Excel Parking strikes again

Lone_Ranger_2

I have emailed Northhampton County Court to see what they think of it. We will see !

Lone_Ranger_2

Well it seems another example of: It's nothing to do with me so I can't be !!!!!d. This is the reply I got from Northhampton County Court.

"Thank you for your e-mail. I’m afraid I’m unable to give advice on such matters as court clerks are not legally trained. You may wish to seek legal advice or contact your local Citizen’s Advice Bureau with regards to your query. I can confirm, however that all claims issued through this court would be allocated a claim number which would be printed on the claim form.



I hope that this is of some assistance, but should you have any further queries, please do not hesitate to contact us."

Never mind, there are still other avenues to explore.

Kite2010

And don't contact CAB as they are pretty useless when it comes to private parking companies (didn't they once say pay the money and then appeal it?)

bargepole

This is what the County Courts Act (1984) has to say:

135. Penalty for falsely pretending to act under authority of court.Any person who—
(a)delivers or causes to be delivered to any other person any paper falsely purporting to be a copy of any summons or other process of a county court, knowing it to be false; or
(b)acts or professes to act under any false colour or pretence of the process or authority of a county court;
shall be guilty of an offence and shall for each offence be liable on conviction on indictment to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 7 years.

Lone_Ranger_2

bargepole wrote: »

This is what the County Courts Act (1984) has to say:

135. Penalty for falsely pretending to act under authority of court.Any person who—
(a)delivers or causes to be delivered to any other person any paper falsely purporting to be a copy of any summons or other process of a county court, knowing it to be false; or
(b)acts or professes to act under any false colour or pretence of the process or authority of a county court;
shall be guilty of an offence and shall for each offence be liable on conviction on indictment to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 7 years.

Which is why they overprinted the word "draft" i presume.

fivegoldstars

Didn't this get mentioned a while back? There was a link to a solicitors website, one used by PPC's, who actually offered draft court papers as part of their 'package'.

ManxRed

It was Bishops Finger or something....


Flint Bishop. They refer to them as 'mock claim forms'

Here: http://www.flintbishop.co.uk/debt-recovery-solicitors-package-options.html

WageSlave1_2

Lone_Ranger wrote: »

OK here's it is:
. . .

What was on the other side/page 2 of the N1 out of interest?

The more pedantic among us will know that they've used the 'wrong' claim form in that if they were really intending to issue proceedings via MCOL [and the £25 court fee and the court of issue being given as Northampton County Court would tend to confirm this] then what gets produced is a N1 CPC claim form rather than an N1

see hmctsformfinder.justice.gov.uk/courtfinder/forms/n001(cpc)-eng.pdf

That said if I were going to use a draft claim form just to coax payment out of someone I would probably use the N1. There's more room in the Particulars of Claim section.

Sending out a draft claim form when one has absolutely no intention of commencing proceedings might be fraudulent misrepresentation under s2 of the Fraud Act 2006 but dishonesty would have to be established. I'll wait until there's a case that says that mere bluffing about one's intentions is dishonest.

But given that the VCS v HMRC case has kicked the stool out from underneath Excel and every other PPC it may well be that dishonesty might be inferred readily enough: they know they don't have a cause of action.

Indeed any solicitors such as Flint Bishop who send out draft/mock claim forms on Excel's behalf could find themselves in trouble with the Solicitors Regulation Authority. Some readers may recall that nice chubby Andrew Crossley fellow and his firm ACS law and how his practice was founded on sending out threatograms to persons who downloaded !!!!!! from the internet . . . . and how it all went very, very wrong for him.

bbc.co.uk/news/technology-16616803

theregister.co.uk/2011/06/08/acslaw_bankrupt/

solicitorstribunal.org.uk/Content/documents/10726.2011%20-%20Crossley.pdf

notts_phil

ManxRed wrote: »

It was Bishops Finger or something....


Flint Bishop. They refer to them as 'mock claim forms'

Here: http://www.flintbishop.co.uk/debt-recovery-solicitors-package-options.html

A bishops finger sounds like something mike perkins might use...

ManxRed

On those long lonely nights when the dating forum is particularly quiet?