County Court Claim from BW Legal for Excel Parking

[charitynjw]

Re: County Court Claim from BW Legal for Excel Parking

Hi

I posted a thread earlier today about citation of authoritative cases.
http://legalbeagles.info/forums/show...of-authorities

I believe it may be particularly relevant in appeal cases.

( [MENTION=71570]R0b[/MENTION] .......any views?)

[Jimbo Jetset]

Re: County Court Claim from BW Legal for Excel Parking

Hi [MENTION=71570]R0b[/MENTION], thanks for clearing that up for me. I did finally get the order and the n460 with it so sent it off with my appellants notice also in triplicate.
As for the Skeleton Argument I'm afraid I don't have any previous experience whatsoever, however, I'm sure I could cobble something together with a little help. Would you be able to give me some pointers on this and the Grounds for Appeal you were kind enough to help with earlier in this thread? Also, do you think it worthwhile to submit the Smith vs Excel transcript that [MENTION=105408]Spudandros[/MENTION] is offering to make available?

[Spudandros]

Re: County Court Claim from BW Legal for Excel Parking

Yes please @Spudandros, unfortunately I couldn't find a copy of the Smith case transcript. Reckon I'd have won if I had it so might well help in my appeal, if I ever get there....

You need to know the background though as its slighltly different to yours. Mr Smith was disabled and didn't drive. He bought and insured his car and gave it to his grand daughter as a present to use as she liked and she then got 3 parking tickets. His son in law Daz Clayton offered to help and lay rep. Daz has kindly given me the OK to release the transcript. i also have the full bundle submitted to appeal. Paragraph 4 is the key point in the transcript.

err. how do I attach a document??? It doesn't seem to like .docx files

[Spudandros]

Re: County Court Claim from BW Legal for Excel Parking

Hi

I posted a thread earlier today about citation of authoritative cases.
http://legalbeagles.info/forums/show...of-authorities

I believe it may be particularly relevant in appeal cases.

( @R0b .......any views?)

Charity, could you forward the transcript to [MENTION=638]Jimbo[/MENTION]? I can't seem to attach it. I'm new to this forum!

[Jimbo Jetset]

Re: County Court Claim from BW Legal for Excel Parking

You need to know the background though as its slighltly different to yours. Mr Smith was disabled and didn't drive. He bought and insured his car and gave it to his grand daughter as a present to use as she liked and she then got 3 parking tickets. His son in law Daz Clayton offered to help and lay rep. Daz has kindly given me the OK to release the transcript. i also have the full bundle submitted to appeal. Paragraph 4 is the key point in the transcript.

err. how do I attach a document??? It doesn't seem to like .docx files

Yes this was something that bw illegal were very keen to point out when I referenced it at my hearing and made a big fuss about it not having any relevance, as it was his granddaughter driving and not an unrelated person as it was in my case. They didn't need to worry as I'm sure the DJ was just humoring me and had no intention of allowing such a lowly individual to direct proceedings in her courtroom, whilst smiling as sweetly as possible, as she reminded me of my place! She went to great lengths to explain that she wasn't bound by any previous case histories as this was a civil action...

[Amethyst]

Re: County Court Claim from BW Legal for Excel Parking

Sorry, we're working on allowing docx files, for now tho you have to resave as a doc file(2003-2007 option on word I think) or a PDF xx

[charitynjw]

Re: County Court Claim from BW Legal for Excel Parking

Charity, could you forward the transcript to @Jimbo? I can't seem to attach it. I'm new to this forum!

Sorry, we're working on allowing docx files, for now tho you have to resave as a doc file(2003-2007 option on word I think) or a PDF xx

I don't think I can PM an attachment.
@Amethyst......if not, can I email it to you to pass on?

[Amethyst]

Re: County Court Claim from BW Legal for Excel Parking

Ahh thought you wanted to put it in the thread. No you can't pm attachments.

[Spudandros]

Re: County Court Claim from BW Legal for Excel Parking

Yes this was something that bw illegal were very keen to point out when I referenced it at my hearing and made a big fuss about it not having any relevance, as it was his granddaughter driving and not an unrelated person as it was in my case. They didn't need to worry as I'm sure the DJ was just humoring me and had no intention of allowing such a lowly individual to direct proceedings in her courtroom, whilst smiling as sweetly as possible, as she reminded me of my place! She went to great lengths to explain that she wasn't bound by any previous case histories as this was a civil action...

It's a higher court. I would have assumed it was pursuasive. If it was an unrelated person, there was even less of a chance of agency.

"I drew to the attention of the parties at the outset of this hearing the Practice Direction on the citation of authorities, going back to 200, which specifically states that a decision on an application for permission to appeal must not be cited unless it established a new principle or extended the present law. That was not the case in relation to the case of Combined Parking Solutions v AJH Films. It established no new principle. It was clearly and on its face decided on the specific facts of that case which involved the defendant being a company rather than an individual and it also was a very short judgment of a single Lord Justice. Therefore it is not a judgment which should have been cited to the deputy district judge and insofar as she appears solely to have based her judgment on that, it seems to me that she did fall into error."


- - - Updated - - -

Ahh thought you wanted to put it in the thread. No you can't pm attachments.

Ok. Thanks.

[Spudandros]

Re: County Court Claim from BW Legal for Excel Parking

I'll try convert it to pdf

[Jimbo Jetset]

Re: County Court Claim from BW Legal for Excel Parking

She claimed it was hearsay as there was no transcript and even introduced the 'pranksters' report on the Evans case to demonstrate that the 'lowly surf' (me) should not attempt to think themselves capable in any way!!

[Spudandros]

Re: County Court Claim from BW Legal for Excel Parking

Well, there's a transcript now. What's the Evans case? Was this the Haworth case involving leaked keeper details or the clamping of the speaker?

[Amethyst]

Re: County Court Claim from BW Legal for Excel Parking

I don't really 'do' parking, but enjoyed reading the judgment, and Daz should be proud of himself

One bit I am confused over, the parking company knew the identity of the driver, so why was this case even in court ? ( see, told you I don't 'do' parking lol )

[Spudandros]

Re: County Court Claim from BW Legal for Excel Parking

I don't really 'do' parking, but enjoyed reading the judgment, and Daz should be proud of himself

One bit I am confused over, the parking company knew the identity of the driver, so why was this case even in court ? ( see, told you I don't 'do' parking lol )

The identity of the driver only came out in the initial hearing when the judge asked who was the driver, after it was revealed the Mr Smith couldn't have been the driver. Up to that point, it was just "a relative". It's a standard defence strategy in these cases not to name the driver and make the claimant prove it was the defendant, or rely on Sch4 to transfer liability to the keeper. But Excel don't meet the requirements of Sch4 so go after the keeper on the assumption they were the driver unless proven otherwise. Of course, the onus is on them to prove there case, but judges are a lottery at times.

[Amethyst]

Re: County Court Claim from BW Legal for Excel Parking

That makes complete sense, thank you. There's no legal obligation for the keeper to identify the driver, but the Sch 4 bit seems the sticking point - what's the difference between Sch4 being used to transfer liability to the keeper and the parking Co not being able to use Sch4 as in this case ? I didn't think they had to prove the keeper was the driver. I guess the law of agency because the contract is between the parking co and the person who parked, not between parking co and the car, hence the discussion about entering into a contract as a third party ( ie the granddaughter wasn't entering into a contract on behalf of the grandfather ) ... seems a major flaw with Sch4 and makes it a tad obsolete ? ( sorry if this is really basic stuff here btw, I'm just interested )