VCS CCJ successfully set aside Leeds Crown Street

Coupon-mad

Do you mean defence as driver, I thought you were only the keeper and were relying on the POFA?

Ferrybird

Coupon-mad said:

Do you mean defence as driver, I thought you were only the keeper and were relying on the POFA?

My error, I've corrected it in my post! You're right, I'm defending as keeper and relying on POFA. Fortunately I have good evidence to support my assertion that I was not the driver. 

Ferrybird

Hi,
I hope that people are keeping well 

If anyone has some time I would be grateful for comments on my draft WS and Defence. The D is still needs polishing but I'm hoping my WS is satisfactory.

I have drafted them in anticipation of my adjourned set aside hearing, date TBC. The Judge at the hearing on 18th Sept asked me to submit a defence to the underlying claim, even though I have requested a set aside initially- hence why most of the full defence is copied from 'Newbies'. The paragraph which relates to my own circumstances is now paragraph 25 rather than 17 as I have broken the template down in to shorter paragraphs. I've done this as I found it easier to get my head around-  I want to make sure that I understand and I can explain everything that I'm arguing.

I have moved the remarks about the Semark-Jullien case written by @Coupon-mad on recent WS for other defendants in to my defence to try and keep legal argument in one place (defence) and my own account in the other (WS).....although there is still some legal argument in my WS so I'm uncertain if how I've split things is correct.

Do I need to append cases referred to in my D or WS? I was thinking that maybe I append them only if I've referred to them without directly quoting and referencing. 

I also wanted to add in Excel Vs Smith, but I'm not sure how to get it in. I wondered whether adding a point below 25 in the defence would be best (and then append it).

Thank you 

Coupon-mad

I'd remove the words 'and should not proceed to trial' (subheading) and remove #5 because we are not seeing strike outs now and you won't see this struck out at the stage you are in the middle of.

Excel v Smith, maybe search the forum for Excel v Smith and VCS v Quayle and find one someone wrote about those two cases before.  Smith is better because it's an appeal.

Ferrybird

Thanks @Coupon-mad I didn't realize I could search like that. I'll start digging around. 

Coupon-mad

The new forum has a rubbish search facility but try it.  Google is better (not joking). 

Add 'site: forums/moneysavingexpert.com' to a Google search for the word Quayle or Smith. Get back here by the back door, via Google.

Ferrybird

@Coupon-mad thats a good tip- I wasn't having much luck on here.
I've managed to amass 20 tabs on my phone with 'useful threads' in the past week when I've come across something that i fear letting go in case I can't find it! Searching will be easier than my unruly tab collection   

Coupon-mad

Oh actually on Google add the word 'parking' to the search because Smith won't narrow it down to parking otherwise!  Quayle is a better search word, with 'parking' then the bit I told you to add to the Google search.

Le_Kirk

Ferrybird said:

@Coupon-mad thats a good tip- I wasn't having much luck on here.
I've managed to amass 20 tabs on my phone with 'useful threads' in the past week when I've come across something that i fear letting go in case I can't find it! Searching will be easier than my unruly tab collection   

Phone is not a good way to use the forum, you lose so much of the detail, lappie, PC or tablet far better.

Ferrybird

@Le_Kirk I generally use my laptop but I end up browsing in bed when it's on my mind, or when I get snatches of time at work.