CCJ Received - Excel Parking Services Ltd/ BW Legal

saver13

Thanks. I shall get it sent off with the form. The only thing I'm concerned with is whether they actually served a notice to keeper and other documents. I can't remember if I received anything through; would they just have to prove they did send those to the address? How likely is it they kept proof of postage?

KeithP

saver13 wrote: »

The only thing I'm concerned with is whether they actually served a notice to keeper and other documents. I can't remember if I received anything through; would they just have to prove they did send those to the address? How likely is it they kept proof of postage?

That might well hinge on the balance of probabilities.

On the one side we have the PPC saying "we definitely sent it".

On the other side the Defendant says "I can't remember seeing it".

Wise up. Be more forceful with your assertions.

Coupon-mad

Forget that. Excel will have sent a NTK; they do not need to have Proof of Postage and nor will they have done.

But the NTK won't be a POFA one, of course. As you will learn when you read other Excel case threads, they do not use the wording needed for keeper liability.

mistakenly followed the advice of "ignore"

Six year old advice from pre-Beavis times, pre-court claim PPC feeding frenzy.

saver13

Excel will have sent a NTK

If this is the case, should I remove:

Since I have not received any documentation from the Claimant prior to finding out about the Default Judgement

?

Coupon-mad

Well do you think any letters arrived to the right address, or not? If they went to the old address then of course it's OK to say you never received them.

saver13

If they went to the old address

I would have still been living at the address they obtained from the DVLA when they sent the Notice to keeper; I'll probably just remove it in this case.

Coupon-mad

Change it to saying that they did not send a POFA Notice to Keeper and you put them to strict proof to the contrary, if they are attempting to hold you liable as keeper.

System

Change it to saying that they did not send a POFA Notice to Keeper

Pretty difficult to use that as how to you prove a negative.

From a judge's point of view he/she will be working to the Civil Procedure Rules 16.5

(2) Where the defendant denies an allegation !!!8211;

(a) he must state his reasons for doing so; and

(b) if he intends to put forward a different version of events from that given by the claimant, he must state his own version.!!!8221;

Coupon-mad

Aww you are making this harder IamEmaresu! Do you need a holiday, I know I do...

Of course they can say that the Claimant did not send a POFA NTK capable of holding a registered keeper liable and put them to proof that they did, and that it was a POFA complaint one.

Then 'said NTK' will have to be shown in evidence and the Defendant can look at it and point out the *non-POFA-ness* of it at the hearing or in their own WS.

System

There are 3 people in a courtroom. You can play as much template ping pong as you want, but the judge is clear that he can only consider the facts within the CPR.

Trip to a court is in order. For the record:

-
- If you don't admi something in a defence you require the claimant to prove it.

- If you deny something, your case is that you have a positive case to counter the claimant's assertion.

- If you deny something in the defence then you have to state the reasons for the denial.

- If you are denying something and putting forward a different version of events then you have to say why.

If they are denying that it was sent, it requires proof. If the OP denies they have received it, is something different.