Court date tomorrow: any final tips, tricks and advice?

95Rollers

Let's hope so.

Anyway back on topic - how did it go @Dannyshiers ?

dantheman02

95Rollers said:

Let's hope so.

Anyway back on topic - how did it go @Dannyshiers ?

Hi all, I'm back.

I won the case.
The judge ruled that due to a lack of instruction of how to display a permit, a lack of definition of a 'valid permit' and 'all details' on the claimant's signage, and a lack of mitigation of loss from the claimant, that no breach of contract occurred.

The hearing took almost 2 hours (inc. verdict).

So, first court date, I was pretty nervous. I'm only 19 and the legal representative on behalf of the claimant was a middle-aged man. I felt I was on the back foot initially, as he told me that he knew the judge and the judge knew his family.

I realised I was in a better position when we entered the room, as the representative was ad hoc, he was not a part of the Claimant's firm, nor was he the person who wrote their witness statement. Therefore he could not give evidence or cross-examination, meaning they were solely relying on their pre-written witness statement.

The first 30 minutes of the hearing was basically the judge grilling the claimant representative on a lack of detail and any mitigation within the witness statement. For example, the witness statement failed to detail whether my permit was defined as "valid" at the time, and also failed to detail where the definitions of their 'terms' came from. The representative obviously couldn't elaborate. I felt the judge was on my side, and he seemed pretty miffed that this case had made it to court in the first place, as he could see that I'd displayed my permit adequately and sort of had the attitude "why are they even bothering" towards the claimant.

It came over to me, and I used my crib sheet points to explain how, in the first instance, no contract could have been struck with myself, as I saw no signage. The claimant relied on photos and plans from 2016, which the judge didn't like, and the witness statement writer had never visited the car park and failed to detail its signage layout in the witness statement. It was clear the plans used were outdated. I did provide video evidence that proved that there was no signs up, but the judge admitted he hadn't watched it.

As the parking enforcement officer didn't give a statement, the judge made the point that he may have been able to see more of my permit, if he had just taken a photograph of it from a different angle. Again, the claimant rep couldn't comment.

So, all in all, my main case was that a) there was no signage, b) any signage wasn't clear, and that c) the signage did not detail what "valid" and "all details" meant. The judge particularly relied upon point c in his verdict, saying "what if the defendant had displayed the permit 'correctly', and then it had slipped during the night - it would not be his fault".

The judge concluded that I, the defendant, had tried to, and succeeded to, adhere to implied contract terms of displaying a valid permit in my car, and therefore there was no breach of contract, and he said that he was not satisfied that the claimant could prove so.

SUCCESS! Great stuff.

However, there's one point I'm a bit sad on; I didn't get any costs awarded.
I submitted a costs sheet in my witness statement, and the judge was aware of this. Bearing in mind that the solicitor to my right had chatted to me and told me that a) he knew the judge, and b) he had another hearing at 3.30, by the end of the hearing, everyone was ready for home.
The judge turned to me and said "Do you really want to pursue the claimant for being unlawful?" and I was under pressure, and said no. The judge then stood up and I felt it was all over.
Slightly bittersweet then, but I'm happy I won nonetheless. The time and petrol money weren't paramount, I guess.

Thank you to absolutely everyone that has helped me on this forum along the way, I could not have succeeded in this way without you.

The judge himself said in the first line of his verdict:
"It is quite clear that the defendant has effectively thrown the legal kitchen sink at the claimant."

patient_dream

WOW, you are only 19 ... the way you write and talk, you have a briiliant future ahead of you

WELL DONE

Not all judges award costs, they should but hey ... you beat the scam

The legals don't understand that if they want a job done properly, they do it themselves and not by a "rent by the hour" legal

A great learning curve in the facts of life

dantheman02

patient_dream said:

WOW, you are only 19 ... the way you write and talk, you have a briiliant future ahead of you

WELL DONE

Not all judges award costs, they should but hey ... you beat the scam

The legals don't understand that if they want a job done properly, they do it themselves and not by a "rent by the hour" legal

A great learning curve in the facts of life

Thank you very much. I am a prospective Law student (starting in September), so it's nice to have a case under my belt already lol xD

Totally agree with you, learnt a lot today.

Thanks again.

Fruitcake

Well done on your win.

Remind us, did the claimant say your defence was a template from the internet and it was unlikely you would understand it, because that is exactly the opposite of what the judge implied about your defence?

Umkomaas

Umkomaas said:

Good luck to the advocate trying to explain the nuance between a case where data was acquired via the DVLA and one where it was not, and why (if AF is correct) one attracts debt collection charges and the other doesn't. Especially when many turn up having little clue about their main brief!

Just as a reminder of what I said earlier!

bargepole

Dannyshiers said:

Thank you very much. I am a prospective Law student (starting in September), so it's nice to have a case under my belt already lol xD

Good luck with your Law degree course. You have an advantage now over the other students, in that you can start to appreciate the difference between Academic Law (as taught in Universities), and real life Law, as experienced in actual Courts.

dantheman02

Fruitcake said:

Well done on your win.

Remind us, did the claimant say your defence was a template from the internet and it was unlikely you would understand it, because that is exactly the opposite of what the judge implied about your defence?

Thank you. Couldn't have done it without you.

No, they did not - not to my recollection anyway.

dantheman02

bargepole said:

Dannyshiers said:

Thank you very much. I am a prospective Law student (starting in September), so it's nice to have a case under my belt already lol xD

Good luck with your Law degree course. You have an advantage now over the other students, in that you can start to appreciate the difference between Academic Law (as taught in Universities), and real life Law, as experienced in actual Courts.

Thank you, just waiting to find out where I'll be studying.

I was thinking this today, and hopefully it'll come in handy!

patient_dream

Dannyshiers said:

bargepole said:

Dannyshiers said:

Thank you very much. I am a prospective Law student (starting in September), so it's nice to have a case under my belt already lol xD

Good luck with your Law degree course. You have an advantage now over the other students, in that you can start to appreciate the difference between Academic Law (as taught in Universities), and real life Law, as experienced in actual Courts.

Thank you, just waiting to find out where I'll be studying.

I was thinking this today, and hopefully it'll come in handy!

Could not see who the legal was who issued the claim, please say