patrons only PCN

anicecuppa

Slightly  frustratingly  they have now submitted a corrected version (though they did so later than the court order required them to). There is a hearing date set for September. Presumably I don't have to re-submit all my original documentation?  I ask because the language on the order is arguably ambiguous - it says we must ensure "that at the final hearing the court and every other party... have acess to a paginated bundle of the documents they wish to rely on."  Does that mean I need to re-submit everything?  It is still possible I will submit a further supplementary piece, raising the data protection issues etc.

Jenni_D

Assuming the hearing will be by phone/video then the usual requirement is for the claimant to compile a common bundle ... Claimant's bundle and Defendant's bundle ... in a single PDF file. If this means you resending your docs to the C to ensure they are captured in the bundle then do so. (And you'd make sure to check the compiled bundle once they issue it, in case they've manipulated anything to try to weaken your defence - this has happened before, e.g. by printing and then scanning photos so they're poor B+W versions rather than clear colour versions. Perhaps copy the court when you send your bundle to the C).

Perhaps post a (redacted if necessary) copy of the court order here for clarification?

MothballsWallet

Umkomaas said:

Fruitcake said:

You could always play billy suggers and call from a 'phone box, if any of those still exist. 

141 in front of their phone number from your own phone does equally well, and saves a trip to the local public toilet phone box. 

Sorry for the lateness, but only just catching up on this thread today: this doesn't always work because some companies' phone switchboards can still show the calling number even with the 141 in use.

It's to do with the call options in the digital phone system: basically, there's a setting that says "Don't show this caller's number" and, because it's a setting, a phone switchboard can be set to ignore it and pass the number through regardless.

Johnersh

1. The cpr requires a witness to correct an inaccuracy in a statement, so perhaps unsurprising you've got a new one. But if you're taking the point, then the court should be reminded that having failed to serve a statement, then served an inaccurate one, they need relief from sanctions

2. See 1 above. If you're not agreeing that their statement is evidence that the court should consider, it's unlikely you'll agree a single bundle. 

anicecuppa

Thanks for the input. They complied with the earlier part of the court order by submitting the (inaccurate) document by the time required.  However they are entitled to send any 'additional' documents up to 14 days before the trial date - which means technically they are within their rights to submit a 'corrected' version.  I will likely draw attention to the pattern of events as a way of questioning the overall reliability of the evidence, rather than arguing the document is inadmissible.

However, the paragraph I'm unsure of is as follows:

"The parties must ensure that at the final hearing the court and every other party and any witness have access to a paginated bundle of the documents they wish to rely on. For hearings by telephone or video a bundle must be provided to the court and other parties by email in pdf format at least 7 days prior to the final hearing unless the court orders otherwise."

In advance of the first hearing I supplied a witness statement and then a supplementary statement - which all parties already have.  Do I need to re-send them as a single paginated bundle?  If I'm going to prepare that, should I take the opportunity to add a further supplementary statement outlining the issue with inaccurate information/data protection etc.?  I don't want to make extra work for myself, but at the same time, I want to make sure I comply with the order.

Johnersh

I wouldn't assume the court has retained your bundle, absent a confirmation from the court staff.

If you can create a pdf bundle, done properly with bookmarks, that's a thing of beauty. You can then send as many as you like. Not everyone has the software readily to hand, unfortunately.

The other thing would be to agree with the claimant what documents should be in the bundle (theirs and yours) and get them to create it. This is what should happen in every case. The creation of a paginated bundle is not an opportunity to sneak in new material and shouldn't be used as such. 

anicecuppa

Well (limited) good news people!

After submitting my final bundle to the court and DCBL ahead of my hearing in a few weeks time, I got a call yesterday from DCBL asking me about any compromise settling rather than going to court.  Of course I said no.

Today a letter arrived saying that they have been instructed to 'discontinue court proceedings' and close their file.

This is good news in the sense of closure.  Very glad to be at the end of this road.
But bad news in the sense that I didn't get my hour in court and a chance to claim various damages/expenses.

However, I will probably at the very least follow up with my local MP to try and get some further action taken against them, or at the very least to get the signage improved.

A million thanks to all those who have offered advice and help over the last nearly 3 years.  I really can't thank you enough.  Another victory for MSE Forums!

Redx

Well done , a win is still a win !  😜😜   Dcb legal and PPL lose again 😜😜

Another one bites the dust !!

Please fill in the government consultation within the next 7 days , thank you

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6286801/government-consultation-re-private-parking-charge-levels-august-2021-please-bookmark-this-thread/p1

D_P_Dance

They have wasted your time, now waste theirs, read this

https://www.citizensadvice.org.uk/law-and-courts/legal-system/small-claims/making-a-small-claim/t

Snakes_Belly

Well done Another cave in for Walton Wilkins.