PCN given despite being a customer

Coupon-mad

You need to make a late complaint to POPLA as they admitted that last year, they had a software/technical problem where their system could not read PDFs sometimes, and they resolved it for many people and found the PDFs later and re-opened the appeals.

I am fairly sure we recently had a POPLA case re-opened (very late) even when a claim form had been served, and the POPLA appeal went in favour of the appellant and the claim was discontinued.

Send a complaint to John Gallagher at POPLA and say you are aware that their technicians worked to resolve the glitch and have found some missing PDFs, so you require that they search again for yours and re-open the appeal due to the missing evidence PDF.

Of course you will also have to put a defence in at the same time.

KeithP

NotCalledDan wrote: »

I am now at the claim form stage.

I have responded to the claim form only to acknowledge and inform that I will require the full 28 days to submit a response. Due to being on holiday when it was issued (9th Jan), this gives me around a week to return my defence.

With a Claim Issue Date of 9th January, you had until Tuesday 28th January to file an Acknowledgment of Service.

On what date did you file an AoS? Hopefully sometime between 14th January and 28th January. Please confirm.

Having filed an AoS, you have until 4pm on Tuesday 11th February 2020 to file your Defence.

That's one and a half weeks away. Plenty of time to produce a Defence, but please don't leave it to the last minute.


When you are happy with the content, your Defence could be filed via email as suggested here:

Print your Defence.
1. Sign it and date it.
   
2. Scan the signed document back in and save it as a pdf.
   
3. Send that pdf as an email attachment to CCBCAQ@Justice.gov.uk
   
4. Just put the claim number and the word Defence in the email title, and in the body of the email something like 'Please find my Defence attached'.
   
5. No need to do anything on MCOL, but do check it after a few days to see if the Claim is marked "defence received". If not, chase the CCBC until it is.

Having filed your Defence, there is more to do...

1. Do not be surprised to receive an early copy of the Claimant's Directions Questionnaire. Nothing of interest there. Just file it.
2. Wait for your own Directions Questionnaire from the CCBC, or download one from the internet, and then complete it as described by bargepole in his 'what happens when' post linked from post #2 of the NEWBIES thread.
3. The completed DQ should be returned by email to the CCBC to the same address and in the same way as your Defence was filed earlier.
4. Send a copy of your completed DQ to the Claimant - to their address on your Claim Form.

NotCalledDan

@Coupon-mad - that is very interesting to know, I will certainly follow up on that while progressing the defence stage.

@KeithP - not to worry, AoS was submitted within the correct timeframe

Any comments on the defence at all? I am happy it covers the main points on which I will rely as I understand that new ones will not be accepted

Coupon-mad

This is not what I would pick out to show why a CEL NTK was not a POFA one:

3.The Notice To Keeper (NTK) sent was not POFA 2012 compliant due to an absence of essential information around the specified land being parked on (POFA 2012 para 7). The information contained within the NTK refers only to a car park on a specified road and does not give further details as to which this may be.

We look at 9(2)f as the main wording to look for. CEL have sometimes included it and sometimes not, so it is vital you check your NTK.

And your defence has none of the wording objecting to the false added £60 or £70 that has caused the £100 parking charge to morph into a higher 'debt'. Even if you save most of that argument till WS and supplementary WS stage, you need to mention it in defence really.

NotCalledDan

Unfortunately, CEL seem to have decided to take the logical step of copying most of POFA 2012 word for word in the case of my NTK. Para 7 is the only real area they seem to have been quite vague however the rest of the arguments are far stronger than the NTK.

No idea why they gave people an easy win in the past when the regulations are publicly available but it seems to be coming to an end.

I have added in information regarding the ballooning payment and sent it off.
Thanks for the help and I will return with any updates