Period of validity

Missaver

Redx said:

Missaver said:

Umkomaas said:

Missaver said:

The lease (48 pages total).  Each page was taken as a photo then all pics converted to PDF and combined,  then compressed.

Why the entire lease?  Just copy the page(s) relating to parking, that should be sufficient. Ordinarily if this was going to a face to face hearing I'd say take the full lease with you to it, but times are now different. 

What other 'tomes' are you thinking of adding to the WS?  See if we can get those reduced for you. 

Just wanted to be safe so they can look through the 48 pages all they like to discover there's nothing within saying permits are required for parking.  All the other PDF exhibits (listed in my WS, page 20 of this thread) are less than 1MB, apart from one, just over 1MB.

Then only use the relevant pages but have the full document handy so it could be easily emailed to the judge if required , think outside the box , mention that it is available in the submitted docs but has been left out for now due to court imposed size constraints

Stage on oath that all the relevant pages regarding parking have been submitted , bearing in mind the new statement of truth which is more extensive than previous

So when I email it all to the Court, and only include the 1 page from the lease, when or how to submit the whole lease? 

Redx

If you do it the old fashioned way , it's dropped into your local court in your bundle , which I thought you already knew ?

This new way of working is unknown to everyone , hence my earlier reply on having it ready to email to the judge if asked , plus I covered the lack of it in you stating what I said in your actual submissions , plus the fact of your statement of truth bearing in mind this month's new guidelines

Until there are a few feedback examples on this new remote hearing system , you cannot expect concrete or tried and tested advice, we will know better in 3 months time

As you were told earlier , it's your court case and you should adapt to the new requirements , hence the coupon mad discussion thread

You can either accept the advice given here , or not , but do not expect black and white tried and tested answers in these uncertain and challenging times

Myself and Umkomaas are in agreement that less is more and the whole lease is not required , hence why you agree with the claimant on the joint submission , so if the claimant is happy for just the one page to be submitted , then it's agreed by both parties that the rest isn't required , but have it ready for emailing , just in case.

We do not believe that the whole lease is required , you do , so it's your choice not ours , but don't expect us to agree with you , we would prefer that you stuck to the latest guidelines on submissions

As I said , less is more

KeithP

Over two hundred and forty replies. It's some months since we have had a thread this long.

Missaver

Missaver said:

Update - I had a reply back from the Court re Electronic bundles, here is what they say : 
"Electronic bundles: the legal representative who arranges the telephone conference must send an electronic bundle for the hearing by email to the other party and to BOTH the following court email addresses by 4pm on the last working day before the hearing"

I had also emailed the solicitors my WS, Costs Summary and a link to a shared drive folder containing the Defence and all exhibits as separate PDFs, each labelled Exhibitxx01, etc.
When I email it to the Court, I will submit a single PDF as per advice below from your other thread re Phone hearings.
A single PDF file containing:
- Trial bundle contents page (with page and exhibit numbering clearly set out)
- your defence (in case the Judge does not have access to the case file)
- signed/dated witness statement (and supplementary WS if setting out the abuse of process issue separately)

Does the single PDF mean combining the WS, Defence, Costs Summary and 20+ Exhibit files into 1 large PDF ?  
(I hope that after trying to reduce the size, it can still be ok to email out..)

I also intend to list a 1 page summary of what each Exhibit number is, to email the solicitors and include in the submission to Court, is this ok?

The Claimant is due to submit their WS this week, hence, I've only provided mine to the solicitors and not the Court yet, hoping to find out first if they had paid the court fee and submitted, because if they haven't, the claim would be struck out.
However, reading the Phone hearings thread, I should submit to the Court asap or at the same time as the Claimant.

After I emailed the court last week re electronic submission, I or the Claimant don't need to submit it until the last working day before the hearing (as quoted above), which is in May!  Therefore, would you agree that there's no point trying to find out whether their WS or Court Fee has been submitted/paid until the last working day before the hearing?  

I have not received anything else in the post btw, only the above email from the enquiries email from the Court.

But in the meantime, I will email the Court everything including the Draft Order in Word format asap?

Fruitcake

With regards to the lease, if asked about providing the whole thing, point out to the judge that in order for the scammers to scam at the location in question, they must have obtained their own copy of said lease from the landowner in order to determine whether they had or did not have the right to issue scamvoices or court claims. 
If they don't have their own copy it can only be assumed that either it does not support their case, or they failed to establish a right to scam.

Once you have seen the scammer's WS and perhaps discover new information, you could always send a supplementary WS to disprove their claims.

Are you at the exhibits stage yet? If so, please post a copy of the alleged contract they supplied, assuming you challenged landowner authority in your defence.

Missaver

Fruitcake said:

With regards to the lease, if asked about providing the whole thing, point out to the judge that in order for the scammers to scam at the location in question, they must have obtained their own copy of said lease from the landowner in order to determine whether they had or did not have the right to issue scamvoices or court claims. 
If they don't have their own copy it can only be assumed that either it does not support their case, or they failed to establish a right to scam.

Once you have seen the scammer's WS and perhaps discover new information, you could always send a supplementary WS to disprove their claims.

Are you at the exhibits stage yet? If so, please post a copy of the alleged contract they supplied, assuming you challenged landowner authority in your defence.

I have never seen any information which confirms the Scammers have a copy of the lease.  According to an email reply from the Court recently, their WS could be submitted up until the last working day before the hearing date, which doesn't give me much time to prepare much else!   I have asked whether that will be instructed to me by post, as it conflicts with the last Order and providing it at least 14 days before the hearing date.  But I understand that I should email court from Coupon-Mad's post in the Phone hearing thread to warn them as well.

I have all my exhibits collated and submitted to the scamlicitors as a shared folder, which they previously agreed to.  I have not seen their WS or Exhibits yet.
Nothing submitted to the Court yet.  

My defence challenged landowner authority, but I have not received anything in reply to that.

Fruitcake

Missaver said:

Fruitcake said:

With regards to the lease, if asked about providing the whole thing, point out to the judge that in order for the scammers to scam at the location in question, they must have obtained their own copy of said lease from the landowner in order to determine whether they had or did not have the right to issue scamvoices or court claims. 
If they don't have their own copy it can only be assumed that either it does not support their case, or they failed to establish a right to scam.

Once you have seen the scammer's WS and perhaps discover new information, you could always send a supplementary WS to disprove their claims.

Are you at the exhibits stage yet? If so, please post a copy of the alleged contract they supplied, assuming you challenged landowner authority in your defence.

I have never seen any information which confirms the Scammers have a copy of the lease.  According to an email reply from the Court recently, their WS could be submitted up until the last working day before the hearing date, which doesn't give me much time to prepare much else!   I have asked whether that will be instructed to me by post, as it conflicts with the last Order and providing it at least 14 days before the hearing date.  But I understand that I should email court from Coupon-Mad's post in the Phone hearing thread to warn them as well.

I have all my exhibits collated and submitted to the scamlicitors as a shared folder, which they previously agreed to.  I have not seen their WS or Exhibits yet.
Nothing submitted to the Court yet.  

My defence challenged landowner authority, but I have not received anything in reply to that.

It doesn't matter. You state they knew or should have known they would need to ascertain whether they had the right to scam on your demised space. By not doing so they would be acting negligently.
You aver that either they failed to take due care by not obtaining a copy of the lease/AST/head lease, or they did obtain a copy but have failed to produce it because it does not support their case. 
I don't see how they can challenge you by saying you have nor provided the whole thing when its contents are primary to having authority to scam. They must (should have) obtained a copy to determine that they had the right to scam.
As others have said, send the relevant parts but have an electronic copy of the whole thing to hand. You have/will have made a statement of truth to the effect that the only parts of the lease that are relevant to parking have been supplied. It will be up to the judge whether he believes on the balance of probabilities that you are indeed telling the truth.

Of course, the judge may accept your word anyway and be happy to make a decision on the evidence provided. You just need to have the full version available if required. 


Even if you don't get to respond to their WS in time to submit yours, you will be able to make bullet points to rip it apart during the hearing. Please do post a copy of the alleged contract to scam if/when you get it.
We have seen many that don't meet the requirements of the Companies Act 2006, some with a different landowner/MA, some between themselves with no landowner/agent's signature, one signed by an alleged director of the MC who does not appear on the list of directors for that company, out of date with no proof of renewal, and much more.

Missaver

Fruitcake said:

As others have said, send the relevant parts but have an electronic copy of the whole thing to hand. You have/will have made a statement of truth to the effect that the only parts of the lease that are relevant to parking have been supplied. It will be up to the judge whether he believes on the balance of probabilities that you are indeed telling the truth.

Even if you don't get to respond to their WS in time to submit yours, you will be able to make bullet points to rip it apart during the hearing. Please do post a copy of the alleged contract to scam if/when you get it.
We have seen many that don't meet the requirements of the Companies Act 2006, some with a different landowner/MA, some between themselves with no landowner/agent's signature, one signed by an alleged director of the MC who does not appear on the list of directors for that company, out of date with no proof of renewal, and much more.

I have submitted my WS, exhibits and Summary of Costs Assessment to the solicitors (including the whole lease), but not filed with the Court yet. When I do and as advised, I will include only the 1 page from lease re Parking and state the whole thing is available to view.

Noted, thank you

nosferatu1001

Include at least the cover to the lease as well, so its obvious which address it relates to. 

Missaver

Good point, thanks nosferatu1001