County Court Business Centre Claim - Help with defence facts

Coupon-mad

There is a huge difference between truthfully saying that the D was not the driver and actually naming that driver (NOT REQUIRED under the POFA, not an obligation in law on private land).   And example of a case where I wrote a WS for someone who didn't want to name his son, in order to protect him from this level of stress, was in the @basher52 thread which was (luckily...I think) won by the Defendant with me as lay rep, last month.

diffie

1:

Can anyone explain what "no loss" mean please?

As Witness statement stage...:

(h) Pay & Display ticket, if the driver paid. DON'T argue 'no loss'!

In my case the driver did pay however the recepit was disposed before getting the letter from the PPC.

2:

There will be two witnesses: the defendent and the passanger. Is a seperate Witness Stetement document required from the passanger or all the facts should be reported in the same document?

Like always, thank you for the help.

Coupon-mad

1.  I just mean don't say that the parking charge is unrelated to any loss.  The argument that the ParkingEye v Beavis case killed.

2.  Separate signed and dated WS are needed. The D needs to refer to the appended WS in their own WS, along with their exhibits.

diffie

Thank so much @Coupon-mad.

Can anyone advise if I am on the right track with the WITNESS STATEMENT? I've been reading the forum posts and cases whole last ten days but I'm still at ABC...

=========

<remove by diffie>

=========

Coupon-mad

'Tentative' doesn't make sense here:

Delayed letters and tentative to appeal.

Also, you haven't based it in the example WS in the NEWBIES thread.  There is only one.

diffie

Coupon-mad said:

'Tentative' doesn't make sense here:

Delayed letters and tentative to appeal.

Also, you haven't based it in the example WS in the NEWBIES thread.  There is only one.

I thought this way it whould have made more sense. My bad, I'll use the example WS.

Thank you.

diffie

Thank you @Coupon-mad

Draft based on example WS and removed the word "Tentative"

=====

pdf file attached

=====

diffie

Coupon-mad said:

Yes that's fine.  

Please can I flag up now that there are TWO relevant malfunctioning machine case transcripts for you to append to your Witness Statement in due course and I don't want to find later that you haven't appended them months down the line.

One is where a machine printed QQ and another I think where it printed PP or a zero, can't remember.  Anyway they are both in the Parking Prankster's case law pages (he has two pages of them). 

DON'T attach them now.    You will be using them as evidence later, that this is a fault with these machines.

In August @Coupon-mad advised to append the malfunctioning machine case transcripts. I'm struggeling to figure out what to write to refer to the cases.

Can anyone help please?

Le_Kirk

diffie said:

Coupon-mad said:

Yes that's fine.  
Please can I flag up now that there are TWO relevant malfunctioning machine case transcripts for you to append to your Witness Statement in due course and I don't want to find later that you haven't appended them months down the line.
One is where a machine printed QQ and another I think where it printed PP or a zero, can't remember.  Anyway they are both in the Parking Prankster's case law pages (he has two pages of them). 
DON'T attach them now.    You will be using them as evidence later, that this is a fault with these machines.

In August @Coupon-mad advised to append the malfunctioning machine case transcripts. I'm struggling to figure out what to write to refer to the cases.

I believe the second one related to an issue where the PDT printed only "M".  This has now moved on as the PPC sent PDT records showing half of the VRM redacted and the solicitor sent a record showing the other half of the VRM redacted giving the OP the full VRM.
Just write the facts referring to "There are two similar cases where the PPC claimed it was impossible for the PDT to print only a partial VRM or single letter when in fact it did on at least two separate occasions.  Evidence will be provided at WS stage"

diffie

Le_Kirk said:

diffie said:

Coupon-mad said:

Yes that's fine.  
Please can I flag up now that there are TWO relevant malfunctioning machine case transcripts for you to append to your Witness Statement in due course and I don't want to find later that you haven't appended them months down the line.
One is where a machine printed QQ and another I think where it printed PP or a zero, can't remember.  Anyway they are both in the Parking Prankster's case law pages (he has two pages of them). 
DON'T attach them now.    You will be using them as evidence later, that this is a fault with these machines.

In August @Coupon-mad advised to append the malfunctioning machine case transcripts. I'm struggling to figure out what to write to refer to the cases.

I believe the second one related to an issue where the PDT printed only "M".  This has now moved on as the PPC sent PDT records showing half of the VRM redacted and the solicitor sent a record showing the other half of the VRM redacted giving the OP the full VRM.
Just write the facts referring to "There are two similar cases where the PPC claimed it was impossible for the PDT to print only a partial VRM or single letter when in fact it did on at least two separate occasions.  Evidence will be provided at WS stage"

Thank you @Le_Kirk

I'm already at the WS stage and need to add reference on the statement.