Good to know.A driver who was hounded for a year over a parking ticket has won £1,000 in a landmark case after turning the tables on a 'cowboy' company.
Steven Beswick, 46, says he received a letter in May 2016 from Civil Enforcement Ltd informing him he owed £100 for supposedly overstaying at Halls Mill Retail Park in Bury.
The father-of-two claims he was threatened by bailiffs, solicitors and even with a court case by CEL, however he did research online and decided to stand his ground, claiming the company had no proof he was the driver.
Driver wins £1,000 in 'landmark' case.
-
Pote Snitkin
- The Watcher
- Posts: 6782
- Joined: 28 Apr 2014 09:43
- Location: In your loft, waiting
Driver wins £1,000 in 'landmark' case.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... 1-000.html
Dodgeball on the Criminal Procedure Rules - "FMOTL nonsense". Discuss.
Re: Driver wins £1,000 in 'landmark' case.
..and who exactly let's these private entities carry on "BAU" without the required or necessary checks and balances?
You've all been sold a lemon. Those not prepared to stand up are just as guilty. Zero backbone 'sheeple' who'll more often than not believe the hyperbole and fall for the bully boy tactics, stump up the readies and not even think they're propping up an easily corrupted system..
Has anyone disputed these stupendous unjust fees/fines on the basis that proof of such losses (suffered as a result of allegedly parking on bloody plot of land!) is actually justified? And fair? Who indeed actually lost out x amount being claimed?
Nothing short of insanity. Banana republics, we can only but apologise for our unwarranted, uncivil behaviour.
You've all been sold a lemon. Those not prepared to stand up are just as guilty. Zero backbone 'sheeple' who'll more often than not believe the hyperbole and fall for the bully boy tactics, stump up the readies and not even think they're propping up an easily corrupted system..
Has anyone disputed these stupendous unjust fees/fines on the basis that proof of such losses (suffered as a result of allegedly parking on bloody plot of land!) is actually justified? And fair? Who indeed actually lost out x amount being claimed?
Nothing short of insanity. Banana republics, we can only but apologise for our unwarranted, uncivil behaviour.
-
Schedule 12
- Posts: 13502
- Joined: 30 Jul 2012 21:23
- Location: Philippines
- Contact:
Re: Driver wins £1,000 in 'landmark' case.
Private parking companies must install front facing ANPR cameras to capture the driver. Otherwise, everyone will defend the claim the defendant is not the driver.
This could well end up becoming CPR3.4 territory costing the parking companies millions in failed claims and costs in favour of the wrongly accused defendant.
This could well end up becoming CPR3.4 territory costing the parking companies millions in failed claims and costs in favour of the wrongly accused defendant.
I am a paralegal working for solicitors bringing proceedings against bailiffs for non-compliant enforcement action.
Author: dealingwithbailiffs.co.uk
Phone consultation with me
Enforcement compliance Checklist
Author: dealingwithbailiffs.co.uk
Phone consultation with me
Enforcement compliance Checklist
Re: Driver wins £1,000 in 'landmark' case.
Well done to the Stephen for fighting this claim all the way and winning and also thanks to Peter for sending me here.
Re: Driver wins £1,000 in 'landmark' case.
What exactly shall be done to repeal this discussing uncivilised and unwarranted type of action? How many others didn't take their case and have lost out?
More to the point perhaps, are we really in the 21st century?
More to the point perhaps, are we really in the 21st century?