bwlegal BPL Letter of Claim/ restrict processing

karlaiskrazy

:)Thanks Keith,

Coupon-mad

The letter then goes into what the parties must do before the hearing.
What do I do now?

Read the NEWBIES thread again; the examples of Witness Statements & evidence.

karlaiskrazy

Hi all, registered keeper due to attend court 7th Aug.

Have received letter from BWLegal basically ripping the defence apart. ( points bear no relevence to this matter) Adding the pay and display details that were asked for 21st Dec 2018. (proving driver paid a fee and over stayed per machine by 3m8s. ANPR 18m 20.)

They had made an offer- Without Prejudice Save as to Costs (which has been ignored seems like drivel.

(currently in the middle of a house move) and would have moved address on day of court and will be 2.5 hours away. Should we let parties know of change of address when submitting statement and evidence?

Still working on WS. so have some questions.

As keeper was not the one driving is it just his WS?

Does the driver need to do a WS

and any other i.e. passengers?

Thanks again.

:beer:

karlaiskrazy

Is there anyone able to read through registered keepers WS?

Please and thank you.

Coupon-mad

All of us!

But NEVER by private message, thanks.

and would have moved address on day of court and will be 2.5 hours away. Should we let parties know of change of address when submitting statement and evidence?

Yes, and put a covering letter with proof of your house move, asking for the hearing to be vacated and the case re-allocated to xxxxxxx court for the first available hearing there, avoiding dates xx/xx/19 (any date you don't want or can't do in the Autumn!).

You do not want to have to travel and you should not have to. I expect the Judge will be only too happy to clear one from his/her list and re-allocate the hearing under these circs, if you act quickly and with proof.

karlaiskrazy

Any advice will help as researched etc but feel am still so out of my depth


WITNESS STATEMENT
__________________________________________________________________________


1. I, XXXXXX am the defendant in this claim. I am unrepresented, with no experience of Court procedures. If I do not set out documents in the way that the Claimant may do, I trust the Court will excuse my inexperience.

2. In this Witness statement, the facts and matters stated are true and within my own knowledge, except where indicated otherwise.

3. The facts of the case are as set out in my Defence, dated 24 February 2019, filed and served in response to the original N1 Claim Form, and verified by a Statement of Truth. They do not bear further repetition here, but this document will lead the evidence to support my case.

NO KEEPER LIABILITY
4. I was the Registered Keeper of the vehicle at the time of the event in question, however, I was not the driver

5. The claimant has produced no evidence of who was driving

6. At the time of the event there was no law that would allow a claimant to transfer liability for an alleged private parking contravention from the driver to the registered keeper (RK). As such only the driver can be held liable in this matter, if any contravention has even occurred. This claim has nothing whatsoever to do with the RK.

7. With no route in law to transfer liability for any alleged contravention, by a driver - to the RK, this claim is null and void. There is no case to answer. The claimant must prove who was driving then take the matter up separately with that person

NO “REASONABLE PRESUMPTION”

8. The claimant cannot “presume” that the defendant and RK was the driver at the time of the alleged contravention. For the following reasons:

9. There is no law that allows them to do this

10. The defendant asserts under ‘statement of truth’ that he was not the driver. This will be repeated in court should this claim proceed to a hearing.

11. Barrister and parking law expert Henry Greenslade was the ‘Parking on Private Land Appeals’ (“POPLA”) Lead Adjudicator from 2012 – 2015. This is an independent appeals service offered by the British Parking Assosciation (“BPA”) and Excel was under that Trade Body at the time of the alleged contravention. I adduce as evidence (exhibit XXX) Mr Greenslade’s opinion in the POPLA Annual Report 2015 which confirms that there is no presumption in law that a keeper was the driver and that keepers do not have any legal obligation whatsoever, to name drivers to private parking companies. Exhibit XXX

12. The claimant will rely on the case of Elliott v Loake [1982] to argue that they can presume the RK was the driver.

13. Elliott v Loake [1982] has no relevance whatsoever in small claims or any civil matters. It is a criminal case which turned on forensic evidence and an eye witness statement. The defendant was prosecuted for, amongst other things, offences under S172 of the Road traffic Act. There is nothing about that criminal case that is comparable or relevant to this small claims matter

14. I refer to Excel v Mr C C8DP37F1 at Stockport 31/10/2016. In this case the judge recognised that Elliot vs Loake was completely irrelevant. In dismissing the claim the judge stated amongst his reasons for doing so that - Excel did not adduce evidence of the driver, and - Elliott v Loake is not persuasive, and can be distinguished.

15. I refer to Excel v Mr B C7DP8F83 at Sheffield 14/12/2016. In this case the Keeper was not the driver, so he elected to offer no evidence, and put the claimant to strict proof. This of course was an impossibility for the claimant. As Mr B was not the driver, there would be no way they could offer any proof. The Judge made it clear that without proof of driver, and without invoking Keeper Liability, there was no claim against the Keeper.

16. I refer to the case of Excel v Ian Lamoureux, C3DP56Q5 at Skipton 17/11/2016. The Judge was critical of the claimant’s attempts to hold the keeper liable. The judge suggested that the only way Mr Lamoureux could be held liable was if he was the driver and Excel could prove he was (which they could not). The judge stated “I think the claim against Mr Lamoureux is totally misconceived because it has no evidence that he is the driver and it seems to be relying on some assumption that the registered keeper is the driver because it is not seeking to rely on the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012”.

17. The defendant was not the main driver of the vehicle in question, and, in fact, very rarely drove this vehicle.

18. I adduce as evidence exhibit XXX – a certificate of motor insurance from the company who insured the vehicle at the material time, proving that the defendant was not the main driver.

19. Several other people including friends and family members had use of the vehicle, around the time in question, though the ‘Driving Other Cars’ (DOC) extension on their own fully comprehensive car insurance policies.

20. If the defendant’s assertion that he was not the driver was to be tested against the ‘balance of probabilities’ then it would be highly unlikely that he was the driver due to the number of other people that could have been driving and the fact he was not the main driver of the vehicle

CLAIMANT UNREASONABLE BEHAVIOUR/ LACK OF CREDIBILITY

23. As the RK, in November 2017 I received a letter from the claimant’s solicitor - BW Legal, threatening to pursue me for a £100 parking charge and an additional £60 for legal costs which they claimed are detailed in the car park terms and conditions.

24. In this matter the claimant is lying. No such “legal costs” were detailed on any of their signs at the location in question at the material time. The claimant is put to strict proof otherwise. Exhibit XXX

25. This is an attempt by the claimant to fraudulently claim costs that, under CPR 27.14 they are not entitled to.

26. As a serial litigant with professional legal representation the claimant knows they cannot claim these costs. Therefore, by attempting to do so they are deliberately misleading the defendant and the court.

27. The claimant failed to adequately respond to my request made on 8th December 2018 where I requested any documentation and relevant information regarding PDT records from that day.

28. My request was not answered appropriately - I received a number of black and white photos of my car, a photocopy of the original PCN and copies of letters supposedly sent to me 2 years ago. I did not receive all of the information I requested.

29. In this matter the defendant tried to reasonably engage with the claimant so that he could better understand the claim and how to defend it. In failing to provide an adequate response the claimant is in breach of pre-action protocols and the overriding objecting as per CPR 1.

CONCLUSION

30. For all of the reasons stated above, the Court is invited to dismiss this Claim, and to allow my wasted costs which will be submitted separately and in a timely manner, depending upon whether a hearing takes place. I firmly believe that to pursue me as registered keeper when the Claimant has no right in law to do so, and to submit vague, incoherent particulars, is wholly unreasonable and vexatious.


I believe that the facts stated in this Witness Statement are true.

Signed.

Coupon-mad

Please read my earlier reply as I just edited it!

karlaiskrazy

The witness statement needs to be on/by 24th July. Will I incurred any fees?

Coupon-mad

A Defendant doesn't pay any fees, unless you lose at the hearing and are not familiar with how to explain why the fake costs should be disallowed, to the Judge (see beamerguy's Abuse of Process thread).

You need to do what I said, a clear covering letter with something like this on the top:

URGENT PRE-COURT VENUE CHANGE NEEDED - CLAIM NUMBER xxxxxx - HEARING LISTED FOR XX/XX/19 IS AT THE WRONG COURT

karlaiskrazy

Perfect thank you Coupon Mad.

So I am clear send cover letter off with witness statement and all evidence?

I will email my cover letter and statement with evidence to all parties b4 Wednesday.

Is IYO is witness statement enough?

Thanks again.