BW Legal/ UK parking Patrol (again!)

Fruitcake

Replace your highness with the court. On the day you should be told how to address the judge, but it would normally be sir or madam.

I believe argumentum ad hominem translates as argument against the person.

This needs to be tidied up to explain better what you mean,

"It took me a considerable time to and being able to amend it to suit in half an hour can be addressed by stating how long you took to read, and understand, and research, and confirm all the other points over 9 months, which was plenty of time to be fully conversant with all the points made as a litigant in person."

Whilst amending two paragraphs did indeed only take a short period, I spent considerable time over a period of many weeks to ensure I understood all the arguments made in the other parts of the template such that I am now able to argue and explain these legal points; points that the claimant has not actually addressed.

Not_A_Hope

In the claimants WS their is an ANPR photo of the vehicle leaving the site. Can you remember queuing prior to this point? It looks to me as though there is the back end of another car just in front of you which supports your contention that you were prevented from leaving through circumstances beyond your control. Perhaps the PPC has lots of photos of vehicles in that queue they haven't bothered to review or share.

In the Beavis case the court agreed that £85 was not unconscionable and it included all debt recovery costs. This PPC like many others are claiming an unregulated Code of Practice gives them the right to try to scam even more money than the Court said was 'fair'. The new government COP agrees.

Their court costs are a complete joke and no judge in their right mind would award them unless you had been completely unreasonable. They have included them in a bid to scare you and hope you will be willing to settle before court (and before they instruct a legal rep which will cost them).

Fruitcake

My mistake, I have just realised the images are time and date stamped. I didn't notice this initially because of the orientation of the images.

moneylion

Hi Everyone

Apologies for the super late message on this. My case hearing was delayed by almost a year and is now scheduled for Tuesday 25/7. 

I was pretty happy with my witness statement (relinked below) but very late in the day (i.e. 2 days before the hearing) BW legal has sent a supplementary defence. 

https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/20vzmd8yd415e1ix5xiye/Final-witness_uploadedmse.pdf?rlkey=pvv6i0ie0v75ll7blyikqazn2&dl=0


They are correcting their position in relation to Para 22, where they now claim that they received the appeal and that it was rejected - what they dont say is why it got rejected. 

They have also reattached new photos in refute to Para 23. 

How significant are those points and should I submit a supplementary witness statement ? 

Any other advice especially with regards to change of procedure/ arguments given any recent developments to other cases on this forum ?

thank you so much and really appreciate your help! 

Coupon-mad

When did that arrive? If only a few days before the hearing, object to it and ask the court to strike that very late WS out.

Did BW also add their template skeleton argument that criticises you for daring to use this forum (which was a good move and they hate it!) and allegedly - as seen on another thread - wrongly tells the Judge that the DLUHC Code is 'defunct'? 

B789

Maybe a bit late now but if a paralegal has accused you of being ignorant due to your use of an internet forum for researching how to form your defence and WS, you should use this argument against them:

I respectfully ask the learned Judge to look at the sparse/generic POC in this case and compare it to the sudden (different and accusatory) allegations in the Claimant's legal representative's witness statement.  I hope the court might agree with me that none of this was pleaded; certainly not an allegation of my ignorance of the law, a bare and unjustified accusation to which I take offence and which constitutes a personal attack and an unpleaded ambush defying any reasonable explanation.

Rothschild v Charmaine De Souza (2018] EWHC 1855 (Fam) is one of many cases which demonstrate the danger of including invective in witness statements; in a short closing remark, Mr Justice Mostyn stated that unjustified attacks in witness statements like this should affect costs.  It is not a third party paralegal's place to suddenly attack me with ad hominem assertions.

Further, I ask that the Judge might consider striking out all or part of the so-called witness statement as the paralegal has most likely never been to the car park in question.  The person making these unpleaded and unevidenced allegations is not a true witness, nor are they even an employee of the Claimant.

If the Claimant's Witness Statement is allowed to stand, and bears scrutiny at the hearing, naturally I believe that less weight should be given to it than to my own account.

moneylion

Coupon-mad said:

When did that arrive? If only a few days before the hearing, object to it and ask the court to strike that very late WS out.

Did BW also add their template skeleton argument that criticises you for daring to use this forum (which was a good move and they hate it!) and allegedly - as seen on another thread - wrongly tells the Judge that the DLUHC Code is 'defunct'? 

thank you for your reply. Yes they did in their original witness statement (relinked) para 28-32

https://www.dropbox.com/s/lmnu7me6shma9zw/scan.pdf?dl=0

The witness statement is dated 20 July but arrived 22 July for a court case due 25 July

How do I object to this ? at the hearing? 

B789 said:

Maybe a bit late now but if a paralegal has accused you of being ignorant due to your use of an internet forum for researching how to form your defence and WS, you should use this argument against them:

I respectfully ask the learned Judge to look at the sparse/generic POC in this case and compare it to the sudden (different and accusatory) allegations in the Claimant's legal representative's witness statement.  I hope the court might agree with me that none of this was pleaded; certainly not an allegation of my ignorance of the law, a bare and unjustified accusation to which I take offence and which constitutes a personal attack and an unpleaded ambush defying any reasonable explanation.

Rothschild v Charmaine De Souza (2018] EWHC 1855 (Fam) is one of many cases which demonstrate the danger of including invective in witness statements; in a short closing remark, Mr Justice Mostyn stated that unjustified attacks in witness statements like this should affect costs.  It is not a third party paralegal's place to suddenly attack me with ad hominem assertions.

Further, I ask that the Judge might consider striking out all or part of the so-called witness statement as the paralegal has most likely never been to the car park in question.  The person making these unpleaded and unevidenced allegations is not a true witness, nor are they even an employee of the Claimant.

If the Claimant's Witness Statement is allowed to stand, and bears scrutiny at the hearing, naturally I believe that less weight should be given to it than to my own account.

Can I talk through this with the judge on the day or does it need to be in the WS? Also will my objection that they submitted a late supplementary WS go against me submitting something new as well ? 

thanks

Coupon-mad

DO NOT engage in email tennis.  Judges frown on it and you want to keep the moral high ground.

Just address it at the hearing, at the very start after the introductions, say there is a 'preliminary matter' of a very late 'u-turn' WS which arrived on SATURDAY giving you one working day (prior to this hearing) to deal with; and the C is trying to change their argument.

That must be unreasonable conduct and you wanted to ask the Judge to please step in and dismiss the very late WS entirely.

moneylion

thank you all for all your help. Going to the hearing later this afternoon - mixed emotions of anxiety and feeling pumped up to face and defeat these scamsters. 

Any last minute tips, comments etc always helpful  

Umkomaas

moneylion said:

thank you all for all your help. Going to the hearing later this afternoon - mixed emotions of anxiety and feeling pumped up to face and defeat these scamsters. 

Any last minute tips, comments etc always helpful  

Good luck, do let us know how you get on, whatever the result.