Help and guidance please

Lamilad

'?? have used the car park in Keighley many times before and have ALWAYS paid the fare.!

Is "??" Where you refer to who was driving?

Lamilad

they'll allege one machine was working all along.

If the PDT logs are anything like the ones we've seen recently I think they can be easily discredited.

Capt_Mainwaring

Quick update - I've found an email from Ian Moore of Sports Direct on Peppipoo about Cavendish Retail Park in Keighley. His email is in response to someone who has complained to them.

I've sent an email to Ian Moore and I've copied in Sports Direct Customer Services team as well. I should have done this months ago. Better late than never, I suppose.

Capt_Mainwaring

Yes, ?? is the driver.

Capt_Mainwaring

Hi CM

As I said before, the appeal was sent before any internet research was done. Does this mean the driver is screwed?

If it does, then the 'fine' needs paying as soon as possible. No correspondence has been entered in to regarding the second PCN.

Lamilad

If it does, then the 'fine' needs paying as soon as possible.!

No it doesn't! Unless your happy to be the next scam victim.

It just means your can't use a PoFA defence, which is usually very effective against Excel. There are many other valid and robust defence points that can be used against them, it just depends whether or not you have the will to fight.

A well prepared defendant is almost always successful against Excel when supported by this forum. That said, litigation is always a gamble and you could lose.

Even if you do it is unlikely you'll pay much more than if you settled now. You could even pay less.

Coupon-mad

Does this mean the driver is screwed?

No.

If it does, then the 'fine' needs paying as soon as possible.

No. How on earth do posters sometimes make that leap when 'pay it' is NEVER uttered here!

Capt_Mainwaring

Lamilad wrote: »

No it doesn't! Unless your happy to be the next scam victim.

It just means your can't use a PoFA defence, which is usually very effective against Excel. There are many other valid and robust defence points that can be used against them, it just depends whether or not you have the will to fight.

A well prepared defendant is almost always successful against Excel when supported by this forum. That said, litigation is always a gamble and you could lose.

Even if you do it is unlikely you'll pay much more than if you settled now. You could even pay less.

I have certainly have the will to fight on. I just want this to end and quickly...

What I'd like to know is:

1) If a PoFA defence can't be used against the first PCN what do you recommend I use?

2) The penultimate letter I received from BW Legal was a Letter of Claim (issued in Nov 2017). An information sheet that came with it (Annex 1) contains the following wording;

'This information sheet is a summary of your rights and responsibilities under the Pre-Action Protocol for debt claims'.

It then confirms a website address (Justice.gov.uk). As this letter was issued after 1st October, does the Daniel San letter still apply?

3) As no correspondence has been entered in to against the second PCN, I assume a PoFA defence can be used against that?

Capt_Mainwaring

Hi CM.

Sorry about that. I just wish some internet research had been done, before appealing direct to Excel. Still, we can't turn the clock back, so any help or guidance on how to defend the first PCN would be more than welcome.

Umkomaas

1) If a PoFA defence can't be used against the first PCN what do you recommend I use?

Other defence points such as deficient/unclear signage, landowner authority to pursue charges, including up to court level, whether the Beavis case helps you - check Lamilad’s dismembering of Excel’s 3 court cases against him (click on his user name, then ‘statistics’, then ‘show all threads by Lamilad’) for further areas of challenge.

2) The penultimate letter I received from BW Legal was a Letter of Claim (issued in Nov 2017). An information sheet that came with it (Annex 1) contains the following wording;

'This information sheet is a summary of your rights and responsibilities under the Pre-Action Protocol for debt claims'.

You respond by asking for every item you can find, which helps you via the PaP, to be forwarded to you in full, in writing, so as the defendant, you have a full understanding of the claim their client is making. List every item you require confirmation/further detail.

3) As no correspondence has been entered in to against the second PCN, I assume a PoFA defence can be used against that?

Deal with each charge as a separate entity - standard advice - so a PoFA defence is available to you, they must prove who the driver was if they fail PoFA requirements. They will quote Elliott v Loakes and CPS v AJH Film, but these are discredited cases in the context of private parking charges against an individual.

Looking further (probably too far at this point), ordinarily, once an individual’s multiple cases have got to the court stage we recommend asking the court to hear all cases at one session, to save the court and the individual being involved in multiple preparation and attendance. Given that you might be defending each of your cases potentially from two different angles, separate hearings might be better advised.

Please note - the preceding paragraph is just my opinion, not a learned one from someone with legal knowledge or qualification.