Help/Advice needed regarding PCN

Hot_chocolate20

Coupon-mad said:

The court is wrong to assume the issues will be identical, because you were not the driver and might be relying on non-compliance with the POFA, which a driver couldn't.  However, we will give you everything you need. 

Have you compared the NTK to para 8 or 9 of Sch4 (properly and pedantically)?

Agreed Coupon. I'm getting nervous with recent decision by the Courts - they seem to be losing their minds a bit.
Please forgive the very stupid question - please could you explain in more detail what you meant by;
"Have you compared the NTK to para 8 or 9 oh Sch4 (properly and pedantically)"  Thank you

Umkomaas

Let's have a scan of the NtK (front and back), suitably redacted, leaving dates showing, and we'll take a look. 

Fruitcake

Hot_chocolate20 said:

Coupon-mad said:

The court is wrong to assume the issues will be identical, because you were not the driver and might be relying on non-compliance with the POFA, which a driver couldn't.  However, we will give you everything you need. 

Have you compared the NTK to para 8 or 9 of Sch4 (properly and pedantically)?

Agreed Coupon. I'm getting nervous with recent decision by the Courts - they seem to be losing their minds a bit.
Please forgive the very stupid question - please could you explain in more detail what you meant by;
"Have you compared the NTK to para 8 or 9 oh Sch4 (properly and pedantically)"  Thank you

This is want nosferatu was eluding to back at the beginning of August, but apparently you didn't like his tone  Surely you compared the NTK line by line with the strict requirements of the relevant paragraphs (8 or 9) of Schedule 4 of the PoFA. Have you told us which paragraph applies?

If you are unsure whether or not the NTK applies, then post it here as suggested by Umkomaas. Only redact your personal data such as name, address, VRM, but not dates or location (unless it's residential).

Le_Kirk

There is clause 3) which states that any party affected by this order can seek to have it set aside by October 21st.  You could consider that on the basis that you don't know the cases are identical and it may lead to a miscarriage of justice.  also, assuming the other two motorists have received the same order, they may already be considering or have considered clause 3) and put in their own objection.

Coupon-mad

I wouldn't object.  Someone on here has far more chance than people off-forum and maybe he's made yours the lead case because the defence covers more ground than the others.

Hot_chocolate20

Umkomaas said:

Let's have a scan of the NtK (front and back), suitably redacted, leaving dates showing, and we'll take a look. 

Attached is the NTK and the reminder notice

KeithP

Can we now please see the second page of the Notice to Keeper, as requested by @Umkomaas yesterday?

Coupon-mad

We don't care about the reminder.

Hot_chocolate20

KeithP said:

Can we now please see the second page of the Notice to Keeper, as requested by @Umkomaas yesterday?

2nd Page of the NTK 👍

Coupon-mad

OK that is a POFA NTK, i.e. it can be used for keeper liability.