IMPORTANT: Please make sure your posts do not contain any personally identifiable information (both your own and that of others). When uploading images, please take care that you have redacted all personal information including number plates, reference numbers and QR codes (which may reveal vehicle information when scanned).
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!

VCS Parking Charges (3) - Resulted In County Court Claim Form

Options
1141517192023

Comments

  • Honeslty, i think this could go either way here.
  • Lamilad
    Lamilad Posts: 1,412 Forumite
    Sixth Anniversary 1,000 Posts Photogenic Name Dropper
    tense stuff. how do you feel it went?
  • Pofa point got ruled out, as the claimant advised they are not relying on it.

    I replied that then they have no evidence of who was driving, which they are required to do.
  • Honestly, i'm not so sure. I honestly think i ripped them with my arguements and evidence, but i' not sure what the judges take on it is.

    I think on paper i should win, although you cant really guess.
  • Lamilad
    Lamilad Posts: 1,412 Forumite
    Sixth Anniversary 1,000 Posts Photogenic Name Dropper
    what did the judge make of their EvL argument and their failure to comply with pofa?
  • She focused on beavis more than anything.

    The pofa is not relevant as the claimant is not relying on it........apparantly.
  • DoaM
    DoaM Posts: 11,863 Forumite
    10,000 Posts Fifth Anniversary Name Dropper Photogenic
    That sounds very like the DJ that Pranky blogged about earlier this week ... really didn't understand the LAW!
  • Lamilad
    Lamilad Posts: 1,412 Forumite
    Sixth Anniversary 1,000 Posts Photogenic Name Dropper
    KimmyHrunt wrote: »
    She focused on beavis more than anything.

    The pofa is not relevant as the claimant is not relying on it........apparantly.

    Oh dear! that sounds like a major misunderstanding by the judge. It's relevant in that without it they can only pursue the driver, so why are you sat there as the keeper when they can't prove who was driving.

    The fact they say they're not relying on it makes it more relevant, if anything
  • Redx
    Redx Posts: 38,084 Forumite
    Eighth Anniversary 10,000 Posts Name Dropper Photogenic
    you would think its a slam dunk win for the defendant if they do not know who was driving and are not relying on POFA2012

    its the fact that they fail on POFA2012 that makes a lot of their claims invalid and why they lose

    no pofa , no driver = no win for the claimant
  • Lamilad
    Lamilad Posts: 1,412 Forumite
    Sixth Anniversary 1,000 Posts Photogenic Name Dropper
    Redx wrote: »
    you would think its a slam dunk win for the defendant if they do not know who was driving and are not relying on POFA2012

    its the fact that they fail on POFA2012 that makes a lot of their claims invalid and why they lose

    no pofa , no driver = no win for the claimant

    Exactly. It's about time district Judges got properly informed about this statute. Especially given that the vast majority of small claims going through the courts these days must involve private parking incidents.

    Cases like this should be over in minutes...

    Judge: "Are you relying on PoFA"?
    Claimant: "No"
    Judge: "Can you prove who was driving?"
    Claimant "No"
    Judge: "Case dismissed"
This discussion has been closed.
Meet your Ambassadors

🚀 Getting Started

Hi new member!

Our Getting Started Guide will help you get the most out of the Forum

Categories

  • All Categories
  • 351.2K Banking & Borrowing
  • 253.2K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
  • 453.7K Spending & Discounts
  • 244.2K Work, Benefits & Business
  • 599.3K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
  • 177K Life & Family
  • 257.6K Travel & Transport
  • 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
  • 16.2K Discuss & Feedback
  • 37.6K Read-Only Boards

Is this how you want to be seen?

We see you are using a default avatar. It takes only a few seconds to pick a picture.