Appealing BW Legal/NCP Defence

KeithP

In the 
County Court Business Centre

Just wondering why you didn't receive that DQ sent to you.
Have you perhaps changed address since the Claim was issued but not told the Court and Claimant about that?

AshCash

KeithP said:

In the 
County Court Business Centre

Just wondering why you didn't receive that DQ sent to you.
Have you perhaps changed address since the Claim was issued but not told the Court and Claimant about that?

Nope. Small chance my wife brushed it away without me seeing it, but I don't think so

AshCash

I've just submitted my WS after receiving the claimant's WS (which dedicated about 50% to belittling me and saying I was talking nonsense because I used a templated defence that waffled on about technical stuff that was beyond my scope of knowledge). Now it's all submitted, I'm ready for a fight. Even if I lose, I want to look these b**tards in the eye. I want to learn the case law that I've mentioned forwards and backwards. Any resources that anyone can point to...

Also, I came across a quote from someone about signage late last night and now I can't find it. Can't remeber if it was a government body or a judge. But it was something along the lines of "If it it's understandable for one, it must be understandable for all. Similarly, if it's fair for one, it must be fair for all". It resonated with me (as I used my dyslexia in my defence) and I'd like to have it in my pocket on the day. 

Anyone??

Thanks

Coupon-mad

That quote is in the Template Defence and ironically it is from the dark side(!) because it is by Will Hurley of the IPC Trade Body.

Not worth you reading - IMHO - none of his desperate stuff is!

You don't need to know any case law inside out (just know your own case facts well) but you can point out how rude the Claimant's WS is about you and that THAT WS is a template!

AshCash

Well, I lost my case today. NCP provided logs of successful payments that completely contradicted the reality which is they were not working when we were trying to pay. Either they were lying or I was and the judge pretty plainly said I was.

As for signage, he said it was some of the clearest he'd seen (despite the fact that all the signage related to payment methods rather than the terms and conditions and the ONLY sign with terms and conditions was unreadable) and therefore, my arguments from the template were rejected (he also made flippant comments about seeing all this in most other cases). 

He agreed the additional £70 admin fee was punitive and not specifically mentioned on the sign, but still awarded NCP £100+legal+court fees. I was under the assumption that if the £70 was deemed punitive, the whole case would be struck out. 

Hey ho. Another consumer bites the dust today. Just need to accept it and move on. 2 years of wasted time and emotion.

Thanks for all the advice

Coupon-mad

That's tough.  Glad he disallowed the added £70.  So you were ordered to pay £200?

Now it's over and not a 'live' court case, please show us a screenshot of the purported 'machine logs' page as attached as their exhibit.  We've seen altered logs before now and would wish to take a look.

AshCash

@Coupon-mad Yes. £200 and change. The really frustrating thing is in the response to my defence, they attached a completely different set of logs... which was much more in line with the reality on the ground and corroborated my assertion that the machines were not working. Then they submitted into evidence these logs showing 89 transactions (vs 25 in version 1) in a 3 hour window. Their representative (who was more competent than I was expecting) explained this by saying the first version was from the app, the second from the payment machines. Perhaps I made the mistake of giving them a chance to answer by highlighting it in my WS. This is in a completely empty car park on a Sunday. There is simply no way a car was leaving that car park every 2 minutes and there 10000% were no transactions at the 5 minute window we were there trying to pay (there are only two POS and they are side by side). I can only draw one conclusion. A total fabrication. 

Coupon-mad

Hmmm

Why are there 3 columns?

And no VRMs (not even redacted)?

Please show us the 'alternative' set of logs v1.

What did the Judge say when you pointed the two different sets of logs out?

Grizebeck

sorry i dont think it is a fabrication

AshCash

@Coupon-mad He didn't even blink at their reasoning. I brought it up again at the end and said "I simply cannot reconcile the logs that they've presented with what happened on the day. I've asked for CCTV footage as this would unequivacally show these logs are not correct and they did not respond." 

It felt like they knew each other quite well... he had the solicitor's name at the tip of his tongue and I asked the guy if he spent most his time in that court and he said yes (was Mr Nice outside the court room). So when I brought it up, the rep batted it away, the judge nodded and that was that.

It was either the claimant that was lying or me. And in not so many words, he said it must be me. Took every ounce of control to not stand up and shout "THIS WHOLE COURT ROOM IS OUT OF ORDER!"