PePiPoo Helping the motorist get justice

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

Operator 'Lied' in Small Claims Court, Birmingham - private land - summer 2016
Mystified-one
post Thu, 4 Jan 2018 - 18:40
Post #1


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 20
Joined: 4 Jan 2018
Member No.: 95,785




Hello

This was in relation to a Parking ticket on private land from a ‘known operator’ – ticket issued in the summer of 2016.

The case hinged on signage – I think that the Operator has effectively 'lied' in Court over signage as there was only one sign in the car park when the ticket was issued – the signage was substantially increased within 3 weeks of the parking ticket y the ‘Operator’.
The judge did not accept my 'expert' testimony as to the number of signs.

The Operator was represented by a Barrister and I represented myself and I'm not a Solicitor.

I have been refused any right of Appeal.

I thought that I had a strong Defence/Witness Statement but I think that the decision is 'political'.

I was not impressed with the DDJ and as did not introduce either 'themselves' or the Barrister even though it was clear that both were knew each other very well.

Things turned down when I questioned the Right of Appearance of someone who had not introduced 'themselves'.

The DDJ said that the Court had not received any documents from me for the Hearing - even though I had a an email acknowledgement of receipt of documents.

The Judge did not want to know my case - it was a 'Stitch Up' - I think that my Witness Statement was more than they could handle.

Just warning you guys out there - the Small Clams Court is very uncertain.

I'm obviously being cautious with the post - but I've have had a disappointing experience as defending the truth - I'm not a liar - I asked the Judge if it was thought that I am a liar.

I need to get this off my chest as was a 'shocker' - 'lies' preferred to the 'truth' and with other Witness Statements dismissed as 'nothing'.

Cheers! rolleyes.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
3 Pages V  < 1 2 3  
Start new topic
Replies (40 - 40)
Advertisement
post Thu, 4 Jan 2018 - 18:40
Post #


Advertise here!









Go to the top of the page
 
Quote Post
Mystified-one
post Wed, 17 Jan 2018 - 23:56
Post #41


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 20
Joined: 4 Jan 2018
Member No.: 95,785



QUOTE (hcandersen @ Wed, 17 Jan 2018 - 22:11) *
Joint tenants. One permit. One of the joint tenants was not aware of the scheme.

Will we ever penetrate the fog of this and discover the truth?

And have you established what evidence was presented to the court?

You will lose if all you're doing is disagreeing with the decision. You must focus on procedure and evidence.

'I think that the hearing should have been adjourned owing to the documents issue.'

We all have opinions and it wasn't.


Yes - One flat sharer did not have their own vehicle and so had little if indeed anything to do with the permit and as was a new 'scheme' and a new Tenancy.
I agree about focussing on evidence and procedure - I have some ideas and forgive if me if I don't test them all on here.
Hopefully - the 'reams' might also be of some benefit to those like me as not familiar with the Court processes and procedures.
Thanks,
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

3 Pages V  < 1 2 3
Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 



Advertisement

Advertise here!

RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: Wednesday, 23rd May 2018 - 03:05
Pepipoo uses cookies. You can find details of the cookies we use here along with links to information on how to manage them.
Please click the button to accept our cookies and hide this message. We’ll also assume that you’re happy to accept them if you continue to use the site.