Excel BW again

claretmad62

Hi to all

Spent quite a bit of time reading others threads, finding it all a big learning curve.


State of play, Excel along with BW currently chasing my wife for a PCN from early 2012 (pre PoFA) On her behalf I have been corresponding with BW and at the moment we are 20 days into County Court sending our initial defence to the claimant. Been on with the WS, as it's over 5 years ago we've not got a clue who was driving....quite a few people have used my wife's car historically. There seems to be different views on what should be in the WS, and what we should take to the hearing as our court bundle. As it's pretty PoFA, what do you think our plan of defence/ attack should be


Cheers

catfunt

A search for "Bw Legal Pre POFA" on this forum should reveal some similar cases which will help you with your initial defence.

When is the deadline?

Coupon-mad

BrainStorm is working on a WS and skeleton argument at the moment. Different case than yours but shows how to set it out (facts in the WS, skeleton argument has the legal arguments like pre-POFA/no keeper liability).

claretmad62

Ok, will look those up.thanks for the quick replies. I got letter dated 9th Jan saying a copy of my defence was being served and they have 28 days. Without going into to much detail at the moment, I nearly missed putting in my defence on the MCOL Site...ended up being a 2 liner ..my own fault ! But at least I got it in

What's your views on pre POFA claims ?

catfunt

What defence did you send in to MCOL?

claretmad62

1/ No contract as POFA not adheered to.
2/ No contracual obligation to claimant by defendant as no contract offered


As I said, totally my fault but with work commitments I totally lost the timeline. I realise the POFA statement means little. But I visited another site and was advised to put this in a pretty damn quick.

claretmad62

Been reading MadHatter752 posts, and know exactly how he feels...felt.

The_Deep

/ No contract as POFA not adheered to.

But surely POFA did not exist then I do not understand the problem, they have to prove OTBP that your wife was the driver. If they cannor, Kerching. Have they mentioned Elliott v Loake?

Here is a plan, look the judge straight in the eye and speak thusly

Sir/Madam. as this event took place over five years ago, neither my wife or I can recall who the driver was, however, on the balance of probablliies it was probably me.

Then, when they take you to court say, Sir/Madam, we have discussed this, and now think that OTBOP, my wife was the driver.

Keep this up until they go bust.

beamerguy

I guess BWLegal are deaf, dumb and blind

claretmad62

No mention of Elliott v Loake, Parking Eye v Beavis yes.

She also has another one from post Pofa...same place (rather not mention location) where they mention Elliott v Loake...but not Beavis. This one seemed to have disappeared, then came back after a 4 month sabbatical !

beamerguy

claretmad62 wrote: »

No mention of Elliott v Loake, Parking Eye v Beavis yes.

She also has another one from post Pofa...same place (rather not mention location) where they mention Elliott v Loake...but not Beavis. This one seemed to have disappeared, then came back after a 4 month sabbatical !

The normal rubbish spouted by BWLegal.

The Beavis case was late 2015.
Beavis overstayed by an hour and his claim was for an unfair charge. Probably your case has nothing to do with this.

Elliot v Loake was a criminal case whereby forensics was used.
This has nothing to do with you with no comparison.
The courts have already dismissed EvL AS NOT APPLICABLE.

BWLegal scratching at straws yet again.

Plus in court, BWLegal have been proven to be incompetent

Pre POFA (Which Excel do not use) simply means they must prove who the driver is/was and that's why they try to use cases that are simply NOT applicable

It is a figment of their imagination which real judges in court do not take kindly to.
In recent cases, judges have dismissed them in as little as 10 mins.
The judges know all about BWLegal