I don't need to worry about them pretending to not receive the hard copies. 

Fruitcake

They could still pretend they didn't receive the hard copies and therefore didn't receive a copy of the videos on a durable medium.

milkybk

Fruitcake said:

They could still pretend they didn't receive the hard copies and therefore didn't receive a copy of the videos on a durable medium.

Well I have the receipts for the 2 methods of posting and have printed additional copies for all parties for the trial. Each pack contains a USB with the videos and the links.

This Jake guy will probably email me in a minute saying "I don't like the video quality" or something, just to confirm it accidentally. 

So I'm as covered as I can be.

Snakes_Belly

Regarding your insurance documents would you have kept it from six years ago? You could have changed your insurer every year on a comparsion site. Some people do as many companies draw you in with a good quote the first year and then increase it upon renewal. 

Snakes_Belly

"Lastly, the test on a set aside vs a small claims are entirely different. If we had 'lost' the set aside then the Court would have struck the claim out. They did not do so and therefore this indicates that there is clearly a triable matter."

That does not happen very often. The only time I have known it happen is where the judge had already dismissed around fifteen similar cases. You stand the same chance of winning your case as anyone else on this forum. The success rate against this PPC is very good.     

milkybk

Snakes_Belly said:

Regarding your insurance documents would you have kept it from six years ago? You could have changed your insurer every year on a comparison site. Some people do as many companies draw you in with a good quote the first year and then increase it upon renewal. 

Well there's digital versions of them i.e. email. But yes, all paper copies are long gone and I did change insurer that year around that time as it happens, just coincidence. Regardless, my WS doesn't mention anything about named drivers, they're just clutching at straws. They tried this argument at the Set Aside and the Judge quickly dismissed it.

Snakes_Belly said:

"Lastly, the test on a set aside vs a small claims are entirely different. If we had 'lost' the set aside then the Court would have struck the claim out. They did not do so and therefore this indicates that there is clearly a triable matter."

That does not happen very often. The only time I have known it happen is where the judge had already dismissed around fifteen similar cases. You stand the same chance of winning your case as anyone else on this forum. The success rate against this PPC is very good.     

Yes, I know they're bluffing, just hoping I'll cough up any money and leave it. However I'm very confident going into it. I'm well prepared thanks to this forum and the Set Aside hearing gave me experience in the Court room etc. Excel are clearly flustered, their documents and emails are full of mistakes etc, it's clear they're scrambling.

milkybk

Took a detailed look through Excel's WS last night. There's some strange abnormalities etc. For one, the opening statement says the WS was for a hearing set for 23/9/21 - but this never happened (I never received a Court letter for a hearing and have checked etc, there wasn't one), presumably because Excel didn't file they're N180, as they were sent that ultimatum letter from the Courts recently - Link - I have contacted the Court asking if Excel filed in time, as it must have been close. Not heard back from them yet but it's mentioned in my WS anyway and tbh, their tardiness etc just makes them look worse.

The paralegal who has drafted the WS and signed it (who says he may not attend) was employed in 2020, the original alleged event occurred in 2017 - although I doubt it matter, more just noting it. He signed the WS in Oct 2021. They don't have any new Evidence at all, literally nothing, all the same exhibits they tried to use in the Set Aside case. 

Most of their photos are taken during the day (alleged event happened late at night) and are squashed onto 1 page of A4, making them all illegible to myself and the Court (7 photos on one page). I have fortunately took photos from almost identical spots at night, which well in my favour. They 2 single photos on separate A4 sheets but they're so distorted and stretch you cannot make out the key wording etc, which again, is good for me. They haven't included any photos of the sign I referred to as "hidden", likely for obvious reasons (as it would work against them).

Their WS is also in varying fonts and different sizes of text, with some bits looking "pasted" in, which I imagine isn't abnormal, as they cobble these things together quickly, hoping the trial doesn't go ahead and they can just bully Defendants into paying.

They spend a long time rambling on about why their exaggerated costs are backed by regulations and law etc but than randomly state that "The Claimant takes note" of certain paragraphs of mine (doesn't argue further), where I specifically cover why the exaggerated sum sought is not recoverable.

They obviously talk about their signage being compliant etc for a few paragraphs but we know my evidence already proves otherwise, plus other similar cases vs Excel that they have lost recently. So no concerns there.

Most of their WS is aimed at refuting sections of my Defence, the standard stuff you would expect. Their focus being on that they believe they can hold the Keeper liable, not the driver (Jake's emails from yesterday obviously eluding to the fact they're struggling with this still). A lot of the stuff they talk about is covered/argued against in all standard Defendant WS's.

An example below:


I can upload it if it would help, redacted obviously - let me know if it would be helpful, maybe there's something additional I can gain from it to append to my WS (which are all posted and delivered now etc).

Grizebeck

26 is a load of tosh and Excel know, they often try that get short shrift in the courts

Fruitcake

Upload their WS to dropbox or similar then post the link here. Make sure no permissions to access the file are needed, personal data is redacted save for information already in the public domain (name of paralegal etcetera), and make sure there are no personal documents or images in the account.
We were once given a link to a poster's account that included holiday photos of their kids!

milkybk

Fruitcake said:

Upload their WS to dropbox or similar then post the link here. Make sure no permissions to access the file are needed, personal data is redacted save for information already in the public domain (name of paralegal etcetera), and make sure there are no personal documents or images in the account.
We were once given a link to a poster's account that included holiday photos of their kids!

Will do 1st thing when home from work today. I will also post my defence statement they refer to, so people can see the two. I have a separate google account setup just for this trial etc, so no risk of anything adversely being shared haha but thanks for heads up!

Will redact everything appropriate as suggested.

I think it will give me an opportunity to add some more stuff to my notes for trial day, e.g. points to refer too when the Claimant says X etc.

Thank you.