Mr Wilke assisted with two cases today at Stockport regarding parking charges issues at the Peel Centre, both of which were before DDJ Moses. Excel were using BW Legal, who had engaged advocates from LPC Law to turn up on the day.
One he came fully prepared for. The other simply asked for a lay representative on the day. As he was present he walked into the lions den.
Excel v Ms H - unprepared.
Excel were represented by a young chap from LPC Law.
Ms Hall stopped for 52 minutes in the Peel Centre complex because she felt ill. Excel argue this is a contractual event, and since she didn't pay, she owes them a PCN.
We tried very hard to argue that there was no contract, and even if there was, it had been frustrated by her illness, but as none of this had been pled or dealt with prior to court the judge rightly dismissed it, He decided
a contract had been entered into and breached. The defence was dismissed.
Mr Wilkie agrees with the judge on this - sorry to say - you can't ambush the claimant on the day.
Excel v Ms C C8DP36F0
This case was assisted by Barry Beavis to prepare a defence. Excel were represented by an older gentleman from LPC Law.
Ms C parked in the Peel Centre, and bought a ticket. She typed in her reg, and it printed "P". The judge made a finding of fact that her evidence was truthful, and that she purchased a ticket in compliance with the terms.
Accordingly, as she was NOT in breach of contact, Excel were not entitled to ticket her.
The claim was dismissed with £86.55 costs - Excel's conduct was not unreasonable.
Prankster Notes
What do we learn from this?
a) You cannot overprepare for a court case. Even Ms C was not fully prepped for, as Fairlie an Fenton was not argued, despite the Excel's contract giving no tenancy or right to litigate. Mr Wilkie wasn't allowed to introduce
Fairlie and Fenton, or Excel and Cutts because it had not been raised in the initial defence.
c) Excel's claims that the ANPR and the ticket machine are synchronised are false, and it is not the responsibility of the consumer to help them fix it.
d) With two cases of bad machines under the belt, it will be easier to argue unreasonable conduct for the third, fourth etc. The other claim was C8DP11F9 – Excel v Mrs S – 09/09/2016, Oldham Court.
This allows larger costs to be claimed against Excel in the event of a claim being dismissed. If you have a PCN or court claim due to a faulty ticket at Peel Centre, you should cite these cases, and also inform The Prankster.
e) Simon Renshaw-Smith is "not fit to run a Car Park."
f) Excel Parking - you've been Gladstoned! Excel will have lost around £200 in the first case, even though they win the hearing. In the second claim, they will have lost an estimated £500.
Happy Parking
The Parking Prankster
is Mr Wilkie getting any costs for travel?
ReplyDeleteAre you still in support of Private Parking Appeals Ltd (of which you used to be a director)?
ReplyDeleteYou shouldn't ambush the claimant on the day, but by the same token, they shouldn't be bushwhacking the defendant by handing heavily redacted "contracts" directly to the judge. A little quid pro quo wouldn't go amiss.
ReplyDelete