CEL County Court claim - help needed with defence

hanger

Thanks for your initial feedback. I have defended on the 'technicalities' as I was responding directly to each of the Particulars of Claim from the court papers.

Guys Dad: I agree that I could maybe include more about the 2 separate visits. Is this something that I could add into number 4 that I would require to see an unredacted series of images from the PPC or should I make more of it elsewhere in the defence?

Also as it was pre-POFA then should I emphasise that I may not be able to recall who was driving and I was only the registered keeper?

Northlakes

Please read again and take in what CM has stated. The incidents occurred pre- POFA and you don't have to remember or more importantly state who was driver was! Your defence case is from the registered keeper and is answered as a third party.

Marktheshark

Have THEY mentioned POFA anywhere in the claim particulars.

hanger

No mention of POFA in the claim particulars.

Coupon-mad

I would change defence points like these:

3. The Defendant denies sentence one of point 3 due to being unable to recall the signs from the date of the alleged event,

...because you don't need to say you are 'unable to recall signs' (that sounds like you were the driver, and you are not responding as driver). It should be that you are denying all liability as POFA 2012 does not apply to an early 2012 private PCN, so there is no keeper liability possible.

I agree that I could maybe include more about the 2 separate visits. Is this something that I could add into number 4 that I would require to see an unredacted series of images from the PPC or should I make more of it elsewhere in the defence?

Also as it was pre-POFA then should I emphasise that I may not be able to recall who was driving and I was only the registered keeper?

Yes, a bullet point about each thing you may want to rely upon if ever you did face them at a hearing, including saying this Claimant has not shown beyond doubt that this wasn't a double visit, as the length of time suggests to you that it may well have been (showing the first entrance and last exit). Could even have been two different drivers. Say so.

Northlakes

The defendant denies should be the stating point of your rebuttals.

THE RK contests the ANPR technology was functioning correctly and I put CEL to strict proof that the necessary certification was in place etc,etc.

You can't go to court half agreeing with the claimant. Denial is a key word and it is up to them to prove otherwise.

Even if CEL don't turn up you need to show to a judge strength of the case not inform him of any weaknesses.