Help Please... NCP PCN BW Legal

Mrplay123456

A quick update, I have got a court date for the 6th October, hearing by Microsoft Teams.  Just hoping someone can chip in with what I really need in my WS to send to the court by email on Monday 28th September.
I filed the Abuse of Process defence, as I was not understanding everything fully.  So just looking for advice on what needs to go in the WS to highlight this abuse to the Judge?  Many thanks in advance

Le_Kirk

Did you find anything that might be helpful when you looked again at the NEWBIE sticky?  There was a specimen WS posted only this week by @Coupon-mad which she held up as an example of how to write one with contents, WS, evidence and summary costs assessment.  Obviously you read it and ADAPT it to suit your circumstances rather then just a blind C&P.

Mrplay123456

Le_Kirk said:

Did you find anything that might be helpful when you looked again at the NEWBIE sticky?  There was a specimen WS posted only this week by @Coupon-mad which she held up as an example of how to write one with contents, WS, evidence and summary costs assessment.  Obviously you read it and ADAPT it to suit your circumstances rather then just a blind C&P.

I will check that out now, thanks

Coupon-mad

You are now late to submit your WS and evidence, unless this hearing was literally only just set up now.  If you knew about 6th October a few weeks or months back, then that letter told you that you MUST get your WS and evidence in not later than 14 days before.

Have the Claimants met the deadline?  Or are you saying this date is new and there was no prior Order mentioning 6th October?

Have you seen the example new WS by robertcox999 as linked in the NEWBIES thread, the one that deals with the Semark-Jullien appeal at Salisbury as well and puts that to bed?


And are you aware you need to do this as well - please please please be heard!!  The Govt are listening right now.

A TASK FOR SEPTEMBER - NB: this will take an hour or more to go through each section, and to do BOTH consultations:

The Government is (this month only) consulting about a new statutory code of practice (CoP) and framework to rein in the rogue parking firms.  Read and comment on the draft CoP proposal and the enforcement framework consultation, and get everyone you know to do the same.

You will need to register to comment on the CoP and enter an occupation even if you are retired or a homemaker, but otherwise it is easy to navigate, and comment upon each section/subsection individually. You can save comments to edit later and or submit comments once you are happy with them.

https://standardsdevelopment.bsigroup.com/projects/2020-00193#/section

You do not need to register to comment on the enforcement framework which can be found here. It has a link on page 5 to make comments.

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/913272/Code_Enforcement_Framework_consultation.pdf

Please complete comment on all sections if you have a view, remembering the vision of the Knight Act is to end extortionate parking charges.  If you agree with us, the added fake 'debt recovery' costs are just double counting the cost of letters and MUST GO, along with the robo-claim legal firms. 

A Speeding fine is £100.  A Local Authority lower rate parking penalty is £50.  Which do you think a private PCN should be like?

HOW TO DO THE SUBMISSIONS:

Responses into the PAS 232 and MHCLG framework documents are not completely straightforward:

On the MHCLG response, you have to answer the questions on a 1-5 scale from strongly agree to strongly disagree, and then put some commentary. No way to upload documents or alternatives.

 On the PAS 232, you have to click on each clause and sub-clause to put your comments, and a suggested rewording of their draft.  You can see comments which other people have written! 

 But, when you click ‘submit’, a message pops up to say your comments have been received, but that only applies to the particular clause you have just addressed.

You have to click ‘submit’ separately for each individual clause response.

Some people will be caught out by this but can revisit it and add further responses up to 12 October.

Mrplay123456

Many thanks for the info I will go though it now...
The Amended Order states that I have until the 28th September by 4pm to send written statement and evidence.

Coupon-mad

Good, as long as the previous Order didn't give the October date and say the usual stuff about evidence 'not later than 14 days before'? 

The thing is, this new one is just talking about electronic versions of what the court already expects you to have done not less than 14 days before. 

What I mean is, one Order (about the arrangements for a remote hearing, I assume) doesn't remove the requirements of the previous Order.

Mrplay123456

I did the Abuse of Process and emailed on time as defence, a long time ago..
Then this court date and new order came about 10 days ago, but I have been away from home and lucky I had emails from the court today asking if my email was ok to use for the hearing on Teams.  
I will amend to WS you linked too and enter my own events.
I just wanted to check things out with those that know.  Also have there been more case`s thrown out for the Abuse of Process lately? ( Last one I have is 3rd August 2020) but checking if the rules have changed
Hope all this makes sense?

Cheers

Mrplay123456

One other thing, should I mention the fact that NCP does not have planning permission for the signs and ANPR cameras for the CP I used?  This is confirmed by email from the Council and is being investigated, as there is no planning in place.

Coupon-mad

I am not talking about your defence.  But if you say no previous Order expected you to file evidence earlier then that is fine.

No, cases are not being struck out now but you know why not if you read the stuff about the Semark Jullien case, covered in the example WS in the NEWBIES thread.  The appeal decision from Salisbury DOES NOT say that adding £60 is OK, it has merely stopped clever district Judges from striking PPC cases out, and has caused the courts more work, only for Judges STILL to refuse the £60 (of course). 

This is because the circuit Judges know what they are doing and the reasons why the £60 does taint the claim, but now they are unable to strike out.  Pathetic.  No rules have changed but more work for the courts now and more hearings - pointless.

Mrplay123456

Ok... thanks for that info, looks like I better cross my fingers and hope for the best.  I was looking forward to it been thrown out, I will read the info you have so kindly given and do the WS based on the one from Robertcox999.  Many thanks for your time and patience.