3 years between PCN and Court presence demanded

Coupon-mad

Very generic and nothing that could have blown out of the water, a defence from a registered keeper that cited non-compliance with the POFA. I can only think the Judge was too hot and didn't care to read about the POFA/didn't understand the huge significance of 'no keeper liability'.

OK, so now can you show us the daft order from that Judge, please?

WhoDunnitDevil

Date 23/07/18
Claim number:xxxxxxx
Court:xxxxxxxxx
Claimant: VCS Ltd
Defendant: xxxxxxxx

Before District Judge Nicolle sitting at the County Court at Nottingham, [Address]

UPON the court considering the defence document and concluding that the submissions contained herein do not warrant a strike out of the claim
AND UPON the court noting the defence does not set out any Defence to the action

IT IS ORDERED THAT

1. The Defence is struck out
2. Permission to Claimant to apply to enter judgement.
3. R3.3 (S) direct

Dated 19 July 2018

Quentin

WhoDunnitDevil wrote: »

POC:

The Claimant's Claim is for the sum of £100 being monies due from the Defendant to the Claimant in respect of a Parking Charge Notice (PCN) issued on 06/03/18 (Issue Date) ast 21:01:06 at Mount Street Nottingham Forman Hardy Holding

The PCN relates to [CAR].
The terms of the PCN allowed the Defendant 28 days from the Issue Date to pay the PCN, but the defendant failed to do so. Despite demand having been made, the Defendant has failed to settle their outstanding liability.
The claim also includes Statutory Interest pursuant to section 69 of the County Courts Act 1984 at a rate of 8% per annum a daily rate of 0.02 from 06/03/18 to 26/03/18 being £22.34.
The Claimant also claims £54 contractual costs pursuant to PCN T&C's.

That interest calculation looks suspicious! (£22 for 20 days)

WhoDunnitDevil

WhoDunnitDevil wrote: »

Date 23/07/18
Claim number:xxxxxxx
Court:xxxxxxxxx
Claimant: VCS Ltd
Defendant: xxxxxxxx

Before District Judge Nicolle sitting at the County Court at Nottingham, [Address]

UPON the court considering the defence document and concluding that the submissions contained herein do not warrant a strike out of the claim
AND UPON the court noting the defence does not set out any Defence to the action

IT IS ORDERED THAT

1. The Defence is struck out
2. Permission to Claimant to apply to enter judgement.
3. R3.3 (S) direct

Dated 19 July 2018

That is literally everything on the letter besides my name and address on the other side and a footer in small print about corresponding with a reference, an address etc.

I notice the date at the top is 23/07/18 whereas the bottom is dated 19/07/18! I received the letter on the 23rd.

WhoDunnitDevil

:rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:

Quentin wrote: »

That interest calculation looks suspicious! (£22 for 20 days)

My typo!

Coupon-mad

See what the resident solicitor posters say (and only them, not some newbie). You want Johnersh or LOC123 to tell you whether that order should definitely have given all parties the right to set it aside within 7 days.

The Judge can be wrong, and here, IMHO, is wrong (due to the POFA argument being well worth airing in court) so surely a strike out has to have a safety net short time for a party to say ''oi''!

If it were me I would write to the Judge by name saying you received the order which was made without a hearing, and are alarmed that it's been summarily adjudged, in view of the complete defence a registered keeper will have under Schedule 4 of the POFA 2012 (which was expounded in some detail in the defence), you ask the court to set aside the order in that basis, and to provide a hearing date.

Or in the alternative, a short preliminary hearing, to deal with the question of the POFA and 'no keeper liability' in fairness to the Defendant who was not the driver and had no opportunity to comment in detail about the parking event but could certainly rely on the only applicable law, which absolutely absolves them of any liability if a parking firm (such as VCS) choose not to use the provisions int he Act.

State to the Judge that the defence does set out any Defence to the action, because of the fact that Vehicle Control Services Limited openly (and they admit to this in court) do not use POFA-compliant Notice to Keeper letters, and due to that choice not to use the POFA provisions, they can only ever hold an admitted driver liable, and you were not driving*.

As there is a defence for a registered keeper, who can never be presumed to have been the driver, in a non-POFA parking charge case, say that you believe the court has fallen into error with this order and has failed to inform you of your rights and has itself breached CPR Rule 3.3(5)(b) by omitting the statement telling a party affected by the order that they may apply to have it set aside:

(4) The court may make an order of its own initiative, without hearing the parties or giving them an opportunity to make representations.
(5) Where the court has made an order under paragraph (4);
(a) a party affected by the order may apply to have it set aside, varied or stayed; and
(b) the order must contain a statement of the right to make such an application.



And I would take that communication (signed & dated as a formal document) by hand to the court in the morning, stapled to a copy of the offending order, and ask that the staff put the note before the Judge urgently.

See what LOC123 and Johnersh say!


*only if true...your case is strong if you were not driving

System

Check the location on GSV - especially the signs.

Check the time of the ticket.

Check the offices across the road. Suspect the DJ knows the car park / location well

Quentin

WhoDunnitDevil wrote: »

:rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:
My typo!

Ok. But when sending anything to court or to the claimant that can be used in court you won't be able to laugh off any detrimental typos!

KeithP

WhoDunnitDevil wrote: »

:rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:
My typo!

So what did it actually say then?

Any other typos in there?

WhoDunnitDevil

Coupon-mad wrote: »

See what the resident solicitor posters say (and only them, not some newbie). You want Johnersh or LOC123 to tell you whether that order should definitely have given all parties the right to set it aside within 7 days.

The Judge can be wrong, and here, IMHO, is wrong (due to the POFA argument being well worth airing in court) so surely a strike out has to have a safety net short time for a party to say ''oi''!

If it were me I would write to the Judge by name saying you received the order which was made without a hearing, and in view of the complete defence a registered keeper can have under Schedule 4 of the POFA 2012 (which was expounded in some detail in the defence), you ask the court to set aside the order and provide a hearing date.

Or in the alternative, a short preliminary hearing, to deal with the question of the POFA and 'no keeper liability' in fairness to the Defendant who was not the driver and had no opportunity to comment in detail about the parking event but could certainly rely on the only applicable law. State to the Judge that Vehicle Control Services Limited do not use POFA-compliant Notice to Keeper letters and can only ever hold an admitted driver liable, and you were not driving*.

And I would take that by hand to the court in the morning, stapled to a copy of the offending order, and ask that the staff put the note before the Judge urgently.

See what LOC123 and Johnersh say!

*only if true...your case is strong if you were not driving

Thanks - I'll see what LOC123 and Johnersh say and then take your advice if there is no deviation or they don't respond.