Kicking the hornets nest

Coupon-mad

Yes we've seen an Airport tell VCS to stop a claim but it's rare. The complaint should always be done as early as possible.

well it's going ahead, received tribunal bundle from them today. They've sent the wrong signage plans (for the site across the road, not where I parked). 

Haha!  PERFECT.

@Saverule have you had time to read other threads today? I just replied debunking reliance on Kumari, Wilshaw, etc. on the VCS thread by @SoJacob this afternoon.

And re your Counterclaim you have to argue it strongly. See examples of winning CCs by @Nosy and @ellaro9 - their threads include their WS and they both won CCs.

A CC for damages for distress is not a Personal Injury Claim. That's trying to mislead the Judge.  The small claims track is for this sort of case too.

B789

The landlord is trying to ‘male bovine excrement’ you. Ask the landlord about who is the Monkey and who is the Organ Grinder in the relationship with their agent. Remind them that they are jointly and severally liable for the actions of their agent and as you are proceeding with this claim, perhaps they should be seeking their own advice from their own lawyers.

Saverule

@Coupon-mad - Lovely Jubbly, I've noted!!

This is my CC gumph... 

COUNTERCLAIM PARTICULARS

22. After reviewing Section 3 and its subsections (The Equality Act 2010 and EA Chapter 15 "Unenforceable Contracts.") it is evident that the parking provider has discriminated against the Defendant and thereby penalising the use of parking spaces that should rightfully be considered a reasonable adjustment per The Equalities Act and BPA Guidance. It is important to note that UKPC Ltd does not enforce adherence to Parent & Child spaces, as this specific requirement is not mentioned in their Terms & Conditions. This raises concerns that the parking provider may be unfairly targeting disabled individuals who have legitimate provisions under The Equalities Act 2010. Therefore the Defendant wishes to claim damages for distress caused by the Claimants’ breach of statutory duty and misleading actions within the meaning of the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008, as amended by the Consumer Protection Regulations (Amendment) Regulations 2014 (“the Regulations”); b) damages for distress caused by the Claimants’ breach of statutory duty arising from violations of the Consumer Rights Act 2015 ('the CRA'); c) damages for distress caused by harassment contrary to the Protection from Harassment Act 1997 ('the PFHA') ref section 3; d) damages for discrimination, distress and harassment of a person with protected characteristics, pursuant to multiple sections of the Equality Act 2010.

NOTABLE CASE LAW

23. (i) Ferguson v British Gas Trading Ltd  [2009] EWCA Civ 46 https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2009/46.html  where Sedley LJ held: 

23a.“[52] ''...For my part I would draw attention to the fact [...] that harassment is a crime as well as a tort. Contrary to what was more than once suggested, this does not modify in any way the constituents of the wrong. 

23 b.[53] Parliament's intention in passing the Protection from Harassment Act 1997 was to criminalise the kind of serious and persistent unwarranted threat which is alleged here, giving a right of civil action as a fallback. In this situation it ought not to be left to hardy individuals to put their savings and homes at risk by suing. The primary responsibility should rest upon local public authorities which possess the means and the statutory powers to bring alleged harassers, however impersonal and powerful, before the local justices.''

 

24. (ii) Harrison v Link Financial Ltd [2011] EWHC B3 (Mercantile) https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Mercantile/2011/B3.html 

24a Where HHJ Chambers QC concluded at [83]:

24b. ''Cumulatively and damningly is what I find to be the way that MBNA and the Defendant went about recovering their debt. [...] It seems to me that such conduct has no proper function in the recovery of consumer debt. Whatever the strength of the suggestion that the courts should only be a last resort, I can see no legitimate comparison between a series of measured warnings which, after full opportunity for response, lead to legal proceedings and what took place. {...there} ...can be no excuse for conduct of which it must be supposed the sole purpose must have been to make the Claimant's life so difficult that he would come to heel. I cannot think that in a society that is otherwise so sensitive of a consumer's position this is conduct that should countenanced.''

25.  Vidal-Hall v Google Inc [2015] EWCA 311 which confirms that pecuniary loss is not necessary for compensation to be payable and that pure distress is enough.

26. The Vento guidelines stem from a landmark case from 2003 (Vento v Chief Constable of West Yorkshire Police) where the Court of Appeal set out clear guidelines for Courts and Tribunals to apply when they are assessing injury to feelings awards.  The Vento case decided that there is now an accepted quantum for compensation and the lowest band is between £900 to £8,800.  UKPC Ltd should consider itself fortunate that I am a reasonable person and have assessed my counterclaim at the lower end.  In a judgment at the Leeds County Court, 3SP00071 - Blamires v LGO, which was a claim for damages including a matter of a breach of the DPA, an award of £2,500 was granted as compensation for distress.

27. The debt collection and court process has significantly exacerbated the Defendant’s mental health conditions referred to in Exhibit B, causing worry, stress and anxiety. As a result, Defendant has had to consult medical and has been prescribed Zopiclone [Exhibit T] due to worrying at night. Therefore, Defendant should be compensated as such by the claimant; the Defendant believes the £300 figure to be reasonable and proportionate, as prescribed by the Financial Ombudsman Redress Scheme [Exhibit U].

Coupon-mad

Very good.  Nicely argued.

Saverule

So totally done!!! At the post office tomorrow morning, who do I send the WS to? UKPC or DBC Legal? 

So pleased it’s nearly over, getting a touch excited now. 😁

KeithP

Saverule said:

So totally done!!! At the post office tomorrow morning, who do I send the WS to? UKPC or DBC Legal? 

DCB Legal.
Isn't their name and address in the box on your Claim Form headed "Address for sending documents and payments (if different)"?

Umkomaas

Aren't you emailing the WS and evidence bundle attached as a pdf to the court and DCB Legal?

Saverule

KeithP said:

Saverule said:

So totally done!!! At the post office tomorrow morning, who do I send the WS to? UKPC or DBC Legal? 

DCB Legal.
Isn't their name and address in the box on your Claim Form headed "Address for sending documents and payments (if different)"?

Ta! I’ve misplaced the claim form, it’s floating around somewhere. Looked in their bundle and found a copy.  

RE: Email- court doesn’t have an email, it’s only physical address for doc’s. 

I’m emailing DCB Legal with WS & Video. Physical Hard copy being hand delivered tomorrow to the court with USB video. 

Saverule

Now going through their bundle and creating a crib sheet. Hearing is on 18th of August. 

Umkomaas

Saverule said:

KeithP said:

Saverule said:

So totally done!!! At the post office tomorrow morning, who do I send the WS to? UKPC or DBC Legal? 

DCB Legal.
Isn't their name and address in the box on your Claim Form headed "Address for sending documents and payments (if different)"?

Ta! I’ve misplaced the claim form, it’s floating around somewhere. Looked in their bundle and found a copy.  

RE: Email- court doesn’t have an email, it’s only physical address for doc’s. 

I’m emailing DCB Legal with WS & Video. Physical Hard copy being hand delivered tomorrow to the court with USB video. 

Have you tried here:

https://www.gov.uk/find-court-tribunal