PCN due to faulty tablet

Coupon-mad

Yes but personally I would email the bundle to CEL and a copy to the court, stating that you believe an electronic copy will assist the Judge and here it is.  Include your costs assessment and a cover page/index, just as you see in the NEWBIES thread where just ONE example WS is linked as a good template to adapt.

That way, you KNOW the court has your entire bundle and CEL cannot remove anything from it.

BTW in a case I was at a video hearing against CEL, it turned out they had sent the court the landowner contract but not the defendant!   There is a court report I posted here about that case somewhere; the username was 'oldbird' something...and it was maybe 2 months ago. 

Watch out for trickery and a young girly who isn't very good at hearings.

henteaser

Witness Statement, Exhibits, Costs attached.
I will be emailing this to the court and serving to CEL.

Coupon-mad

And you found the thread I mentioned, to show you what it's like in a CVP Hearing against CEL?

Your WS is very good but add something about:

- wanting to see the landowner contract because you don't believe the landowner has authorised this Claimant to do what they are doing, and that they must supply this to you as well as to the Court, and that it must not be redacted (Court of appeal case...Chestnut something applies!).

- the Semark-Jullien case, because you can't just throw in DJ Grand's decision without covering the matter of the recent appeal of the similar case (that CEL will pretend means something it doesn't).

Both of the above are there for you to copy, in the WS linked in the NEWBIES thread which deals with both. 

henteaser

Brill, thank you. A couple of questions (I will post a revised WS before I send).
- Could you expand on what evidence was submitted in regards S Wilson, who also signed this claim form despite the PCN being issued Feb 2019.
- In regards to the WS in the Lewes Video hearing you attended: "I have seen no evidence that this Claimant has landowner authority, because they also failed to include any evidence to the court" which reads as if the defendant in that case had seen CEL's WS and evidence BEFORE the defendant submitted theirs. Sorry if this is a dumb question but what's the order of events for me here? How would such a statement be included in my own WS if I haven't seen CELs yet?
- Do I need to include anything in my WS if I am intending to request by letter to the court that a Lay Rep present the defence?

Coupon-mad

henteaser said:

Brill, thank you. A couple of questions (I will post a revised WS before I send).
- Could you expand on what evidence was submitted in regards S Wilson, who also signed this claim form despite the PCN being issued Feb 2019.
- In regards to the WS in the Lewes Video hearing you attended: "I have seen no evidence that this Claimant has landowner authority, because they also failed to include any evidence to the court" which reads as if the defendant in that case had seen CEL's WS and evidence BEFORE the defendant submitted theirs. Sorry if this is a dumb question but what's the order of events for me here? How would such a statement be included in my own WS if I haven't seen CELs yet?
- Do I need to include anything in my WS if I am intending to request by letter to the court that a Lay Rep present the defence?

Both parties have the same deadline for WS & evidence, so yes, sometimes the C's WS rubbish arrives first.  It did in that case.
No need to mention a lay rep at all until the D gives their phone number (and lay rep's number) for the hearing.

You can find the words to use about Scott Wilson if you search the forum for his name and Wonga.

henteaser

Updated WS which I plan to serve this coming Tuesday, unless there's a case for holding off until the last minute? (Claimant has until 9th Nov to pay the court fee) 

Umkomaas

Just a skim. On my iPad I can't post while a download is open - and why it's best to show the WS as a post, not as a download, then there's something to scroll up and down to. 

Evidence - it is recommended these be annotated and cross-referenced as follows. Assuming Fred J Bloggs is the Defendant, FJB001, rather than Exhibit A, FJB002 rather than Exhibit B.

I can't recall if it was para 12 or 13 where you refer to VRM input into a tablet. Your final sentence refers to 'table device'. Should that read 'tablet device'?

Your summary costs assessment. Stationary' should read 'Stationery'. 

Coupon-mad

That looks very good.  I am confused by what looks like a typo where it says the car was parked from 2019 till 2020!

Also, as the incident was in early 2019, I would add this to your point about Scott Wilson and fill in the date he joined CEL:


I must emphasise that I mean no disrespect to the Claimant's purported witness but would also point out that he was not an employee of the Claimant in early 2019 (Linked In record shows xx/xx/19).  This is significant because not only do I contend that he is not a 'witness' at all and it is more than likely that a person working at the Claimant's Head Officer has never visited the car park or gym  in question, but he is not in a position to state what the signs were like or indeed, whether the Gym's own keypad VRM logging in system was in working order that day.  However, my statement confirms that it was not working properly and took several attempts to input the VRM, which I did.

henteaser

Notice of discontinuance received 4 days after I served my WS.

Thank you everyone for all your help.

ANOTHER ONE BITES THE DUST

Redx

Well done

There seems to have been quite a few discontinuance letters by CEL recently