Devere Parking Services counterclaim for costs

peter_the_piper

Aaaah..................

ashleypride

Nice ending. Devere really are idiots with their POC "The defendant denies that she was driving her own vehicle on the date of event."

esmerobbo

Respect to them for seeing it though and getting their costs back. Its a pity all Judges are not as switched on, or so easily mislead!

backfoot

Probably why this Judge operates in higher Courts.

bcn99

Hi All,

This is good to read. I have recently recieved a form stating that this same company are taking me to court. I had written back to them asking them to prove who the driver was. I am choosing to defend my claim.
I think I have a robust defence but any additional advice would be very welcome.
Thanks
Bcn99

taffy056

bcn99 wrote: »

Hi All,

This is good to read. I have recently recieved a form stating that this same company are taking me to court. I had written back to them asking them to prove who the driver was. I am choosing to defend my claim.
I think I have a robust defence but any additional advice would be very welcome.
Thanks
Bcn99

Can I ask , have you received stamped court papers for this ?

Sirdan

bcn99 wrote: »

Hi All,

This is good to read. I have recently recieved a form stating that this same company are taking me to court. I had written back to them asking them to prove who the driver was. I am choosing to defend my claim.
I think I have a robust defence but any additional advice would be very welcome.
Thanks
Bcn99

Just my opinion ( i am NOT legally qualified) but depending on the exact circumstances I believe it is very unwise to defend a claim on the basis that they can not prove who the driver particularly if the driver is probably the R/K.
This is because the PPC only have to establish on balance of probability not prove beyond reasonable doubt.
Whether we like it or not some district judges will side with the PPC in the following circumstances.
The vehicle is a private vehicle and the R/K is insured on the basis that they are the "main driver" -most insurance does stipulate this.
In the event that there is no evidence to the contrary the judge may well conclude that on balance of probability the main driver was indeed the driver when the event occurred.

In short if you want to defend on the unknown driver defence you need to be able to demonstrate that in probability it was not the main insured driver i.e. the registered Keeper.

IMHO contractual defences are a better strategy unless you can offer evidence as to why you could not possibly be the driver .

peter_the_piper

bcn99 wrote: »

Hi All,

This is good to read. I have recently recieved a form stating that this same company are taking me to court. I had written back to them asking them to prove who the driver was. I am choosing to defend my claim.
I think I have a robust defence but any additional advice would be very welcome.
Thanks
Bcn99

If it really is stamped court papers you have and not just a threat saying "we may take you to court" then the advice of pepipoo.com as well as here would be very wise.

bcn99

Hi,

Yes, I have stamped court papers. I don't really want to give too much away on here before any hearing, but I certainly don't intend to accept that I am responsible for thier "invoice".

Bcn99

taffy056

You need to get over to https://www.pepipoo.com they will help you a defence that ensures that you have the best chance of winning.

Best of luck