County Court claim form

Coupon-mad

Johnersh and LoadsofChildren123 are solicitors. You claim to know more?

1505grandad

I know nothing about legal matters but I do know this thread is dealing with a Court in England.

A quick look on Wikipedia found:-

"Plaintiff" is the term used in civil cases in most English-speaking jurisdictions, the notable exception being England and Wales, where a plaintiff has, since the introduction of the Civil Procedure Rules in 1999, been known as a "claimant",

In England and Wales, the term "claimant" replaced "plaintiff" after the Civil Procedure Rules 1998 came into force on 26 April 1999.[2] The move, which brings England and Wales out of line with general usage in English-speaking jurisdictions, was reportedly based on an assessment that the word "claimant" is more acceptable as "plain English" than the word "plaintiff".

As I say I cannot comment on legal matters or the above as I have had no training or legal experience whatsoever so know even less about the CPR 1998.

nosferatu1001

Just dont enagge with the troll any further
OP - as you can tell, Luxardo is utterly ignorable. Theyre a waste of bytes

Disgruntled_parker

Situation update,

The defendant has today received the Claimants WS. It's a pretty lengthy cut and paste document, covering all aspects of any likely defence such as; No contract, No authority to enforces charges, excessive charges etc etc.

The document was dated some 4 days late as directed by the notice of allocation.

The WS also contains a picture of the defendants VRN. Up to this point this has never been presented by them. And they have ignored any attempt to find this information out.

Not sure what to do now?

The_Deep

.

I would have advised you to pay up as soon as you got (sic) the summons (sic) because you had (sic) absolutely zero chance of winning this case.

But I get slaughtered on here for suggesting this.

Indeed, and rightly so. Reported, others may care to emulate.

[Deleted User]

When's trial listed?

Nothing to stop the o/p conceding that photos evidence the car was there, whilst challenging the terms of the sign - provided the defence was broad enough.

Perjury is to knowingly lie and is a rare finding. Yes you can get banged up - ask Jeffrey Archer - but the precedents all point to a rather different type of case. As an observation, it's often the claimant that's found to be lying.

A finding of fact against a party who is honestly mistaken (eg if you have honestly forgotten after the passage of time who was driving, a judge can still make a factual finding that it was you and that your memory is fallible). That type of finding is much more common.

Le_Kirk

luxardo wrote: »

I would have advised you to pay up as soon as you got the summons .......

Summons .......... I don't think so! It is a civil case, no law has been broken.

luxardo

Le_Kirk wrote: »

Summons .......... I don't think so! It is a civil case, no law has been broken.

thank you Mr P Dan Tick .. summons, claim, writ .. whatever, I'm trying to write in layman's terms

luxardo

The_Deep wrote: »

.

I would have advised you to pay up as soon as you got (sic) the summons (sic) because you had (sic) absolutely zero chance of winning this case.

But I get slaughtered on here for suggesting this.

Indeed, and rightly so. Reported, others may care to emulate.

So you think that advising to pay a 60 quid ticket rather than defend an unwinnable case and lose 260 quid is bad advice ?

Le_Kirk

luxardo wrote: »

thank you Mr P Dan Tick .. summons, claim, writ .. whatever, I'm trying to write in layman's terms

Plaintiff, claimant .... whatever, I'm trying to be accurate and factual. I would have thought that someone as well versed in the law as you say you are would like to be both of those (factual and accurate.)