No ticket/wrong address - PCN, debt collectors

Fight_the_good_fight

No, you do not tick this box unless you live outside of the UK

Coupon-mad

Daniellep64013 wrote: »

Yes I've seen that, but I don't know whether that means I should tick the box?

Bargepole clearly tells you, in his summary in the NEWBIES thread:

Do not contest jurisdiction

So the answer to ''do you INTEND to contest jurisdiction?'' is obviously no...

Daniellep64013

There's no need to be rude. I simply didn't understand.

Daniellep64013

Could anyone possibly help with the defence please? Absolutely no idea how to set it out, what to put etc.

Thank you

KeithP

Daniellep64013 wrote: »

Could anyone possibly help with the defence please? Absolutely no idea how to set it out, what to put etc.

There are several examples linked from the NEWBIES thread.

There is also good guidance there about how to compose one.

Post your draft here when ready for critique.

Redx

nobody is being rude, just straight talking and to the point

and nobody here will write your defence for you

this is a self help forum, which is why you will keep being pointed back to that NEWBIES thread

now that your AOS has been done according to the BARGEPOLE instructions, now look at his concise defence and copy and paste it into word or wordpad or similar

then adapt it as explained by CM recently

most people can use bargepole's concise template defence from the NEWBIES thread, and add in a point or two about the facts of the case/contravention/why they are not liable.
And a point about no landowner authority as seen in other defences.

then post it below , for critique

Coupon-mad

Daniellep64013 wrote: »

Could anyone possibly help with the defence please? Absolutely no idea how to set it out, what to put etc.

I wasn't being rude - but we are very busy here and your question was already answered in the NEWBIES thread, that you do not want to contest jursidction.

Hence why defences are fully explained in the NEWBIES thread post #2. Most newbies a happy to copy bargepole's concise defence, and then change the second point to state their own facts of the event.

Fight_the_good_fight

Its not a case of being rude, but self help.


As can be seen by the "traffic" on this forum which undoubtedly must be one of the busiest forums on the net where a few posters such as C-M and others are constantly giving up their free time to read and re post advice. For OP's not to follow simple advice such as reading the newbies threads then wanting spoon feeding without puting much work in their self must be infuriating.


You will find that not only will your knowledge improve if you read and understand the newbies thread, which subsequently leads to less insignificant posts about what do I do next and can someone do all the work for me.


If the regulars can see that OP,s have clearly put some effort in and tried and not just tried to copy and paste defenses, further and better advice may be forthcoming.


On being a regular lurker on this site I amazed at the patience given by the regular contributors to posters asking questions which are not only inane but are all answered in the newbies thread. Additionally when told to do something come back a few months later requesting further help after ignoring the advice given.


I would argue that with this forum coming to the point of saturation with requests that if posters, post and clearly have not read the newbies or claim to have but is obvious they haven't they should be directed to the newbies thread and the main aim of concentration put towards those who have clearly put the time and effort in.

Daniellep64013

I have been reading the defences which are posted in the newbies thread but I am just struggling to understand what to put. The terminology and language used are slightly alien to me I have to admit. Of course I understand that everyone is busy and posters are giving up their time to guide people through. It is not a case of wanting someone to do it for me, it's just a case of me really struggling to understand what I need to put. I have no idea what the defence should be - that the wording on the signs is too small, that there was no ticket machine (but there was an option to pay by phone)? There are around 6 fines not just 1 so I don't know whether that will make a difference. If I knew what to focus the defence on then I could come up with something.

I'm looking at copying Bargepole's defence - if that's okay? But unsure what to change point 2 to say? The car was parked there, in the private cark park - no permit etc. So I'm unsure what I actually need to change it to say.

I do appreciate everyone's help - I'd have absolutely no idea if it was just down to me! I apologise if I do sound idiotic, and if I'm asking too much.

Le_Kirk

Start with Bargepole's concise defence. What did the Particulars of Claim (POC) say? This is what you need to counter, for example: -
POC states - Parking without buying a ticket
Defence - the defendant purchased a ticket and will produce it in court
POC states - no ticket displayed
Defence - the defendant used a pay-by-phone method and no ticket is issued.

Carry on like that until you have answered all the specific points in the POC added in to the concise defence by Bargepole. Then post here for critique.