Monday, 2 March 2015

DEAL breaker

The Prankster has received this court report hot off the press from Eastbourne.

I arrived at Eastbourne County Court nice and early. The clerk of court asked if I knew if the claimants were coming and I said it would be unlikely. [Prankster note. They are probably getting ready for their criminal hearing in Scotland on Wednesday] I went in at 2pm and the judge said he would continue with case management as I had an unusual argument he wanted to hear more about; namely that my membership of the Co-op had supremacy of contract over CEL's claims. I explained rather badly about mutual society and club law and he said that he wasn't sure and asked what else could I say to rebut their claim. I told him about the failure to respond to my CPR31.14 request for documents for sight of contract; proof of who was driving my vehicle as it wasn't me (this was a pre PoFA parking event); proof of Mr Shwarts acting on behalf of DEAL; and assignment of residue of supposed debt. He asked me if PoFA made a difference to my defence if it went to full hearing. I explained that protocols for keeper liability have a strict timetable and even if applicable CEL would have failed.

I was asked about the fake solicitors signature and explained a little about the Creative/CEL/DEAL structure. He asked me if I knew about the Bristol case and I said that I did and that is why I thought that he might have stayed this hearing until after the end of the month when that would have decided certain things. I also told him that I had copies of the General Order of Judgment handed down from other courts and he asked me where I got my copies from. I told him that I got them from the Parking Prankster as redacted copies and he said they are available to the public in full if required.

He then said that he had warned DEAL that if they didn't show up he would make a summary judgment so he did.

Claim summarily dismissed with costs. 

My counterclaim is stayed for a year in case they want to ask for a continuance but he thought it unlikely - and if they did that the chances of him finding for them was nil and it would be unlikely that another judge would either so said that he didn't think it would be wise of them to argue.
He didn't comment on the strength of my defence as he had no need to. DEAL have shot themselves in the foot again and it is clear that their reputation has gone before them.

Prankster Note

It is not entirely clear whether DEAL will be still in existence in a year's time.

Happy Parking

The Parking Prankster


  1. It looks a though DEAL are getting desperate. This from PePiPoo today:-

    "I have just put the phone down from a call from DEAL asking if I wished to make an offer in response to their claim. I made it clear in no uncertain terms that I DID NOT wish to make an offer. Nice try DEAL but you're not getting a penny out of me."

  2. Make that two phone calls today.

  3. maybe they need petrol money for the trip to Scotland later today

  4. I'd be interested in hearing more about the unusual argument - given I'm a member of the co-op (though I'm a member of the midcounties lot).