Another win for MSE

Chefdave

Redx said:

you are making the classic mistake of not reading other threads, where its been explained at length

like this one recently

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/77024744#Comment_77024744

you proceed as normal until you find to the contrary , handing in documents doesnt seem to be a problem so far, plus the Royal Mail and Post offices are open for business , the court has commanded you to follow a certain path, same as everyone else, so unless you hear different , you try to comply

you learn a lot just by reading, its your case , not ours, sometimes its not about monetary gain

The fact of the matter is that I'm like a rabbit caught in the headlights. There's so much to get your head around in such a short space of time that (for me) it's impossible to know where to start. However I am beginning to find your hectoring rather irritating. 

I cannot wait to get this over with. If it ever happens again I'll settle. 

Redx

I find your constant complaining and negativity irritating as well , yet despite this I have provided you with sources of information where the topic has already been discussed

I have never had a private PCN and never had a court case , but 7 years of coming here , reading threads and helping others including yourself mean I have learned a lot. I haven't seen you help anyone else on here at all , so you are just a taker where it's all about you

Personally I would never pay a sc@mmer , so your last statement is appalling , it's what a wimp would do

D_P_Dance

If it ever happens again I'll settle. 

Dave, an MP recently said in the HoC that he believed that some of these companies had links o organised crime.  Would you be happy to  funds white slavery and child prostitution.  We are sometimes assertive and/or robust  in our replies because some people do not take this scam seriously.

Chefdave

D_P_Dance said:

If it ever happens again I'll settle. 

Dave, an MP recently said in the HoC that he believed that some of these companies had links o organised crime.  Would you be happy to  funds white slavery and child prostitution.  We are sometimes assertive and/or robust  in our replies because some people do not take this scam seriously.

Yes I would settle in future because it's simply not worth the time/stress/effort to fight it for someone with zero experience. 
It's like I'm pawn caught between the parking scammers and the activists who's heart is in the right place but don't seem to realise that not everyone is capable of being an amateur lawyer. 

nosferatu1001

You're not being an amateur lawyer. Not in the slightest.  

You're no different to the hundreds of other lay people claimants and your constant cries of I can't do it get wearing. 

Have some confidence and pride in your own capabilities 
if you simply pay up you're funding them to harass people who can't afford to pay up

Chefdave

nosferatu1001 said:

You're not being an amateur lawyer. Not in the slightest.  

You're no different to the hundreds of other lay people claimants and your constant cries of I can't do it get wearing. 

Have some confidence and pride in your own capabilities 
if you simply pay up you're funding them to harass people who can't afford to pay up

If they're that bad then I invite you and Redx to leave the thread

Thank you

nosferatu1001

Or take it as a gee up to just get this done. You can do it. Same as the dozens of others. 

NearlyDone

Chefdave,

As one of the ‘others’ I know where you are now.  I felt exactly the same about all this hassle ands harassment. It’s a pain in the backside and seems to be a battle against the odds. I'm working on my witness statement at the moment with my court date looming, probably just like many others. In the end this is my course of action I have chosen and I am so grateful to this forum for the assistance I am getting in working through this nightmare.  I do wish I had the advantage of an easily argued case you seem to have here. The thought of winning against these companies and making their life more expensive and more difficult is what helps motivate me to continue.

All the best with the perseverance and good luck with the result.

Nearlydone.

D_P_Dance

... I am so grateful to this forum for the assistance I am getting in working through this nightmare.

Do not think of this as a a night mare, think of it as a piddling little parking ticket from an ex-clamper.  If you put your mind to it you can eat them for breakfast. 

Coupon-mad

Chefdave said:

OK I've put a few things together, the ws needs to submitted by Wednesday 15th at 4pm. I still need to do a contents page and figure out how to submit it, but before I go any further I thought I'd post my ws, supplementary ws and exhibits here for criticism, thank you

I had a look now and hope you pressed ahead, as what you submitted was really good and thorough.

Beware of a court direction saying the hearing will be heard over the telephone, as it seems when that happens the Judge is working from home, with no access to your WS and evidence at all!    Yep, that's apparently what is happening.

The orders allocating Telephone Hearings are stating that the C and the D have to agree a 'shared bundle' of evidence and the worry now is that most Ds will not notice that and that the PPCs legal reps will email the court with a 'bundle' that they pass off as the agreed bundle that covers everything...when in fact it's just theirs...

Be ready to email the court to object to a telephone hearing and read every word in the directions very carefully.  I've seen one that says that:

 ''any request for adjournment, which is not by consent, regardless of how many days notice is given, will require a notice fee of £255.''

and:

''failure to provide a telephone number may be treated as a failure to attend the hearing when an order may be made in the absence of that party''

and:

''it should be assumed that the Judge will NOT have access to the case file''... ''prior to the hearing the parties are expected to liaise to agree the key documents required by the Judge essential for that hearing.  In default of agreement the parties may identify their own key documents but will need to justify the absence of agreement to the Judge who may make costs orders consequent upon the failure to agree''.

This may well be standard wording from several or all courts...
Needs a new thread of its own I think, so we can advise properly.