CEL over stay fine - Defence statement, Help please

Lamilad

does the below now clearly state im defending as keeper?

No, it states that they have not complied with PoFA.

Technically this is fine if you wish to defend as the keeper as you can hold them to strict proof as to who was driving... but if you weren't the driver then you should say this before you get into the pofa stuff with clear statement along the lines of "it is denied that the defendant was the driver of the vehicle at the material time"

Redx

SLC80 wrote: »

Claxtome or anyone.

I have not responded to any letters or given away i am the driver or keeper.

I thought i had made reference to this in my original 1st draft, no? I have since read more and added- see below section on this. does this read ok?

I beg to differ, read post #1 again (and again if you dont see it and then edit it)

no , you didnt because it isnt stated , as Lamilad correctly says

when it is stated (because the driver and keeper are not one and the same person) , then its a statement of truth

do not add it unless it is the truth however, perjury is a far worse "crime"

hiding behind POFA2012 is not a statement of truth nor does it state its from the keeper, it merely states that the claimant has failed POFA2012

the PPC,s that do fail POFA2012 try to infer that the defendant is the driver , as well as the keeper

they (or the judge) may actually ask you this question in court

then you have to have a good answer ready

in the good old us of a its called "pleading the fifth"

SLC80

Have a look here; new advice from Johnersh and LOC123, both solicitors, read it all:

Thank you coupon-mad, yes this really helps and very interesting? almost gives me the hope that this may work in my favour? lets see? Today was the 14th day. I will follow advise, give till Tuesday, call the CCBC and report back on here as to what they say!

I will have ready with me, what to say ... if anyone would like me to ask anything more specific than what Johnersh and LOC123 advise that may help me and forum members please reply before next wk.

SLC80

I beg to differ, read post #1 again (and again if you dont see it and then edit it)

no , you didnt because it isnt stated , as Lamilad correctly says

when it is stated (because the driver and keeper are not one and the same person) , then its a statement of truth

do not add it unless it is the truth however, perjury is a far worse "crime"

hiding behind POFA2012 is not a statement of truth nor does it state its from the keeper, it merely states that the claimant has failed POFA2012

the PPC,s that do fail POFA2012 try to infer that the defendant is the driver , as well as the keeper

they (or the judge) may actually ask you this question in court

then you have to have a good answer ready

in the good old us of a its called "pleading the fifth"

Right?.. trying to make sense of it all once again (brain hurts)...as this advise #2 seems to contradict #13

You haven't stated that you are defending as 'keeper' or 'driver'. Better to defend as 'keeper' if you haven't let it slip who the driver was.

'Better to defend as keeper' if i haven't already slipped. How do i do this then?? seems like I should be staying completely quiet without saying anything atall, until I may happen to be asked in court, as you say Redx?

So ....to clarify if i am the registered keeper and driver ...just leave my defence as it is. If i wasn't driving but am the registered keeper I need to clearly state this, by writing a statement of truth?

do not add it unless it is the truth however, perjury is a far worse "crime"

Of course, I would not lie- cant bear to make this any worse than it already is!

Loadsofchildren123

The requirements set out in the new Orotocol and the previously applicable PD are NOT “guidance”. They are part of the court rules and therefore binding.

SLC80

Hi all, I have finally received POC 12 days late.

Many thanks to members for guidance and support ..Letter below is ready to go out with my minor changes to dates etc also amended to mention the fact it was dated the 11th Oct but received it on the 3rd Nov. Is it advised I send this to court as well as CEL (L2 3PF) with proof of postmark stamped letter it came in v POc with another date.

Please any comments or advise is welcomed.

Date: 6/11/17

Dear Sir/Madam,

Claim No. XXXXXXXX

I am writing to you in regards to a money claim addressed to me by your company, Civil Enforcement Ltd.

I have finally received the Particulars of Claim on (03/11/2017), which are rejected because they should have been sent to me by 25/10/2017 at the latest. Also the Particulars of Claim are dated 11/10/2017 however these were only received by post to me on the 3/11/17. Enclosed are printed scans to show the significant difference in dates. Your company is in breach of CPR 7.4 because your particulars have been served out of time. In default of service, it is a fact that Civil Enforcement is in breach.

In order to get permission for late service of particulars, the claimant must apply to court for relief from the sanction (CPR 3.9). The test is that in Denton v TH White Ltd [2014] EWCA Civ 906.

As an unrepresented Litigant-in-Person, I consider that a delay of several days is more than trivial and, in the context of a claimant professionally represented with volume claims before the court, I believe that compliance with the court timetable is an imperative, and your breach has caused me significant detriment.
Accordingly whilst I consider the position, I require a copy of the certificate of service filed at court, verified with a statement of truth from a named individual, confirming the date of service. In the meantime, since no valid Particulars have been served, the matter is unable to proceed and there is no requirement upon me to serve a defence at this stage, and nor will you be able to enforce the claim.

Yours faithfully,


YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS

SLC80

Do I wait for response on this letter or still continue to reply back with my defence before court deadline?

SLC80

Update: GOOD NEWS!

Received a letter from CEL (legal team) enclosed was..
'CONFIRMATION OF CANCELLATION' and a copy of a N279 form-NOTICE to court OF DISCONTINUANCE

Seems like good news but not sure? Does this mean my fine has been cancelled?? The letter does not say anything more about outstanding amount and whether this is still owed.

Cancelling proceedings to court would be an obvious yes, has anyone else had the same news as me?

Quietly ecstatic! Slc80 :j

[Deleted User]

Nicely done. This is game over.

Sadly no automatic right to your costs of defending the case though. That'd need a written request to the Court (and probably a formal application, so not generally worth the candle).

Nevertheless a win is a win. Happy new year.

SLC80

Amazing!!!!

PHEW!

I'm so pleased, this has really lighten the load I have been feeling.
Johnresh-With this result I don't mind not asking for costs, I'm just so glad its over!!!

Thankyou to everyone who has helped and has had the time to resound directly to me, using their spare time if it hadn't been for the support on this forum helping me directly and the research of past posts I would have certainly NOT had the courage to deal with this on my own.

Good luck, hope others have the same outcome as me.

Happy new year all !!!