DCBL certificated bailiffs and high court enforcements

D_P_Dance

See if they will feature it again.

Hazy05

🤔 i might just do that. Il give them a ring on monday.

Fruitcake

Hazy05 said:

Yes actually both my sons was insured to drive my car. Ok, well iv drafted some of the evidence already. Iv also made a complaint to my MP. This carpark has been featured in our local newspaper numerous times.🙄

Great, so four people had access to the car meaning that the chances of the driver having been the keeper is no more than 25%, much less than the balance of probabilities required for the claimant to win.

Hazy05

Yes potentially could be anyone of us. After all it was 5 years ago. So i need to change the defence to include that my 2 boys also had permisson to drive.  Im feeling quite confident more than i was . Especially now iv taken photos of where the signs are placed and its a very busy ( traffic wise) to get to the parking area. You definatly would not be concentrating on the signs in place as you need eyes in the back of you head just for your safety. 🙂

Fruitcake

I don't think you need to identify everybody; just that four family members (or the defendant and three other members) of the household had use of the car and all were insured to drive (either on the owner's policy or on their own policy.)

Post up your pics for us to have a look at. 

Hazy05

the entrance to the car park is coming down on the left and sharp turn into. There is also 2 lane traffic on either side of the road as there is a garage dierctly opposite, restaurant. At the time of my notice there was a huge billboard directly above the notice sign advertising Asda or something so your eyes are drawn to that i only know this as the letter they sent me showing this parking notice it also showed the billboard. I did not use this exit to access the cake shop it was around the back.

Hazy05

I will be going back to take more photos. To include the flow of traffic. When i file the witness statement.

Hazy05

Hi. Just an update of whats happening... I have now recieved a response back from DCBL.. They are saying they agree that someone who had access to my car have incured the parking cost.. They want to know who has access to my car and why?. If i fail to reply this will be brought up in court when i am cross examined and i could be in content of court. Also in bold letters underneath " cannot pay take it away" along with their payment details. How do i response to this. TIA

Umkomaas

Hazy05 said:

Hi. Just an update of whats happening... I have now recieved a response back from DCBL.. They are saying they agree that someone who had access to my car have incured the parking cost.. They want to know who has access to my car and why?. If i fail to reply this will be brought up in court when i am cross examined and i could be in content of court. Also in bold letters underneath " cannot pay take it away" along with their payment details. How do i response to this. TIA

They're fishing for the driver's details because they know that Highview cannot pursue the registered keeper as their NtKs are not PoFA-compliant. This is happening on almost every Highview thread currently at this stage.  

Have you not seen it before?  You are reading other Highview threads, aren't you?

Hazy05

Yes. Iv been reading them and will go back and re read now i have recieved this response from them. Do i have to reply back with the details or can i just produce them in court? 
TIA