A lesson in taking PROPER advice and not jumping in headfirst re litigation....

[Amethyst]

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/m...-a3817311.html

Very sad, but sadly the right judgment - the bailiff was send to collect on a judgment debt, the right course of action was NOT to sue the bailiff company. How on earth it ended up at £30k costs though. Goodness.

[jaguarsuk]

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/m...-a3817311.html

Very sad, but sadly the right judgment - the bailiff was send to collect on a judgment debt, the right course of action was NOT to sue the bailiff company. How on earth it ended up at £30k costs though. Goodness.

I'd love to know what she actually filed the claim based on.

[Amethyst]

Sorry forgot the judgment - http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2016/610.html

found it... http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2018/803.html

On 1 December 2011 Ms Loson issued proceedings in the County Court against the bailiffs seeking an injunction to restrain them from disposing of the vehicle and damages for the loss of the use of the vehicle in the four or five days when it was in the pound. The basis of the claim seems to have been that she had requested the bailiffs not to tow the car away until she (or her husband who was supposed to be dealing with the dispute about the parking ticket) had been given the opportunity to pay what was due. The bailiffs' defence was that Ms Loson was confrontational and unco-operative and that there was no prospect of payment.

[lgfa92]

The judgement is available - http://www.bailii.org/cgi-bin/format...l&query=(loson)

It's been ongoing issue since May 2010 - the initial court case in 2011 was an attempt to get an injunction against the bailiff and it's all dragged on since then. The latest case was an argument over two costs orders which had been made in the earlier cases - a district judge had made an instalment order which was overturned on appeal. The latest case was an appeal against that earlier decisions.

[Amethyst]

Was the original judgment against Mr Emzie a default judgment ? I suppose if he refused to apply to set that aside and let it go to enforcement she didn't feel she had have much choice but to try and prevent the baliffs but to get all the way to this point racking up £30k in costs ? Crazy beans.

[lgfa92]

The parking tribunal rejected their appeal so the order for recovery by the court was basically a rubber stamping exercise. It seems they also tried an appeal against the parking tribunal's decision...

As I understand it the court have to issue the order for recovery unless there's a procedural error - in the same way as a council tax liability order works. Where there's a tribunal route of appeal the court usually have very little power to consider the background of why the request for an order has been made.

For interest - the earlier case against the bailiff is listed here - http://www.bailii.org/cgi-bin/format...l&query=(loson)

[warwick65]

That is shocking

I can't see if she tried to use her own degree training or did someone/somewhere else egg her on.

As a law student she would have access to both the SU and probably law lecturers

It must be devastating for her - potentially implications to her apparent ambitions to practice law

[lgfa92]

In the original case against the bailiff the judgement states: "I do accept that Mr Emezie was the architect of these proceedings brought by his wife and that he was the controlling mind. It seems to me that costs would not have been incurred without his driving force."