Claim Form from Gladtones re Contractual PCN from G24

D_P_Dance

On no account agree to a hearing by telephone, skype, on paper etc.  Insist on a face to face hearing, even if it clashes with the ladies beach basket ball at the Olympics.  

sensahuma

The defendant has just spoken to the local county court. All hearings are being done remotely at the moment.

They said that since the hearing is listed for the 9th April and that no other comms have been sent till now, that implies that the court will call the defendant tomorrow on the phone number mentioned in the records to provide further instructions for doing this remotely on 9th. In all likelihood there will be a tele-conf calling number that the defendant will have to dial-into.

That being the case, the above suggestion from @D_P_Dance cannot be adhered to, unless someone can advise differently.

nosferatu1001

Obviously this is  new territory
You do whatever you can to get the best outcome for you
If you feel comfortable with a telephone hearing, use it. But you have to be aware you are likely at a disadvantage. 

sensahuma

Thanks.

The defendant will check tomorrow when the court calls to see if an option of deferring the case to a later date to enable f-2-f hearing is available. The defendant will update the post here accordingly.

Coupon-mad

I have posted on two threads already this week about how to prepare for a telephone hearing.  

It is important not to let the Claimant steal the 'floor' and get you riled with their nonense, so as to throw you off the scent when it comes to your turn to speak.  Have a bullet point list of your main points, as I posted to two other people this week.  Stay focussed and note down anything they say that is not true, and be ready to highlight that without blaming the rep, who is probably a hired gun who will be told what to say.

Just to add, a number of County Courts are now closed until further notice. Any hearings listed for these courts will be adjourned indefinitely, or may be transferred to another court. Here is the (non-alphabetical) list, thanks to bargepole:

 

SALISBURY LAW COURTS

SUNDERLAND COUNTY AND FAMILY COURT

BARNSTAPLE MAGISTRATES' AND COUNTY COURT

BLACKWOOD CIVIL JUSTICE CENTRE

BRENTFORD COUNTY COURT

CHESTERFIELD COUNTY COURT

DARLINGTON COUNTY COURT

EDMONTON COUNTY COURT

KINGSTON UPON THAMES COUNTY COURT

MAYORS AND CITY OF LONDON COUNTY COURT

REDDITCH COUNTY COURT

SLOUGH COUNTY AND FAMILY

STAINES COUNTY & MAGISTRATES COURT

STRATFORD CIVIL AND FAMILY

UXBRIDGE COUNTY COURT THE GRANGE

WAKEFIELD CIVIL JUSTICE CENTRE

WORTHING COUNTY & MAGISTRATES COURT

CARMARTHEN COUNTY COURT AND TRIBUNAL HEARING CENTRE

DURHAM COUNTY AND TRIBUNALS CENTRE

HEREFORD COUNTY COURT AND FAMILY COURT

TELFORD COUNTY AND FAMILY COURT

ALDERSHOT JUSTICE CENTRE

BARNSLEY MAGISTRATES & COUNTY COURT

BEDFORD MAGISTRATES & COUNTY COURT

BERWICK UPON TWEED MAGS & COUNTY COURT

BOSTON MAGISTRATES & COUNTY COURT

LANCASTER MAGISTRATES & COUNTY COURT

LLANDUDNO MAGISTRATES' COURT

SKIPTON MAGISTRATES & COUNTY COURT

TAMESIDE MAGISTRATES & COUNTY COURT

WELSHPOOL MAGISTRATES & COUNTY COURT

LEYLAND MAGISTRATES COURT

WORKINGTON MAGISTRATES COURT

sensahuma

Update re Final verdict: Case Dismissed by the Judge.

The defendant dialled into the call before time, judge waited for Claimant (or their rep) for 4 mins. No one joined from the Claimant's side, so the judge locked the call, asked the defendant few questions to confirm that they were not disputing the incident or the overstay shown. The defendant's response was that he agreed to being at the store (evidenced by credit card stmt), and that he did not dispute the timings, but considers the overstay penalty as disproportionate.

The defendant was asked whether he had seen the claimant's WS, to which his response was yes and that there were glaring anomalies that he wished to point out - one in particular about the evidence that shows photos of the store with a different name than the one that the defendant had actually visited.

The judge agreed to this point and remarked that the claimant's WS appeared as something akin to a template based response (The defendant does not remember the exact remark). The judge said he would dismiss the claim on that basis but then also said something like - "Had the claimant been able to get this right then we would be having a different conversation".

I am not sure what this means; if there had been further debate, the defendant was planning to use other arguments around grace period and costs being claimed as disproportionate and disingenuous.

Hopefully the result would still have been the same!

PS: The phone call has been recorded as per standard procedure in case someone wishes to know more.

sensahuma

The defendant thanks all the excellent experts, samaritans on this forum who unselfishly do yeoman service.

Many, many thanks indeed!

nosferatu1001

Well done!