Civil Enforcement Limited Court Claim

nosferatu1001

Yes, as a Lay Rep. The Defendant MUST be present.

Umkomaas

Google search on Lay Representative. Also check out McKenzie Friend. You will need the judge's agreement at the outset of the hearing.

If you are not allowed as a LR, then you need to have MF up your sleeve.

kryptonite786

Hi, just a question, in my court defence I stated I have a letter from the landowner to confirm I was parked genuinely at the premises.

Should I send this letter directly to CEL right now or shall I present it in court IF and WHEN the hearing proceeds.

Coupon-mad

At WS stage when evidence is filed, as per the explanations in the NEWBIES thread post #2.

I hope it doesn't say who 'parked' the car. You said it confirms: ''I was parked'' but the landowner can't do that from their own knowledge because they were not a witness to the parking and your Dad - if it was not him driving, and it seems you are now saying it wasn't - should only be saying the driver was a family member and that's all (no naming that person).

His WS needs to make it crystal clear he wasn't driving, nor even there (if true).

kryptonite786

The letter states briefly but i quote in exact words,

'Mr xx xxx (my dad) was a genuine customer and authorised to park'

'the car park at xxx xxx xx in which mr xxx xxx ( my dad) parked that day is owned by xxx xxx and as a customer should not be liable to pay any fines etc'

kryptonite786

In a bit of a panic now, the landowner wrote my dads name as thats what was on the claim form because he is the registered keeper. Should it only say 'the vehicle in question'?

kryptonite786

to clarify, basically the defence statement does not mention drivers at all as it just states 'the vehicle in question', but the letter from the landowner does, as they used the details from the claim form i passed to them which is my dad as the registered keeper

Coupon-mad

kryptonite786 wrote: »

In a bit of a panic now, the landowner wrote my dads name as thats what was on the claim form because he is the registered keeper. Should it only say 'the vehicle in question'?

You need them to re-write that. It's terrible.

If he genuinely wasn't driving, they are not only wrong to say so, but have potentially ruined his defence.

You need to politely explain the difference and ask for an adapted email that does NOT name the assumed driver, which they got wrong (did they?).

kryptonite786

Yes you are correct, as the claim form was in his name they assumed the driver was the name on the claim form. I will contact them to re-write this, thank you for your help.

Coupon-mad

Rewritten without naming you...if you were the driver.

It should just be confirming that 'a member of the xxxxxxx family who was driving the vehcice VRN xxxx xxxx was a genuine patron...blah blah...'