Court Claim PCN

WinWin

Can anyone advise please.

I have downloaded DQ, not sure what court to enter the box top of front page 'In the ......County Court'. Will it be the one in Gladstones DQ?

Thank you for your comments

WinWin

is it ok to email N180 to Northampton and Gladstones?

Coupon-mad

Will it be the one in Gladstones DQ?

No but what did they put?

WinWin

county court bulk centre

WinWin

do i just add county court business centre as original claim form?

Coupon-mad

Pretty sure bargepole explains all this in his post about what happens when (in the NEWBIES thread).

WinWin

Anyone know if I can use electronic signature for DQ?

Lamilad

WinWin wrote: »

Anyone know if I can use electronic signature for DQ?

Yes, this is allowed by CPR 5.3 and PD 5A.

WinWin

Hi

Its been a while because of Christmas. Thank you to all have assisted me so far, its much appreciated.

I have now received Notice of Allocation to Small Claims Track (Hearing) and Gladstones witness statement, which includes:

The Agreement authorising them to manage parking on the relevant land
The Sign(ie, the contract)
Notices
The Site Plan
Photographs of the incident

The defendant is liable for a parking charge relating to the parking of a vehicle on the relevant land in a manner so as to incur the same pursuant to the contract(ie, The Sign), they then set out the details of date, where and that this was an overstay.

Their defence

The defendant avers they were not driving the vehicle at the time of the parking incident.

They then state, The criminal case of Elliott v Loak 1983 Crim LR 36 held that the Registered Keeper of a vehicle may be presumed to have been the driver unless they sufficiently rebut this presumption.

How does one 'sufficiently rebut this?

they include evidence of payment for parking and state the allotted time and state their charge is issued correctly as was overstay.

There is quite a bit more, is it worth me adding a photo of their defence?

WinWin

they also say:

Despite having ample opportunity to do so the Defendant failed to identify the driver either adequately or all. The Court is therefore invited to conclude it more likely than not that the Registered Keeper(ie, the Defendant) was the driver.