Day At Court

luham

I just seen this

(issue date plus 5 days plus 4 weeks) and that the claim came from Northampton CCBC


so mine = issue date 21 Feb + 5days 26 Feb + 4weeks 26 Feb


is that correct, i was panicking a bit as was thinking 4 weeks from the 21th and my defence is still not ready , please someone confirm this

Redx

luham wrote: »

I just seen this

(issue date plus 5 days plus 4 weeks) and that the claim came from Northampton CCBC

so mine = issue date 21 Feb + 5days 26 Feb + 4weeks 26 Feb

is that correct, i was panicking a bit as was thinking 4 weeks from the 21th and my defence is still not ready , please someone confirm this

no its NOT correct

our resident expert KeithP gave you the exact details you require above, and nobody is going to give a different opinion, not after the hundreds of CORRECT posts he has made on here about dates and times etc

see post #27 above ^^^^^^^^ it fully answers your questions on submission and dates

get on with your draft defence and post it below (no more questions until that has been done)

luham

hello and thank you REDX
however, resident expert KeithP stated ;;Having done the AoS, you have until 4pm on Tuesday 26th March 2019 to file your Defense.,, post 27 above



that is allowing the 5 days ???


I'm working now at the defense

Redx

yes it is , and you said 26 feb in your query, not march

KeithP does not get it wrong, he has done hundreds of these calculations

ShakeItOff

Keith will be correct.

Post up your defence when ready. Sooner rather than later.

luham

In The County Court
Claim No: XXXXXXX
Between
Parking & Property Management (Claimant)

-and-

XXXXXXX (Defendant)

____________
DEFENCE
____________

1. The Defendant was the registered keeper and driver of vehicle registration number XXXXXXX on the material date. The Defendant denies that the Claimant is entitled to relief in the sum claimed, or at all.

2. The facts of the matter are that the vehicle was parked out of boundary covered by the parking firm, but they claim to extended area on 30th May 2018, two days prior to the date of this parking charge, the parking attendant who issued this parking charge stated this , also it is in writing by the parking company on their ( site info plan ) they write, ‘’AREA HAS EXTENDED EVER SO SLIGHTLY 30.05.2018’’ , however there was no such warning nor any new signs were erected to indicate the extension, I might add that this remain to date.

Parking and property management own pictures of site ‘’ XXXX site images 2, 3 and 4 ‘’show the ground of the whole site to be of laid bricks, it also shows a clear road marking of the site entrance border , my vehicle was clearly outside of that.

3. Back in December 2018, I had repeatably requested from the parking company to provide the following

- Both copies of ( Site Info Plan ), Enforcement Date 19.05.2017 and the one that they state in it area has extended ever so slightly enforcement date 30.05.2018.
- Any evidence that you they have altered / added any signs on site to indicate that they have extended the area that they cover as of 30.05.2018

Their only reply received was a late one dated 6th Feb 2019, ‘’This information cannot be shared as shared information re with our clients for GDPR, And that this information will be produced in court procedures’’ .

I also asked for
- All photos taken
- All letters/emails sent and received, including any appeal correspondence earlier
- All data held, all evidence they will use, and a full copy of the PCN.
- Evidence payment of £60.00 to the debt collector, as they have added £60 to the claim.


4. Accordingly, it is denied that the Defendant breached any of the Claimant's purported contractual terms, whether express, implied, or by conduct.

5.The Defendant has the reasonable belief that the Claimant does not have the authority to issue charges on this land in their own name, and that they have no right to bring any action regarding this claim.

5. The Defendant has the reasonable belief that the Claimant has not incurred £60 costs to pursue an alleged £100 debt. The Protection of Freedoms Act 2012, in Schedule 4, Para 4(5) states that the maximum sum that may be recovered from the keeper is the charge stated on the Notice to Keeper, in this case £100.

6. In summary, the Claimant's particulars disclose no legal basis for the sum claimed, and the Court is invited to dismiss the claim in its entirety.

Statement of Truth:

I believe that the facts stated in this Defence are true.


Date

Umkomaas

5. The Defendant has the reasonable belief that the Claimant has not incurred £60 costs to pursue an alleged £100 debt. The Protection of Freedoms Act 2012, in Schedule 4, Para 4(5) states that the maximum sum that may be recovered from the keeper is the charge stated on the Notice to Keeper, in this case £100.

But the driver can be liable for more.

1. The Defendant was the registered keeper and driver of vehicle registration number XXXXXXX on the material date. The Defendant denies that the Claimant is entitled to relief in the sum claimed, or at all.

Have you previously confirmed to the PPC the driver's identity?

Was their NtK PoFA compliant?

Le_Kirk

Defences should be written in the third person, which you mainly have done but you slip in a couple of places. Have a read, check and amend.

luham

Umkomaas wrote: »

But the driver can be liable for more.

Have you previously confirmed to the PPC the driver's identity?

Was their NtK PoFA compliant?

I had confirmed that I was driver & keeper !
what is this '' Was their NtK PoFA compliant? ''

KeithP

luham wrote: »

I had confirmed that I was driver & keeper !
what is this '' Was their NtK PoFA compliant? ''

If you have confirmed to the PPC that you are the driver, then POFA is irrelevant.

Forget all about POFA.