Groundbreaking decision :)

[odds]

Just thought that I would share this.

 

http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/greater-manchester-news/mum-daughter-team-who-won-12849258

 

This pair who both allegedly work in the legal profession seem to think they have come across some sort of legal loophole that nobody on the planet knows about. Maybe they should have asked Ericsbrother for advice and it wouldn't have even got to court in the first place

[DragonFly1967]

Yeah, we'd have never thought of that

[dx100uk]

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/3263657/parking-fine-appeal-won-manchester-landmark-legal-case-help-millions-drivers/

 

 

shame they called them FINES

shame they called them Penalty Charge Notices.

 

 

usual mistakes for the press

[Oddfellow]

"The judge had never come across that defence before"????

 

 

Really? At Manchester "Civil" Court (I presume they mean County)?

 

 

Excel reckon they could have avoided it getting to court if the defendant had engaged with them earlier? That's alright then - all you defendants can write to Excel telling them they are engaging with them to stop it getting to court - drop the claim, please"

[Oddfellow]

Oh, and it's not a "legal loophole" - Excel simply failed to comply with statute law.

[silverfox1961]

Groundbreaking?? that'll be a no then!

 

This argument has been around for a few years now. Obviously in Manchester, the public are fully law abiding and pay to park in a car park meaning that very few actual cases get to court. Either that or the judge doesn't do many parking related cases.

 

Excel won't care either way as they make enough from the mugs who think that Excel have some magical power over them.

[ericsbrother]

I'm glad that they defeated the claim but I doubt if the hyperbole is theirs but typical of a reporter who has been told something they didnt know before and wants to tell the world what they have discovered.

 

As regulars here know Excel sue a lot of people who use the Peel Centre and they have been found wanting on many occasions. The layout and the signage of the car park is appaling, despite the signs being changed twice in the last 2 years. The ticket machines often dont work and Excel have a very long history in believing they are always right and the judges who hand down the decisions are somehow dimwits to believe the evidence of the motorist.

 

Excel are leading lights of the IPC, whose mambers are told by Will and John that the POFA isnt for them as they have superpowers that transcend mere written laws but time and again, in a clearly argued point they find out that the judges dont actually belive in father christmas and the law does apply, even to IPC members.

 

I do like the comment about engagement, that is very rich from Excel, who even as I write are busy suing others for pre POFA claims as keepers of a vehicle in car parks wheere they didnt have any rights because they were managed by VCS, a sister company. That doesnt stop Excel from telling lies to judges though. I would rephrase this last bit to avoid outrage by people who cannot believe that they are anything other than paragons of virtue in the parking world but cant think of a suitable metaphor.

Edited April 6, 2017 by honeybee13
Paras.

[ericsbrother]

BTW, there is no such thing as a legal loophole, everything is allowed that is not otherwise prescribed. In other words there is the assumption in law you may do something unless the law says you cant. so the burden of proof is ALWAYS on the shoulders of those who say the action is prescribed. You dont have to prove you are not Jack the Ripper, the legal process has to prove you are.

 

This has always been the case in England since well before William the Conqueror but kings since his time have tried to claim otherwise. Not so good for King John, Charles I or James II. Parliament came unstuck when they tried to suspend Habeas Corpus.

Edited April 6, 2017 by honeybee13
Paras.