Ccj -pcn

Coupon-mad

What about Citizen Advice Bureau , would they be able to help me word it or assist me in any way ..

Nope. They are clueless, but this is something we can help with if you show us a draft of what you want to say.

How do i start my defence as for set-a-side

Like Saggi did.

With simple centralised/justified headings like you see in the example witness statements, in post #2 of the NEWBIES thread.

Timtay

Hey thank you ..
So most of the headings cover failings in the parking laws... that I can high light ..they are not necessarily pointing at specific areas... like on street parking or other private land etc ... but generally linking them all ..in one way or another .
I'm so worried that I'm missing the point to guide them that I'm innocent and not trying just to get out of paying.

Like you say I'll draw up a letter and go from there ..I'll write it from within what I wanna say ,it won't be business like as I don't know how to or adjust where and what ... please if you think that I need to highlight or add stuff please say what, as honestly I'm totally thick regarding the inner laws and they're relevance or what they refer too ...
Guys really appreciate all you say ...

Coupon-mad

Show us your draft. It does need to be set out properly though.

Timtay

Please adjust what you think needs adjusting or tell us where and how ..

your input is most valueble .

My draft statement is as follows: -!

I am Timothy William Ivan Nigel Taylor and I am the Defendant in this matter.
This my supporting Statement in support of my application ( date) 2017 to:
· Set aside the Default Judgement dated (month) 2016 as it was not properly served at my current address;
· Order for the original claim to be dismissed
· Order for the Claimant to pay the Defendant £255 as reimbursement for the set aside fee; and any compensation that is viable considering the stress that’s been endured. !

1. Default Judgement

1.1. I understand that the Claimant obtained a Default Judgement against me as the Defendant in August/September? 2016. However, this claim form has not been served at my current address and I thus was not aware of the Default Judgement until 3rd may 2017 when I was doing a routine check on my credit file. I understand that this Claim may have been served at my OLD ADDRESS of 12 Spinney Drive, Banbury Oxfordshire ox169ta.
I presently have just moved back to the UK from Australia, thus not being legally able to defend myself.

1.2. I contacted Northampton County Court (date unknown whilst in Australia,) to find out details of the Default Judgement. The officer advised me and sent me a link referring on what action I needed to do once on my arrival back in the UK

1.3 I have received previous documentation from the Claimant in this matter and I was never ever able to challenge the Claimant’s claim. I have sufficient evidence issued to me from west bar surgery the customer who operates within these premises, I was attending the building on the purpose of its nature that the carpark is solely for the use of regarding its patients, I have relevant timings within the building aligning me to be legally parked within the time frame of my arrival and departure.

1.4. I attempted to contact the Claimant using information given to me by the letters I received.
I was not able to get through to a member of the Claimant’s staff to discuss, nor have I received a response to my numerous answer phone messages left on the Claimant’s legal department. This means as the Defendant, I feel as I’ve been persecuted by a simple mistake, if indeed it was a mistake. I had or have no way of checking that the details that are entered (KN60KKM) are correct or not. The system being in its infant years, and newly installed. I still do not have any details regarding the case being submitted to the court or of the court that it has taken place, other than the CCJ issued and the summary of charges now owed, which I take are in excess of ￡236.00 (pounds) last letter received 22/08/2016

1.5. I believe the Claimant has behaved unreasonably in pursuing a claim against me without ensuring they allowed necessary channels for consultation regarding solving this matter. According to publicly available information, my circumstances are far from being unique. The Claimant’s persistent failure to use correct and current polices & procedures results as an unnecessary burden for individuals and the justice system across the country.

1.6. On the basis provided above I would suggest that the Claimant did not fulfil their duty to allow the Defendant’ (myself) access to allow it to be represented in line to the claimant when bringing the claim.

1.7. Considering the above I was unable to defend this claim. I thus believe that the Default Judgement against me was issued incorrectly and thus should be set aside.

2. Order dismissing the Claim

2.1. I further believe that the original Claim by the Claimant has no merit and should thus be dismissed. I understand that the Claimant is a Parking Company which seeks to claim for “Parking Charge Notices” which the Claimant believes are due as a result of an alleged breach of contract for parking by a motorist.

2.2. If the Claimant has obtained details of the vehicle for which the Defendant is the Registered Keeper, and used those details to make a claim for a “Parking Charge Notice’’, I thus dispute the claim in its entirety as I do not know the wording of the contract nor do I know the means by which the contract was alleged to come into force.

2.3. If the Claimant can evidence that the alleged incident relates to a vehicle for which the Defendant is the Registered Keeper, any Notice to Keeper served by the Claimant must comply with Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012. Otherwise, the Claimant is required to prove the driver of the vehicle they claim was involved in the alleged incident. I submit that the Claimant cannot provide such evidence and further submit that the Claimant does not include ‘Protection of Freedoms Act 2012’ wording on the Parking Charge Notices they issue and therefore cannot hold the Defendant automatically liable for the alleged incident merely for being the Registered Keeper of a vehicle.!

2.4. A requirement of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 is that this any Notice to Keeper served by the Claimant must be served within 14 days of the date of the alleged incident. Since I have not received any documentation from the Claimant prior to finding out about the Default Judgement, I submit the Claimant will not have complied with the requirements of the Act and thus cannot claim this charge against me as the Registered Keeper in any case.

2.5. I further submit that the Claimant’s claim is without merit due to substantial issues in law. This is for the following main reasons:
2.5.1. Lack of Standing by Claimant: The Claimant is unlikely to be the landowner of the car park in question, and will have no proprietary interest in it. This means that the Claimant, as a matter of law, will have no locus standi to litigate in their own name. Any consideration will have been provided by the landholder, and only they would have been able sue for any damages or trespass.
2.5.2. No Loss Suffered by Claimant: Their claim is presumably based on damages for alleged breach of contract. It is a fundamental principle of English Law that a party who suffers damages through breach of contract can only seek through court action to be put back in the same position as they would have been if the breach had not occurred. In order to do so, they must demonstrate their actual, or genuine, pre-estimate of loss. I submit that no loss has been suffered by the Claimant as a result of any alleged breaches of contract on the part of any motorist of the vehicle of which I am the Registered Keeper. I further submit that any loss to the landholder (which would be the only party able to claim such losses) would be at most a few pounds.
2.5.3. Claimed charge is an Unenforceable Penalty: I further submit that the Parking Charge that the Claimant claimed, given it is not based on any loss suffered due to the alleged breach, is nothing but an unenforceable penalty.
2.5.4. No contract with the claimant: Any contract must have offer, acceptance and consideration both ways. There would not have been consideration from the Claimant to the motorist; the fee for parking benefits the landowners, not the Claimant. Therefore, there is no consideration from the motorist to Civil Enforcement Ltd.
2.6. On this basis I believe that the Claimant has not provided any reasonable cause of action and thus the claim should be dismissed in its entirety.
2.7. In order to make informed decisions and statements in my defence as keeper of the a vehicle, I will require copies of all paperwork and pictures of all signs from the Claimant.!

Statement of Truth:
I believe that the facts stated in this Witness Statement are true.

Coupon-mad

If you have admitted to being the driver in the first appeal, then you can't use the POFA 2012. That law (schedule 4 of it, anyway) only has application for registered keepers.

Have a look at some other recent ones that mention the words of Sir Oliver Heald, bringing in the assurance made by the Government that they will stamp out this practice of parking companies (who were singled out) getting sneaky CCJs using old addresses.

Timtay

Hi what's your opinion.. on this is it worthy or not .
Thanks for everything

Coupon-mad

Looking like it has the main points but remove any argument about 'no loss'. So get rid of this:

2.5.2. No Loss Suffered by Claimant: Their claim is presumably based on damages for alleged breach of contract. It is a fundamental principle of English Law that a party who suffers damages through breach of contract can only seek through court action to be put back in the same position as they would have been if the breach had not occurred. In order to do so, they must demonstrate their actual, or genuine, pre-estimate of loss. I submit that no loss has been suffered by the Claimant as a result of any alleged breaches of contract on the part of any motorist of the vehicle of which I am the Registered Keeper. I further submit that any loss to the landholder (which would be the only party able to claim such losses) would be at most a few pounds.

2.5.3. Claimed charge is an Unenforceable Penalty: I further submit that the Parking Charge that the Claimant claimed, given it is not based on any loss suffered due to the alleged breach, is nothing but an unenforceable penalty.

Timtay

Thank you ...I will . Also I received a mail from a a legal firm ..(right legal advice ) And to submit my evidence and £350 and they will get it setaside... any suggestions that this is genuine or just a scam ...thank you

Coupon-mad

Timtay wrote: »

Thank you ...I will . Also I received a mail from a a legal firm ..(right legal advice ) And to submit my evidence and £350 and they will get it setaside... any suggestions that this is genuine or just a scam ...thank you

Sounds like a waste of time and money.

System

Sounds like a waste of time and money.

Since the website it registered to an individual in Delaware in the US then you'd be best looking elsewhere.

Companies use Delaware to hide, so why would a legal services firm hide outside England and Wales?