Help! DEFENCE due

BaftyCrastard

Should I put together a Supplementary WS and send it across asap? Points I'd include are; 1) Claimant as yet has failed to provide any proof that the signage on 07/09/18 was theirs and not ECP's. 2) The signage in the exhibits from the Claimants WS are not dated, could have been taken yesterday and conflict with public images from Google which are date stamped May 2019. It's reasonable to assume that if the Claimant had any proof that their signs were either installed or had permission to be installed at the time, that they would provide this when put to strict proof. 3) These images also show additional signage erected since May 2019, which would suggest they are more recent and could be used to deceive the Court. 4) Reference my change of address during this time and hence no response to perceived scam claim (changed licence but not V5C book at the time, not sure how I'd prove this). 5) Reference the aerial exhibit which displays where signage was posted, add google image from May 2019 that show these have been installed after the alleged incident. 6) Reference DCB Legal's use of legal templates for various other inflated parking claims along with failure to provide any evidence / breakdown of 'costs / damages' incurred. 

Thoughts?   

nosferatu1001

In which case you would quesiton the solicitor on the day as to why they filed a WS knowing that the signs were not there - are they incompetent or were they trying to mislead the court?
Have you included that Google SV proof to the court? If not do so, and to the claimant, to show theyre lying

BaftyCrastard

nosferatu1001 said:

In which case you would quesiton the solicitor on the day as to why they filed a WS knowing that the signs were not there - are they incompetent or were they trying to mislead the court?
Have you included that Google SV proof to the court? If not do so, and to the claimant, to show theyre lying

I haven't as they only made reference to those signs in their WS which I didn't know existed (erected since the incident). I will get the Google SV images from May 2018 and May 2019 and include them so I can reference on the day. Do I need to put together a Supplementary WS and include these in there?

nosferatu1001

Yes, a short S WS is all you need, make explijcit reference (para graph number!) to where the claimants rep has filed a statement stating signs x y z are in place, and point out that google SV from X date proves otherwise
You suggest hte reason the claimant has filed a misleading witness statement is an obvious one.

BaftyCrastard

For anyone following the thread that hasn't read the Claimant's WS & S WS please can you give any advise to take to my hearing on Tuesday, thanks! - https://www.dropbox.com/s/t7b54nyd2ccl83c/Claimant WS & Supplementary WS.pdf?dl=0

Fruitcake

Have the scammers provided a copy of the alleged contract between or flowing from the landowner? The whole case pivots on whether the scammers had the landowner's authority to act on their behalf so if you have it, we need to see it, unredacted.

nosferatu1001

Have you looked at their contract? Made sure it meets all the required elements of a contract to be valid? The company NAMES all agree to eachohter - signs to PCN to contract, all three must be EXACTLY the same?

BaftyCrastard

Fruitcake said:

Have the scammers provided a copy of the alleged contract between or flowing from the landowner? The whole case pivots on whether the scammers had the landowner's authority to act on their behalf so if you have it, we need to see it, unredacted.

nosferatu1001 said:

Have you looked at their contract? Made sure it meets all the required elements of a contract to be valid? The company NAMES all agree to eachohter - signs to PCN to contract, all three must be EXACTLY the same?

They haven't provided a contract from the landlord, under the heading CPR Compliance para ix, they put "The Defendant is a third party to the Landowner Agreement. Privity of contract applies". Their Exhibit for the right to manage the car park and issue PCN's etc is attached.

Jenni_D

Have you checked with Land Registry as to who owns the freehold for that site? (I believe it's a fairly trivial sum to find out).

Who is the signatory to that letter? What position do they hold within the alleged freeholder company? Do they have authority to make such a statement?

BaftyCrastard

Jenni_D said:

Have you checked with Land Registry as to who owns the freehold for that site? (I believe it's a fairly trivial sum to find out).

Who is the signatory to that letter? What position do they hold within the alleged freeholder company? Do they have authority to make such a statement?

REI own the freehold for the site, I've already contacted them directly. It appears to be signed by Jack Sear (Asset Management) who sits on the board of Directors & Management.