BW Legal - Any help very much appreciated...

Coupon-mad

Are there 7 claims filed already, and are some of them from the same PPC?

Your thread is so long I have no idea if you've asked the court for the same PPC ones to be consolidated, but I can see that word doesn't appear in your WS at all?

didgeridoooo

No, I haven't asked, but I may do on the next claim. Also note, this claim (this thread) is a standalone claim. No other claims from the same PPC.

Coupon-mad

this claim (this thread) is a standalone claim. No other claims from the same PPC.

Ah, OK.

Now re your WS, as you have gone into so much personal detail, if this driver was YOU then I think you should drop the POFA paragraph and admit to being the driver in the WS near the top, because what you are giving is an honest witness account (so no need to hide behind calling the driver 'she' - unless this is not you, in which case, say it wasn't!):

4. On the material date, the driver was a full time mother of four children, the youngest of whom was still exclusively breast-fed, feeding around 15-20 times per day, and slightly poorly whilst overcoming a mild sickness bug.

5. The driver took her children to visit Falmouth Maritime Museum which was a regular outing. She drove

And, if the ANPR image shows arrival at 13:02, what time was shown on the PDT you displayed? I would be trying to explain the time taken to PARK and PAY, separately from the time taken to leave, and use the BPA CoP on grace periods and Kelvin Reynolds words from the BPA article about grace & observation periods being different.

And you have said nothing in that WS to object to the added £60 that they can't recover, unless you let them.

didgeridoooo

Thanks very much for reading it CM.



Time between entry and ticket purchased is only a few minutes, so I am focussing more on the end. The main thrust of the argument is that we are being penalised for times of entry/exit, when the signs made NO mention of such things. Had they done, no ticket would have been issued.

POFA v Admitting - That's actually a point which has probably caused half of the inordinate length of this thread, which is a constant bugbear for all (and I am extending it further with this post!). Short version... I received various opposing opinions. 1. POFA is strong - use it, versus 2. Driver defence is strong in this case so use it and balls to POFA. As people said, I had to basically pick my poison. And I did that by deciding to invoke POFA, since that is their stated basis for the claim, and give the judge the chance to 'let me out' on it, as they have screwed it up. But the driver defence is in there without the admission, BUT that admission will be given in hearing IF asked. A judge who respects POFA shouldn't ask who was driving, indeed shouldn't even get to that part of the WS before deciding to throw this out. But if they don't see POFA as enough, then they can ask and we will tell them who was driving. The facts are true, it's just that driver is referred to in third person, such as was advised by various experienced people, and I decided to take that approach, balls to the wall, come what may.

Abuse of Process - I actually took that out because I went into it heavily in the defence, and didn't want to extend the WS further or risk boring or annoying the judge. I will try to find some wording to drop in relating to that if you think it should be in the WS too. THANK YOU CM, very very much.

Coupon-mad

Honestly, I would defend as driver.

Your story of what happened is bound to slip out that it's you when you verbalise your case, and hiding being 'the driver did this' is untenable and not needed, given that PP do use the POFA. You will feel soooo much more comfortable telling it like it was and you will be the only true 'witness' in the room! Gives you an advantage IMHO.

You could always attach the stuff about added costs as a supplementary sheet, so the Judge doesn't have to trawl through it until you come to the matter of costs.

didgeridoooo

Fair points and I don't disagree at all. I just went round and round in circles and had to plump for an option. So I chose this one, BUT...... I am 99% sure within 2 mins of hearing starting, it will become a first person conversation. I just wanted to (riskily perhaps) offer the judge a way to throw it out on POFA grounds. After all, the second the admission is made, the claimant can start attacking on that basis and it all shifts over, whereas I can instigate that IF and WHEN we want to, depending on the feel of the judge. OK, I am probably overthinking and over complicating things, but it's the only way I could balance A) the various advisers' comments, and My dogged desire to see them fail on POFA, as it SHOULD fail there!
I do accept the risks, but I think they are minor. if the judge doesn't like the approach, we can drop it in an instant, docking cap to the judge for being inexperienced litigants perhaps too.

Supplementary sheet - not sure what official term that would have, or do you mean as a piece of evidence/exhibit?


Thanks again

Coupon-mad

You haven't filed that WS yet - so I cannot stress enough, change your stance to admitted driver from the WS onwards. Change all 'the driver' to 'I'.

PP will not fail on POFA. They use the right words, so hiding behind that is pointless and might make the Judge feel you have something to hide - even if they don't ask you outright 'were you the driver?' (which some would) the Judge might arch an eyebrow & think: 'why are you not here admitting to driving, in the interests of open dealing'?

There is SOMETIMES a place for using the POFA, but this is not it.

Supplementary sheet - not sure what official term that would have, or do you mean as a piece of evidence/exhibit?

Whatever you want to call it. Anything goes as long as you file & serve it.

Also include your costs schedule at this stage.

didgeridoooo

Coupon-mad wrote: »

Also include your costs schedule at this stage.

I was sure I read that that is for later. Oh god, I have no idea how to even calculate it. Will get looking for threads on that. Thanks

Coupon-mad

Ermmm...cough...the NEWBIES thread shows you how to work out a costs schedule.

This is why we have the sticky thread, to stop threads going past 50 or so posts of drip-drip questions (oh wait!...).

didgeridoooo

Yes that would have been my first port of call, I can't remember what it contains off by heart (despite many reads!) but thought it would probably refer to it. thanks