Vcs letter before claim...mistake of calling VCS when receiving NTK...Help!

Suggii

Yes KeithP I just spoke to CCBC and they are working on DQs sent around 12th March yet. They just said if you recieve a reminder call us back. They should get around ours by next week. The deadline was 25th but I will ignore it as I have an email receipt of sending the DQ.

MothballsWallet

Suggii wrote: »

Should I complain via letter/email or in person to local MP?

Can I suggest the writetothem.com website (I'm not affialiated with them, I've just used them a couple of times to email my own MP)?

It lets you find current MPs for different areas and contact them - I'd recommend writing to your own MP and mentioning that the incident happened in one of their colleagues' constituencies (and name the other MP by doing a search on that area first) - some MPs get funny about non-constituents contacting them, so it's easier to engage your MP's help to do this for you (that's what they're paid for).

Suggii

Just an update, my OH got a hearing date for the 8th October.

Coupon-mad

Good, and what does it say about the WS & evidence being filed, by when?

Suggii

hi sorry for getting back late, i was abroad for some time.
It says WS and Evidence should be filed 14 days before hearing date.

what would would i need for evidence?
i know copy of the beavis case.
copy of Practice Direction
signs i dont have any, need to check google for that. if anyone does have any, would be grateful.
i got the letter of partnership with the taxi firm.
map of the taxi route of job hired
and an image of the warning sign that came up on the car when it brokedown.
would i need copy of the VCS cases that were dismissed that i mentioned in defence?

anything else i need?

is it worth mentioning anywhere about VCS sending a letter about the CCJ decision which wasn't made by court but they just sent it, maybe so my OH pays up.

U414830

https://www.dropbox.com/sc/hn58g8rs4brpowc/AAAFzmEuX03J_2rJrk6SjlWVa

U414830

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n93eoaxhzpU

Le_Kirk

Witness Statement (WS) is the narrative, i.e. what happened on the day, relating to the circumstances surrounding the (alleged) contravention and in support of the defence. Evidence is anything that you have mentioned in your defence and WS such as signage. You shouldn't need Beavis or Practice Direction because judge should have access to that. If, for example you are relying on POFA, you would take an extract to prove your case for example, the PPC cannot claim against keeper because the driver has not been identified and either the PPC failed POF or is not relying on it. You need your WS and evidence in a paginated bundle kept in a ring binder and for further help on that, use those words in the keyword(s) in "Search this Forum"

Suggii

Just recieved VCS witness statement and evidence bundle.
I feel worried. They have used quite few cases to refer for backup. And are arguing that the breakdown isnt a reason for not paying. They also are using the same pics of signs and carpark as the ones sent by U414830. They are dated 2017. Aren't they meant to have update photos?
Also in the statement they say they have authority to implement a parking scheme since 15th jan 2018.
They seemed to have picked on all my defences.
I feel bit worried now.

Le_Kirk

Suggii wrote: »

Just recieved VCS witness statement and evidence bundle.
I feel worried. A. They have used quite few cases to refer for backup. B. And are arguing that the breakdown isnt a reason for not paying. They also are using the same pics of signs and carpark as the ones sent by U414830. C. They are dated 2017. Aren't they meant to have update photos?
D. Also in the statement they say they have authority to implement a parking scheme since 15th jan 2018.
They seemed to have picked on all my defences.
E. I feel bit worried now.

A. They always send loads of stuff designed to worry you*
B. Break-down is normally a reasonable defence - it is called vicissitude. Let the judge decide!
C. Photos should be at the time of the event so argue this in court.
D. Saying they have authority is not PROOF - is there a signed contract in the evidence bundle?
E. *It's working then