PCN with County Court N1 form (Excel (ELMS Legal))

Trainerman

Snakes_Belly said:

Ed2022 said:

@Johnersh and @Snakes_Belly exactly
today had the reply saying its been assigned to the local county court and hopefully some progress then on the case

Excel lost a Lichfield case at Nuneaton last week.

Not sure of what the judge said as the hearings were running late and it sounds as if he read the paperwork over his lunch and came back and gave his decision. No appeal allowed.

They seem to be losing these cases but the sad part is that many have already paid up. I cannot believe how they can sleep at night after ripping people off like this including BB holders. I just cannot comprehend their mindset and how they can think that this is OK. 

It is the modern disease of " bu***r you mate, as long as I make money" ! Which is why it is imperative that the Government make the right decisions to shut these bullies down

Ed2022

Trainerman said:

Snakes_Belly said:

Ed2022 said:

@Johnersh and @Snakes_Belly exactly
today had the reply saying its been assigned to the local county court and hopefully some progress then on the case

Excel lost a Lichfield case at Nuneaton last week.

Not sure of what the judge said as the hearings were running late and it sounds as if he read the paperwork over his lunch and came back and gave his decision. No appeal allowed.

They seem to be losing these cases but the sad part is that many have already paid up. I cannot believe how they can sleep at night after ripping people off like this including BB holders. I just cannot comprehend their mindset and how they can think that this is OK. 

It is the modern disease of " bu***r you mate, as long as I make money" ! Which is why it is imperative that the Government make the right decisions to shut these bullies down

Agree with you both.

Was it linked somewhere here or on the FB page.

Snakes_Belly

I will try and find out why it was dismissed. 

As I mentioned the hearings were running late and I don't think there was much dialogue in the courtroom. Basically it appears as if the decision was made on papers during the judges lunch.

Snakes_Belly

Snakes_Belly said:

I will try and find out why it was dismissed. 

As I mentioned the hearings were running late and I don't think there was much dialogue in the courtroom. Basically it appears as if the decision was made on papers during the judges lunch.

Difficult to say regarding the decision as the defendant was a bit overwhelmed with it all.

It would appear that there were some issues with the VRN records. They had supplied two sets of VRN's one at appeal and the other in their WS which did not match up. The VRN of the defendant's car was not on either but must have put doubt in the judge's mind and that these records were not accurate.  

There were shades of the Ambler case.

Snakes_Belly

Further to my post above it was mentioned in the WS that Excel were no strangers to falsifying records. In the Ambler case the VRN records appeared to have been tampered with. 

If two records for the same event don't match then it would seem as if there had been some tampering with the evidence. 

Ed2022

Thank you @Snakes_Belly . Utter disregard and dishonest practices, while does cast doubts on their over practice, my own WS will rely on differing material factors.

Snakes_Belly

There is another Lichfield case that is similar to yours and are probably at the same stage.

Ed2022

I suppose they are posting on facebook than here.

Coupon-mad

Snakes_Belly said:

Further to my post above it was mentioned in the WS that Excel were no strangers to falsifying records. In the Ambler case the VRN records appeared to have been tampered with. 

If two records for the same event don't match then it would seem as if there had been some tampering with the evidence. 

Wow! As you say, another Excel v Ambler case.

I hope that this person has been primed about responding to the Public Consultation and will state clearly what happened in their £170 rip off PCN case?

Can you ask the D for the two conflicting VRM lists; the one from the appeal and the one from the WS? We'd like to see the differences, to help us spot this in other cases.

To reassure the forum team, it is perfectly OK for us to see/show the two lists here.  This case in question is over, not a live case, and the VRM lists are always partially redacted so they contain no personal data.

Snakes_Belly

Coupon-mad said:

Snakes_Belly said:

Further to my post above it was mentioned in the WS that Excel were no strangers to falsifying records. In the Ambler case the VRN records appeared to have been tampered with. 

If two records for the same event don't match then it would seem as if there had been some tampering with the evidence. 

Wow! As you say, another Excel v Ambler case.

I hope that this person has been primed about responding to the Public Consultation and will state clearly what happened in their £170 rip off PCN case?

Can you ask the D for the two conflicting VRM lists; the one from the appeal and the one from the WS? We'd like to see the differences, to help us spot this in other cases.

To reassure the forum team, it is perfectly OK for us to see/show the two lists here.  This case in question is over, not a live case, and the VRM lists are always partially redacted so they contain no personal data.

I will try to get hold of those VRN lists. Actually the person that helps the Lichfield cases on the FB Group knows Lamilad and is familar with the Ambler case so is aware of the tricks that Excel can pull.