Bank Park Management Windscreen PCN CCJ - didn't receive anything - set aside hearing upcoming - help!!-

[TheCat08]

UPDATE:-  So we went to the Set Aside hearing on 5th Jan.  The neighbour asked me to speak on his behalf. 

Not good news I'm afraid.  The judge would not accept the following:-

1) The badge to have been on proper display.  

 

2) Other than one letter & the judgement notice to have been received.  Even though we took the other persons mail which had been received to his address.  The claimant said they had sent their submissions for the set aside hearing to him (they claimed) on the 9th Dec, but he had not received these either, so again they had gone to the other address !!  

 

3) Even if he set it aside, based on the draft defence there would be no real chance of defending the action. 

 

4) That he wasn't the driver at the time. The judge asked who the driver was at the time.  I advised I was under no legal obligation to disclose this.  His response was " I will ask you once more", so I repeated the same.   The claimant stated this was a freedom of information situation & therefore the person who was driving at the time we should disclose details of?

 

5) There were photo's which the claimant alleged were of the inside of the car.  I was allowed to view these on the solicitors iPad.  The judge stated he could not see the badge on the seat.  We could not even make out any detail of the picture he was looking at as it was completely black, with just a slight bit of reflection off the inside door handle !!   My neighbour didn't believe this was a picture of his car.  I was quite astounded they had the nerve to take pictures of the interior of people's cars & feel this is some sort of privacy breach?? 

 

The Claimant's solicitor was in attendance.  He had not received the copies of the draft defence etc I had sent to them, yet the judge accepted this can happen for the claimant. !!  I had copies with me, so offered one to the claimant.  The judge gave him time to read though before continuing with the hearing. 

 

The judge was going through the bundle they had sent in ( which we had not received  & had no sight of as there was not a copy available to us )   In this was an alleged contract between Bank Park Management & INTU at Merry Hill Shopping Centre, allowing them to 'police' the car parks at the centre. 

 

I asked to appeal:-  The judge heard the appeal within 10 mins of his summing up.  I stated the wrong person was being pursued. He stated he had not misappropriated the law, there was no chance of a defence should a set aside be granted & this was based on the draft defence submitted.  I advised the draft was as stated ' a draft' which was not in it's entirety, but he still denied the set aside. 

 

He said I could try an N164.  ?????  Now on top of the £350 they have already lodged against him, the judge awarded another £156 to the claimant for solicitors attendance !!!  

 

As neither party had received copies of what had been sent to the court, then I believe the judge should have adjourned the hearing to allow for this to be corrected. 

 

The person who was driving the car at the time ( a relative of his ) has said to put the N164 in & they will go to court with my neighbour to reveal it was the driver at the time.  Is it really worth the risk?   Your views would be really appreciated.  

 

 

[FTMDave]

Really sorry to hear about this.

 

It won't have helped that the fleecer's solicitor turned up, nor that you had had no chance to see their WS.

 

It's perfectly possible the charlatans knocked up a photo of the inside of any old car and never sent a WS to your friend knowing its disappearance could be blamed on the postal problem.  That's the sort of people you're dealing with. 

 

But in any case a judge shouldn't be asking who the driver was.  We call it the "judge lottery".  Judges can be biased and useless at their jobs like anyone in any profession.

 

Sadly it's time to throw in the towel.  There's no point continuing.

[TheCat08]

My thoughts too FTMDave on the whole of your comments.  Sadly, the person who was driving is not in a position to pay the CCJ in full, so this now remains against my friend. 

 

Just now want others to know if they have any dealings with Merry Hill Shopping Centre & this company, don't use anything about them 'potentially'  not having a contract to operate.  I say potentially, as I never had the privilege of seeing this alleged contract !!

 

My only other thought was if I write to the scammers asking if they set aside the CCJ & I will pay the amount in full for my friend, so he can pay me what he can afford on a monthly basis.  What are your thoughts, is it worth a try? 

[FTMDave]

Sadly I think that boat has sailed.  The time to ask the fleecers if they would consent to set aside was when your friend discovered the CCJ, not now after a set aside hearing and after the scammers turned up in court to oppose set aside.

 

One thought.

 

If you defy the court and don't pay a judgment within 30 days you get stuck with a CCJ.

 

If you pay in full, after the 30 days, you still get stuck with a CCJ.

 

So one option would be for your friend to simply defy the court and continue not to pay.  I've been on this site for seven years, and I've never seen the charlatans enforce judgement for a single ticket.

 

The only worry is £360 + £156 = £516.  This is a reasonable sum and might push the fleecers towards enforcement.  It's short of the magic £600 high court bailiffs point though.  Hang on and see what the other regulars think.

[dx100uk]

Judge lottery.

 

Dx

[FTMDave]

Thinking about it, £360 is a hell of a lot, even after a default judgement, for a single parking ticket.

 

Can you please let us have the maths as to how the fleecers broke down the £360.

[TheCat08]

DX100, it was a Judge Lottery & was a judge who was completely bias on their behalf.   

 

FTMDave  --- I note your comments about the CCJ still having 30 days to pay.   Is this from the date of the Set Aside hearing?   

 

I've asked my friend for the figures breakdown, but as he has not received any of the paperwork from these horrid people,

 

so he does not have anything showing the actual figures breakdown!! 

 

We only have the figures from what was said in court. 

 

When I asked for the appeal, I did say in this that the figures were excessive, but the judge never even acknowledged this submission. 

 

My only thoughts would be a SAR to gain this, which I'm quite happy to do.   Do you think this is worth it? 

 

To put this out there & would welcome any reply, am I right in the following please?  :- 

 

1)  A disabled bay is a courtesy & not enforceable in law? 

 

2)  The disabled person, who was a passenger in the vehicle, had & still has a valid Blue Badge. 

 

3)  The driver used the Merry Hill Shopping Centre facilities, therefore the landlord still profited from the driver & it's passengers attendance.  

 

COULD THIS POTENTIALLY BE USED IN AN N164 SUBMISSION ? 

 

FTMDave ---- Just remembered, the fleecers tried to say the driver had no right in using the Blue Badge, because it was not the driver who was not the driver who was disabled? 

 

I did reply to this, advising the disabled person was a passenger in the vehicle at the time, therefore the valid Blue Badge was allowed to be used. 

Edited January 9, 2023 by TheCat08
To add content

[dx100uk]

Blue badges mean nothing on private land 

 

Dx

[FTMDave]

Regarding the judgement, it should have been something like

 

£100  PCN

£ 60  Unicorn Food Tax

£ 35  Claim fee

£ 50 legal costs

£ 20 interest

------------------------

£265

 

41 minutes ago, TheCat08 said:

My only thoughts would be a SAR to gain this, which I'm quite happy to do.   Do you think this is worth it? 

The problem with a SAR is that the fleecers' last communication would probably have been a Letter of Claim for £160, then solicitors would have taken over and added/invented the other legal costs.

 

It might just be easier for your friend to phone the solicitors, be all nice as pie and pretend they want to pay, and ask to be sent a PDF of the claim form.

 

I know the set aside hearing was 5 January.  What was the date of the original CCJ?

 

I'll be frank with you and admit I'm out of my depth with talk of an N164 and when the 30 days run out, if you can please answer this question I'll flag the thread up FAO Site Team members who know more than me.

[TheCat08]

dx100uk - Therefore, regardless of whether they could see the Blue Badge or nor was really irrelevant?? 

 

FTMDave - I appreciate all the info & guidance already given.  If anything, this is a massive learning curve.  Anything we can take from this personally or for the benefit of others on the site is a total bonus. 

 

 The original CCJ was Septermber 7th 2022.  Which was what we were told in court. 

 

If you could flag up about the question about the N164 please.  It would be very interesting to see if there is an avenue still open? 

 

Thank you 

 

 

 

 

[FTMDave]

Done!

[FTMDave]

Right - bad news.

 

Given your friend didn't pay by 7 October 2022 they are stuck with a CCJ and a knackered credit file for six years.  A successful set aside would have reset the 30 days ... but as we know it wasn't successful.

 

If your friend doesn't pay - they are stuck with the CCJ.

 

If your friend pays - they are stuck with the CCJ.

 

I think the conclusion is easy to draw.

 

Senior Site Team members with years & years of experience discourage trying to appeal.  One judge has already ruled against your mate and any further judge is likely to do the same.

[TheCat08]

At least we tried.  Will have to mark this up to experience,  In the grand scheme of thing of things at least I have learned how to attack these horrid fleecers. Will just have to wait &  see if they enforce it??  Thank you for all your help with this. 

[FTMDave]

If the fleecers want to enforce they will have to return to court, so your friend would have ample warning.

 

It would be a good idea for them to sort out this problem with the post though.

Edited January 13, 2023 by FTMDave
Typo

[TheCat08]

We have contacted the local Royal mail office, but initially they put it down to when our usual Posty was away & it was a relief that was making the error. 

 

However, I have witness our usual Postie delivering our neighbours post to us.  When I challenged the Posty about it, his excuse was (because the other address is empty) the post is piling up so the Posty thought it better to leave us their mail !!!. 

 

I asked about delivering our mail to the empty address?  Posty told me it will have been in error when just glanced the door number!!! 

 

I told Posty what had been caused by merely "glancing",  not with just this but with other important information. 

 

Posty apologised, yet we are still getting the other addresses post & I have had to chase other documents we have not received. 

 

Clearly to conversation I had with Posty has not had any impact, so I am waiting to see Posty again.  I shall make it clear this time & explain there will not be a 3rd conversation, so if Posty does not pay attention then I will put in a formal complaint.   

 

Luckily majority of companies I have been dealing with, when I have explained what has happened, have been obliging & sent the documents via email. 

[FTMDave]

I think the time for quiet words with Posty is long gone.  Your friend has lost a court case and a set hearing due to this basic incompetence.

 

Time for an official complaint and demand for compensation (which no doubt RM will do everything they can to wheedle out of.

[TheCat08]

FTMDaveBank Windscreen PCN - parked in BB bay without BB- Merry Hill Shopping Centre

Quote

If you want to appeal, of course the site will help you all the way.

 

It's just that senior Site Team members, who have worked all their lives in the legal field, are of the opinion that a new judge is unlikely to go against the previous (useless) judge's opinion.

 

I think that you were incredibly unlucky in that (a) the fleecers bothered to turn up to the set aside hearing which hardly ever happens and (b) you hadn't been given any details of what they would be arguing.

 

My friend is still seething.  The person who was driving the vehicle at the time has also offered to step forward. 

 

If my friend does decide to lodge the N164, would we be able to introduce the following:-

1)   In the set aside hearing, The Claimant acknowledged they were in possession of a copy of the letter  sent to the claimant which included a copy of the valid BB, therefore:-

F.3 Appeals - had been lodged. 

In considering appeals parking operators must recognise the following as mitigating circumstances warranting cancellation of a parking charge, subject to evidence being provided:

 

e) where a Blue Badge has not been displayed but the holder of the Blue Badge supplies a copy of the Blue Badge they hold that would have been valid at the time and in the circumstances identified in the notice of parking charge i.e. that the holder was in the vehicle whether or not as the driver);

 

2)  The disabled bay only had a symbol on the floor, not a pole defining the parking.  Nevertheless, a  disabled parking space is inoperable on private land & not enforceable in law. 

 

3)  The driver at the time of the "alleged contravention", has attended the hearing & willing to revert the case to them, as they had not received such notices of a private land contravention. 

 

4)  Even though both parties had sent each other evidence they would each be relying on at the set aside hearing, neither party had received the documents.  Therefore, the hearing should have been adjourned to allow each party to receive & respond to what was being submitted by each party

 

Anything else anyone would like to add in attempt to set out a basis of appeal would be gratefully received. 

 

 

[FTMDave]

Of course.  You can bring up what you want in an appeal application.

 

Just please carefully consider that you might be throwing good money after bad, as highly-experienced Site Team members have suggested.

 

You're right to be seething.  I've been on this forum for seven years and have seen set asides granted easily every time.  Apart from two.  One where the Cagger was abroad and asked for a telephone hearing and couldn't hear the fleecers' arguments.  And yours where you had no idea what the charlatans had prepared for the hearing.  You have been very unlucky.

Edited January 16, 2023 by FTMDave
Typo

[TheCat08]

Please can I invite anything else anyone would like to add ? Seriously  thinking about the N164. 

[TheCat08]

The seething & bruising is still running deep on this one.  However, after very careful consideration my mate has decided not to lodge the N164.  

 

What my mate does not understand is why a judge would think it acceptable to charge such extorniate amounts for parking, as it didn't cause anyone any harm.  As he says " Bloody lot of money for a simple mistake !!!"

 

He is now worrying about what to do about making the payment, because of the solicitor fees that were added on at the end of the Set Aside hearing. 

 

His question is "How likely are these bleep, bleep, scammers to enforce & should he pay?"

 

 

Edited February 10, 2023 by TheCat08

[FTMDave]

How much does he "owe" now (original CCJ + set aside costs combined)?

[TheCat08]

It's £156 for the solicitor on the Set Aside hearing & £256 on the original claim

[FTMDave]

That's "good" news as £412 is nowhere near the sum of £600 which is the point when they can get High Court bailiffs in.

 

They can get County Court bailiffs in, but it's unlikely and the court would let you know before ...

 

... but then there's the damn problem of the disappearing post.  Upthread I wrote that your mate needs to deal with this, but I explained myself badly.  Personally I'd be contacting the family of the deceased person, and in writing not a quiet chat, explaining that you've lost two court hearings due to your post going missing, and can the two of you find a solution to Royal Mail's incompetence such as periodic meetings to exchange the post.

 

I would also complain to Royal Mail and not take being fobbed off as an answer.

[TheCat08]

My mate has put in a complaint to Royal Mail, so waiting on reply this.  The relatives of the deceased rarely visit the property,  but I ask my mate to put a letter though in the hope they open it & they can arrange any exchanges.  It is a proverbial pain in the back side for him.