Fighting a UKCPM CCJ Help

sofa_searcher

nosferatu1001 said:

Did you SAR the DVLA to find out who requested and what address was returned?
They didnt guess it. Someone told them. 

I'll request the information from DVLA using the V888 form.

nosferatu1001

No you will not. 
You will email them. It is free, V888 is not. An obvious search on this forum will tell you the DVLA email address. 

Yes, the point of a DRAFT order is it is a DRAFT.

Le_Kirk

Yes, apart from the date of application and the date of judgment the other date fields are left blank for the judge.

Umkomaas

nosferatu1001 said:

No you will not. 
You will email them. It is free, V888 is not. An obvious search on this forum will tell you the DVLA email address. 

You should email the DVLA and ask which organisations (when and for what reason) accessed the registered keeper's data from them between a range of dates which includes the date(s) of the parking incident(s). You need to provide the registered keeper's full name and address, the address on the V5C logbook and the Vehicle Registration Mark of the vehicle involved in the parking incident. 

SubjectAccess.Requests@dvla.gov.uk

This service is free of charge. 

Even though you email your request, the DVLA will respond via Royal Mail.

sofa_searcher

Hi all. I wish to submit my N244 application first thing on Tuesday. I've drafted my witness statement and draft order which i've posted further up in this thread. The last item  that will go with the N244 form is the draft defence. I've taken the 2020 Defence template on this forum and i've added the following points for parts #17, #18 and #19:

 DRAFT DEFENCE

17.       The parking charge of £100 is not a genuine pre-estimate of loss. The Defendant was parked in a parking bay that is allocated to the Defendant's employer XXXX, and the vehicle was at all times parked within the correct zones to deem that no penalty is justified. Therefore, the claimed amount is not valid as parking was taking place under this agreement since 2015. Photographic evidence supplied by Claimant confirms the location as the staff parking area.

 The parking charge should compensate the landholder only for the loss they are likely to suffer because the parking contract has been broken. For example, to cover the unpaid charges and the administrative costs associated with issuing the ticket to recover the charges.

In this instance, unpaid charges are nil as the vehicle was parked in an allocated parking bay. Any breakdown purporting to be a genuine pre-estimate of loss cannot include general business expenses because these would remain the same whether or not there were any alleged breaches of contract by drivers.

 18.       The Claimant also has no contract with the driver of the vehicle; no consideration nor acceptance has flowed between the parties so the elements of a contract do not exist. The issue of a staff parking permit and parking privileges is strictly between the employer and staff member and is the only extant contract relating to parking this car on this site by this driver. Despite what they may say, the Claimant cannot re-offer the same parking space on different terms and allege a charge is due when there has been no loss suffered and the driver is permitted to park there.

 The Claimant’s signs in this car park are sparse and unclear, to the extent that they are incapable of forming a contract even if the driver had seen and agreed to the terms, which is not the case in this instance. A lack of signs at the entrance to the car park and office block, and unclear wording, is a breach of the BPA Code of Practice and creates no contract.

 19.       It is my belief that the Claimant have no proprietary interest in the land to issue charges and pursue them in their own name, including at court level. In the absence of such title, the Claimant must have specific contractual authority from the landowner to issue and pursue charges in the courts, and to make contracts with drivers. I do not believe such a document is in existence. I therefore put the Claimant to strict proof to provide POPLA with an unredacted, contemporaneous copy of the contract between them and the landowner which provides them with the authority to issue and pursue charges. In accordance with the BPA Code of Practice paragraph 7, This must include assignment of the right for the Claimant to make contracts with drivers and for the Claimant to pursue them at court in their own name. Please note that a 'witness Statement' or 'site agreement' will be insufficient to provide all the required information set out in 7.1 and 7.2 and I put the Claimant to strict proof that their contract covers every point in this section of the BPA CoP.

Statement of Truth

I believe that the facts stated in this defence are true.  I understand that proceedings for contempt of court may be brought against anyone who makes, or causes to be made, a false statement in a document verified by a statement of truth without an honest belief in its truth.

Defendant’s signature:   

Defendant’s name:

Date:

Coupon-mad

Have you added #19?  Why?  The template already covers no landowner authority elsewhere.

Also remove EVERYTHING that tries to say a parking charge must be a GPEOL...that argument has no legs at all:

17.       The parking charge of £100 is not a genuine pre-estimate of loss. The Defendant was parked in a parking bay that is allocated to the Defendant's employer XXXX, and the vehicle was at all times parked within the correct zones to deem that no penalty is justified. Therefore, the claimed amount is not valid as parking was taking place under this agreement since 2015. Photographic evidence supplied by Claimant confirms the location as the staff parking area.

 The parking charge should compensate the landholder only for the loss they are likely to suffer because the parking contract has been broken. For example, to cover the unpaid charges and the administrative costs associated with issuing the ticket to recover the charges.

In this instance, unpaid charges are nil as the vehicle was parked in an allocated parking bay. Any breakdown purporting to be a genuine pre-estimate of loss cannot include general business expenses because these would remain the same whether or not there were any alleged breaches of contract by drivers.

sofa_searcher

Coupon-mad 
Thanks, I've removed point 19 and amended point 17 accordingly. N244 complete as shown below.

D_P_Dance

  The parking charge of £100 is not a genuine pre-estimate of loss. 

Oh dear!  Have you not read Beavis v PE?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-essex-34721126

sofa_searcher

D_P_Dance said:

  The parking charge of £100 is not a genuine pre-estimate of loss. 

Oh dear!  Have you not read Beavis v PE?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-essex-34721126

I've removed that sentence along with other parts highlighted by Coupon-mad

sofa_searcher

UPDATE
I received a N244A Notice of Hearing of Application letter from my local county court and it states I've been given a set aside telephone hearing date for late November.
I've been asked to supply; telephone number for BT Meet Me meeting and a core bundle of documents that I've agreed with the Claimant. Both are to be sent to the county court using the provided email and no later than 7 days before the date of the hearing. The actual wording from the letter is as follows;

To enable this hearing to be conducted remotely by the judge, the parties are directed to agree a core bundle of documents. Guidance as to contents of a core bundle is set out below. The agreed core bundle is to be emailed to court at [EMAIL Address].

The guidance for core bundles (dated March 2020) included in the letter is as follows;

1. The guiding principle is that only documents which are necessary for the determination of the issues before the Judge at the relevant hearing should be included in a core bundle. The aim is to limit the pages of the core bundle to 50. In no circumstances are there to be more than 100 pages in a core bundle.

2. As an example, the following form the basis of a core bundle for a CCMC:

(i) The agreed case summary

(ii) Any pleadings necessary for the purposes of the CCMC

(iii) Any previous orders relevant to the issues which the Judge will be asked to decide

(iv) If costs budgeting is an issue, the budgets and the budget discussion reports

(v) If any applications are being dealt with, copies of the application and the witness statements in support and against

(vi) Any other key documents (it is only exceptionally that correspondence between solicitors will be necessary).

3. Skeleton arguments (if any) do not form part of the core bundle and may be sent separately, together with a copy of the draft order in Word (if the parties have a significant disagreement as to the terms of the draft order, each may send a draft).

4. If a document might become relevant in the course of a hearing, the party should have an electronic copy of it available so that it can be emailed to the Judge, but that will be an exceptional course. The parties will be able to make oral submissions.

5. The bundle should be agreed and paginated — documents from an existing paginated bundle may be used with the existing pagination so long as they are placed in numerical order in the core bundle.

I would be grateful if someone could confirm that my plan of action as follows is correct.
I will follow the formatting guidance provided in Annex 3 of the document provided here 
My core bundle will aim to address guidance points (GP) 2(i) to (vi) from the guidance provided in the letter. Therefore it will consist of;

1. Index page - Not numbered. The following page after the index page will be page 1
2. For GP 2(i) i will provide a short paragraph or so detailing the timeline. So the PCN issue date, when the CCJ was applied for by the Claimant, the date the CCJ was granted, when i first made contact with gladstones to set aside by consent and finally when i made my £255 N244 set aside application with CCBC. I will reference and include in my list of schedules a copy of the judgment order and N244 application form. All referenced documents or evidence for my witness statement (WS) will be included at the end of the pdf as Schedule A, B, C etc.
3. GP 2(ii), 2(iii) and 2(iv) from above i believe are not applicable for my case. The only cost i will be asking for is the £255 set aside court fee which will be included in my 6 point draft order.
   
4. For GP 2(v) I will make use of my WS used for N244 application. This will cover  the timeline again but from my perspective and summarises the evidence that supports the claim papers were incorrectly served. The WS also mentions Gladstones agreeing they served the papers incorrectly but refused to pay the cheaper £100 court fee to correct their error. A copy of my N244 application will be provided at the end. 
5. GP 2(vi) is essentially my Schedule section

As instructed I will attach a native word document of my draft order. Is the skeleton argument essentially the Draft Order?
Lastly, do i send my draft pdf to Gladstones and ask them to supply their supporting documents?