CVP hearing questions

[rhino666]

I was the claimant in a Cloud Video Platform small claims track hearing; what a great idea.
Hopefully someone on here has more experience than me of procedure and can answer a few questions.
The Deputy Judge opened with a dissuasive comment at the idea of a potential appeal. I've been to a few court hearings before and not encountered this; would it be considered normal to comment on the idea of an appeal at the start of a hearing?
The defendant was then allowed to include a significant witness in person. The defendant's N180 only specified that one person, the defendant, would attend and I was given no notice of the extra attendee. I pointed this out by displaying the relevant N180 page but my permission was neither sought nor given. This was a key witness in the case but their involvement at the hearing, should, in my opinion, have ended with the signed statement supplied with the defendant's hearing documents; can anyone clarify please?

[atticus]

Sorry, but no. You had the opportunity to cross examine this witness.

[rhino666]

Judgement went against me much against the feeling of the 2+ hour hearing and evidence proffered in my claim which hinged on issues that are my area of technical expertise. After what I consider to be, if not the worst, the most surprising travesty of justice I have encountered, I have to appeal.
As this was a small claims track hearing, carried out on 21st November I think I have to get an N164 permission/appeal form to the court by 12th December; given the Royal Mail's performance at the moment I will email a copy too. I thought I may be able to pay the fee via MCOL but it now appears that an old fashioned cheque enclosed with the N164 is the only way to pay?

[atticus]

I thought I may be able to pay the fee via MCOL but it now appears that an old fashioned cheque enclosed with the N164 is the only way to pay?

Then send a cheque.

[rhino666]

The crux of this case and the basis of my claim was to prove that a car Electronic Control Unit(ECU) I had supplied to the defendant's garage sustained visible and proven damage incurred by a cause external to the ECU. I suggest the defendant had to prove that the ECU I supplied damaged itself. The damage was admitted by the garage to have occurred whilst the ECU was in their possession. I actually have the part, as it was returned to me, so able to prove that two x one way switches(diodes) on the two ECU live circuits were burnt by the live, 12 volt power on those circuits being short circuited to earth. The visibly lesser damaged diode on the permanent 12 volt circuit, that is always live, did not work at all, so power would not get to the ECU on that circuit. The much more burnt and split diode on switched 12 volt circuit, that becomes live when the ignition is actuated with a key, did still work but was fused such that power could still get to the ECU but could also flow out of the ECU. The car still ran perfectly and charged the battery perfectly, despite the damage. These diodes are the first significant components encountered on the ECU live circuits. There are no possible earths available on these ECU circuits at or before the damaged diodes and the diodes themselves have no earths, so the earth that caused the short circuit damage must have been introduced externally. As both the permanent live circuit and separate switched live circuit were affected, this damage must have occurred with the ignition turned on and quite probably with the car running. I suggest that the only way that both these live circuits could short circuit is direct contact with the battery live and earth internal plates(heat warping) or much more plausibly direct contact between the live and earth terminals, perhaps via battery jump leads or battery charging leads. The damage caused to the diodes would have produced some smoke and an acrid smell inside the car where the ECU is positioned. At least one fuse would also have blown and there may have been other associated obvious issues. The ECU could not possibly damage itself with a short circuit at the point of damage as no earth available. I also tested both permanent and switched live circuits on the ECU by connecting to a 12 volt car battery when testing and programming transponder chips to the ECU and an associated immobiliser prior to supply.

I presented this information as an expert at the hearing and was allowed to give a clear explanation, with the aid of commented A4 photographs, showing the ECU and damage. I was not contradicted or asked for any clarification, so considered that my evidence and explanation was understood and accepted. I did also request a report from an independent expert on the N180 and it is perhaps an anomaly that this was apparently ignored and effectively precluded when pursued subsequent to the N157 indicating that my N180 request had been ignored.

The defendant admitted at the hearing to relying entirely on the garages technical knowledge and version of events. The garage owner produced a tame statement, so he was allowed to attend the hearing with no notice given to me and against the N180 statement that no witness other than the defendant would appear at the hearing. I have dealt with this person before and he was uncharacteristically unrelaxed to the point that he was physically sick before the hearing even started, such was the stress of his situation. He confirmed provenly incorrect information at the hearing and lied about not knowing the ECU had been damaged and the cause. He was incredible and the only answer the defence had to my proven factual version of events. He left the hearing after 15 minutes or less and audibly cursed as he did so. The judge made a point of saying that he was not to be considered an expert witness.

The defendant's wholly retaliatory counterclaim was destroyed by the judge long before summing up. The defendant was ineffective without making a single proven point. Most of the points raised had been explained/dealt with before, so raising them again at the hearing was always going to be ineffectual and damaging to the already compromised defence case.

At this stage I believe I had done as well as I possible was capable of, not a perfect performance but certainly felt far better than it probably was by the inefficacy of the defendant and witness.

Aside from the judge being dissuasive about the idea of an appeal at the very start of the hearing, the only other oddity was a persistent effort to get me to admit that I was a business. I am not a business, so resisted this suggestion but it was raised on several occasions. I did ask why this was being persisted with as at the time as it did not seem to be relevant; no satisfactory answer at the time but it came later.

I felt very confident that I had won the claim and the defendant had also lost their counterclaim but summing up and judgement was a numbing shock. The judge rejected my claim, finding the part I supplied to be faulty and as I was now apparently judged to be a business, the defendant had a right of return for a full refund within 30 days of delivery. I suggest that the judge should have attempted to discredit my evidence/explanation at a much earlier stage in the hearing if this was where judgement was heading. If there was any doubt or further explanation/justification required, I would have had a chance to address that as the defendant did with the counterclaim. The defendant's counterclaim was refused entirely but I had to pay the defendant maximum costs of £95 and also the £70 cost of the counterclaim. now aside from the judgement being wrong, isn't it an anomaly that I should pay the fee for an absurd and wholly retaliatory counter claim that was entirely rejected by the judge?

The judge had been calm and professional throughout and I listened numbly to the summary and judgement. The last part of the judgement was the £95 maximum costs to be paid and the judge very strangely asked me my opinion about that; obvious self doubt after such a polished performance, It was difficult to answer.

I hope those that have read this have some sympathy for me and understand why I have to appeal. I was completely happy with the 2+ hours hearing up until the most important part, the 2 minute or less summing up and judgement. Ideally I would want a fair minded person to watch the CVP hearing video and reappraise the situation. I understand that just getting permission for an appeal is difficult, so evidence and poor judgement aside, it would be very useful if anyone can spot any anomalies in process, application of law, etc.

I have not got much time to pursue this appeal and will need help and advice to have any chance of getting justice here. Please reply if you can offer anything at all to help me or indeed if anything I have presented here needs further clarification.

Thank you.