Biting back with a vengeance

GettingOnInYears

This is it in a nut-shell. The full appeal less an annex of instances that show distress caused, exacerbated in the Witness Statement, as well as the aggravating factors material to a damages award

Full appeal

For those folk who are contemplating any legal action - or are defending a case against them, I must again point out that these submissions have all been constructed by using Microsoft Co-Pilot.

The programme is a dream. For instance when I wanted to refer to all of the relevant parts in my witness statement as to verified distress, aggravation etc, all I had to do was copy the Witness statement file (not open it - just copy) and paste it to Co-Pilot and ask it to search for every instance I wanted to rely on.

It constructs a case line by line, refers to applicable case law etc. It's an absolute dream, and to be honest I think it's only time before AI is fully capable of replacing judges in some cases. Probably for the best too.

Until the case was constructed by referring to the eggshell skull, Co-Pilot advised that the award would be small, likely not exceeding £1000, but once all of the aggravating factors, evidence of distress and my pre-existing personal nightmares were added using the eggshell principle. it adjusted the likely award to be at leat in the upper half of the middle Vento band and potentially into the lower of the top band. We'll see how that plays out but I guess it won't be this side of Bonfire Night.

kryten3000

Seriously, don't rely on AI to write anything you intend to put in front of a judge.

GettingOnInYears

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/82036735#Comment_82036735

Naturally anything from an AI programme needs to be double checked for certainty. In fact treble checked, but I still swear by the results it's achieved for me. There were some errors but if each sentence is scrutinised for correctness then it produced results that extend far beyond my own knowledge.

The case was strong. As strong as it could possibly have been, only the judge got it wrong on the award when she failed to use the correct means of assessing causation for damage/distress. If she had she used the correct principle as laid out in the case law that was mentioned in the case, she would then have awarded damages/compensation and costs.

At this stage though, I'm sort of happy it's got to an appeal as I believe the same judge may not have taken everything into account, whereas an appeal court should be more likley to properly assess the full case on causation and redress.

One other thing as well. It's been mentioned about using the voice call, ex tempore I believe it's called, and recording it. At the start of the call, the microphone is supposed to be muted so there's no interference with the judge's verdict and explanation. So, having a muted microphone it's perfectly legal to recite the speech word for word into a text to speech programme. It's just a problem if any recording of the conference is made but not note taking which is what a text to speech programme is.

As it stands, my appeal and Skeleton arguments are now complete and I just wish they would send the written order so I can kickstart the process.

1505grandad

FWIW (if the SA is for a Judge to view) - seems that the following paras in the SA refer to different gender?:-

Para 12 - "….breach caused him underlying life circumstances."

Para 19 - "…..caused her underlying life circumstances."

Also do the various "judgement" words relate to a legal doc.? - if so there should not be a middle "e".

GettingOnInYears

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/82037104#Comment_82037104

Yeah, I know, the anomaly has been corrected. It's my Christian name that confuses people, and AI I guess.

And the AI programme worded the finding as "judgment "which I thought was wrong, but it shows how good AI can be when it can differentiate between the use of the 2 spellings.

GettingOnInYears

I've been waiting for the sealed order from the court before submitting my appeal. In the meantime I added more to the appeal anyway which is worthy of consideration.

On Wednesday I called the court to ask about the sealed order and they told me what it said. Basically "case dismissed". I told them that they need to go to the judge for a correction as that wasn't a true reflection of the outcome. They did that and when I called them yesterday the judge had added confirmation of the DPA breach, and that the secondary claim for damages for distress was dismissed due to their being no evidence that the breach has actually caused distress. That's completely at odds with things mentioned in the witness statement and given orally at the hearing. All of which adds considerably to my appeal.

I e-mailed it off yesterday afternoon so here's another 4 - 6 month wait ahead. Justice does take some amount of time eh?

Here's the updated appeal - Updated appeal -REMOVED AND REPLACED IN MY NEXT POST

GettingOnInYears

Just got an Order to submit a transcript by September 25th.
Bloody frustrating and more cost but nevertheless an important piece of work. What's more annoying is the necessity of it having to be ordered and paid for for by myself - the appellant - when the court already has the CVP recording in it's possession.

So my estimate of an appeal being made and judgment given is now well into November

Coupon-mad

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/82096849#Comment_82096849

A transcript will be damn expensive. Has to be done by the court's approved transcribers.

With your email attaching it, add in the CMA's Open Letter from 3 weeks ago, which exposes issues such as lack of signs and lack of 'material information' on consumer notices, as the CMA investigate consumer protection issues around this industry.

GettingOnInYears

The official transcript is now awaiting court approval so should be with me very soon. It cost less than £100 and will be recoverable too.

In the meantime I've spent a good amount of extra time scrutinising and editing my appeal submission, as the appeal court has allowed, following delivery of the transcript. As I know what is in it, except for some minor typo's which don't impact the main appeal, I rewrote it and now attach it here again.

Once the transcript is with me I'll also post it here.

For what it's worth - this has been a very time consuming exercise. Without the personal circumstances I was undergoing - and still am to some extent as my wife is near end of life - the expected remedy would be substantially less than what I expect using the eggshell-skull principle. So would I do it again? Perhaps as I like to kick these jackasses where it hurts, but anyone else should be aware of the costs in bring such a case, which ought to be recoverable when they win.

In the meantime, the car park is still being monitored by CP Plus Ltd even though the town centre to which it belongs has now been sold in the last 6 or 7 weeks. That means, of course, that the ongoing contract which was with Praxis (although it was never signed anyway) is now defunct but the signage doesn't reflect any change of ownership. So any new PCN's issued as of now are also based on DVLA data that was obtained without reasonable cause.

New appeal

Coupon-mad

Good luck with this next stage!

In your actual document you have signed & dated it (under a statement of truth if needed)?