Claim Form received, help!

Coffee321

Oh god, I knew I’d seen it somewhere. Thank you

Coffee321

I have received DQ. I have filled it out and made copies. Is there a particular way to send it? Recorded post?
One copy to court in Northampton and one copy to pace or Gladstone’s?

KeithP

Send your completed DQ to the CCBC in the same manner and to the same email address that you sent your Defence.

Refresh your memory by re-reading post #3 above.

Send a copy of your completed DQ to the Claimant - address on your Claim Form.

Never ever use any form of postal service that requires a signature when writing to a parking company or their solicitor.

All that does is allow them to refuse delivery.
Proof of non-delivery is not quite what you want.

Use standard 1st class and get a free Certificate of Posting from the Post Office counter.

The item is deemed delivered two working days later.

Coupon-mad

Never ever use any form of postal service that requires a signature when writing to a parking company or their solicitor.

Seconded...

Coffee321

I have the General Form of Judgement or Order.
It tells me to send written statements or evidence and witness statements by a certain date (that certain date is coming up)
I have printed out:


(d) a copy of Schedule 4 of the POFA - there is a link to it in post #1 above. The Judge will NOT have this to hand & is unlikely to be familiar with it. This is only applicable if you are defending as keeper.
(e) a copy of Henry Greenslade's wording from the POPLA Annual Report 2015 'Understanding Keeper Liability' if defending as keeper.
(g) the case transcripts that support your argument (get them from the Parking Prankster's case law page), PACE v Lengyel


also insurance docs showing the keeper is not the only person that could have been driving.


I was going to put in excel v lamoureux but looking at the freedom of info act parts it talks about I am now unsure. The was a windscreen CN. how does this info affect using this piece of evidence? The keeper was not the driver.


thanks in advance!

Coffee321

IN THE COUNTY COURT - Claim No.:

Between

Pace Recovery & Storage (trading as Ace Security Services) (Claimant)

-and-

************ (Defendant)
____________________________
WITNESS STATEMENT
__________________________

I, ****************** of **************, *********, ***********, **** *** am the defendant in this case.

1. The facts in this statement come from my personal knowledge. Where they are not within my own knowledge there are true to the best of my information and belief

2. I am not liable to the Claimant for the sum claimed, or any amount at all and this is my Witness Statement in support of my defence as already filed.

3. I assert that I am the registered keeper of the vehicle in question in this case. I was not the driver.

4. I have included my certificate of motor insurance, which shows that there are 3 people insured to drive the car.

5. The parking event was so long ago that nobody can remember who was driving the car.

6. The claimant is unable to provide any evidence of who the driver was.

7. The claimant has not followed proper procedures and still hasn’t evidenced the landowner contract.

8. I did not respond to the brightly-coloured alarmist Notices sent to me by Pace or their solicitor because I believed they were spam (this sort of scam had been exposed on Watchdog). Also, as I was not the driver and these were not offences or fines from an Authority like a Council, there was no reason or obligation upon a registered keeper to ‘appeal’ to what appeared to be junk mail.

2. I had no reason to respond to their letters or to name the driver, nor am I obligated to. This is supported by my Exhibit, an extract from the POPLA Annual Report 2015.

23. Barrister and parking law expert Henry Greenslade was the ‘POPLA’ (‘Parking on Private Land Appeals’ independent service offered by the BPA) Lead Adjudicator from 2012 – 2015 and Excel was under that Trade Body at the time of the first mentioned in this claim. I adduce as evidence 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. No adverse inference can be drawn from my choice not to respond to what appeared to be spam.

47. 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 doesn’t know who the driver is, is wholly unreasonable and vexatious.

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


……………………………………………………………………�
�…. (add name and sign)
………………………
(add Date)

Coupon-mad

I was going to put in excel v lamoureux but looking at the freedom of info act parts it talks about I am now unsure. The was a windscreen CN. how does this info affect using this piece of evidence? The keeper was not the driver.

Was there a Notice to Keeper a month later, and was it POFA compliant?

What about these appeal cases as they are persuasive on the lower courts:

- Excel v Smith

- Jopson v Homeguard

and what about the county court decision of PACE v Noor?

All available from the Parking Prankster's case law.

What about your lease/tenancy agreement showing your rights?

What about the signs, you must attack the signs.

Redx

Firstly it says witness statement, but signs off as defence statement

Coffee321

But the keeper was not the driver. How is this not enough?

Coffee321

Yes there was a ntk a month later. It talks about paragraph 8(2)(f) secduleb4 of protection of freedoms act 2012. Does this mean it is POFA compliant?

I have attacked the signs in my defence. Should I put the same stuff in WS?

If I use the tenancy agreement it will identify the driver.