Hearing end of the Month

Quentin

If you have used your real name as your forum name (and posted it in #4) then you need to get MSE to change it to something completely anonymous. (And edit #4!)


The ppcs monitor this forum and can use posts against you

jackmarak

My forum name isn't my real name.
None of the dropbox documents contain any real names or sensitive information.

Whats #4 sorry?

Fruitcake

jackmarak wrote: »

My forum name isn't my real name.
None of the dropbox documents contain any real names or sensitive information.

Whats #4 sorry?

Post 4.

You also need to edit the post where "someone" stood. Never use "I".

jackmarak

Got it, you'll need to edit yours now I think (You quoted it)

Castle

Stupid question perhaps; but if you're the Registered Keeper, why did they write to the leasing company on 16th November 2016?

jackmarak

It was a work lease car.
They got the details for the leasing company who then forwarded it onto the defendants workplace, who forwarded it to the defendant. The defendant had to say they were the keeper in order to take the heat away from the lease company/workplace.

Quentin

Castle wrote: »

Stupid question perhaps; but if you're the Registered Keeper, why did they write to xxxxxxx

If that info comes from the dropbox link then you need to take it down OP!


Remove any "unique" info that allows the claimant to identify you - eg that addressee/dates and times etc

jackmarak

I have done, cheers for the heads up.

They already have the defendants witness statement, so they'll know this stuff already.
I kept dates as I thought they were important.

Castle

jackmarak wrote: »

It was a work lease car.
They got the details for the leasing company who then forwarded it onto the defendants workplace, who forwarded it to the defendant. The defendant had to say they were the keeper in order to take the heat away from the lease company/workplace.

Thanks.. I did suspect that was the case; although you have referred to yourself as the "registered keeper" , (rather than "keeper"), in both your defence and Witness statement.

On the positive side the NTK disproves the claimant's witness statement paragraphs 18 & 19; (as clearly it wasn't sent within 14 days).

jackmarak

I know the main defence, defendant has a statement signed from the landlord to say the claimant had no authority. (The IPC is known for this and it will be quoted + why it is relevant).

I'm being told that should be enough but the other arguments should be mentioned from thewitness statement.
The problem is linking the correct law/code to the other arguments. i.e. Sign doesn't explain what is determined as the premises.