CCJ without my knowledge

Sebastian83

So would you still recommend doing a draft defence without mentioning any details about the claim itself or including evidence?
Just plain and simple without details?

Le_Kirk

A defence - even a draft - should be concise and just long enough to mention all the legal/technical points that you want to use to refute the POC such that it opens the door for being backed up and supported by the WS. 

Sebastian83

I have adjusted now paragraph 2 and start now working on paragraph 3.

The facts as known to the Defendant:

2.1. It is admitted that the Defendant was the registered keeper but not the driver of the vehicle in question and liability is denied. 

2.2. In the PCN, first time received by the Defendant on the XXX 2020, it has been claimed that the Defendant would have parked his car on the car park at XXX Road in XXX Leicester from Saturday, XXX 2019 4:05pm till Monday XXX 2019 12:08pm.
The Defendant was working on both days during the times in question. Therefore the Defendant cannot have parked his car on this car park.

2.3. The only other authorised driver having used the car with the registration number stated in the PCN did also not park the car at that car park over the time period stated.



Is this better now?

Le_Kirk

Yes, it sets the scene and opens the door for full narrative and evidence at the WS stage.  I would make one more change: -

2.2. In The PCN, first time received by the Defendant on the XXX 2020, it has been claimed claims that the Defendant would have parked his car on in the car park at XXX Road in XXX Leicester from Saturday, XXX 2019 4:05 pm till Monday XXX 2019 12:08 pm.  The Defendant was working elsewhere on both days during the times in question and Therefore therefore the Defendant can could not have parked his car on in this car park.

Sebastian83

Le_Kirk said:

Yes, it sets the scene and opens the door for full narrative and evidence at the WS stage.  I would make one more change: -

2.2. In The PCN, first time received by the Defendant on the XXX 2020, it has been claimed claims that the Defendant would have parked his car on in the car park at XXX Road in XXX Leicester from Saturday, XXX 2019 4:05 pm till Monday XXX 2019 12:08 pm.  The Defendant was working elsewhere on both days during the times in question and Therefore therefore the Defendant can could not have parked his car on in this car park.

Thank you very much, that helps me a lot.

I have now finished paragraph 3. I am still not sure if this is how it should be. Again I would appreciate any advise!

3.1. The Defendant first found out about this parking charge on the XX/10/2020 after getting credit declined the day prior.
The Defendant has never received any post prior to that day about this claim.

3.2. On the XX/10/2020 the Defendant made a Data Access Request to the Claimant to find out what this claim was about.

3.3. On the XX/10/2020 the Defendant made an application to set aside the judgement at the County Court in Northampton.

3.4. On the XX/11/2020 the Claimant replied back to the Defendant and has sent him 31 pages of letters, all sent to an address the Defendant did not live since more than 13 months prior to the County Court Judgment being entered.

It also needs to be mentioned that in this email the Claimant stated:
“Please note we are currently in the process of attempting to retrieve ANPR photos and a copy of the reminder letter from our archives. If we are able to obtain copies, they will be sent to you in due course.”
This has never been sent to the Defendant.

3.5. On the XX/11/2020 the Defendant replied back to the Claimant and made him aware that he was not parking on this car park and that the Claimant has sent all these letters to an address the Defendant did not live for 13 months before the CCJ has been entered. The Defendant told the Claimant that therefore he expects him to drop the claim and to compensate him for the court fees paid.
The Defendant never replied back to this email.

3.6. On the XX/05/2021 the Claimant sent an email to the Defendant and demanded £125 in order to support the Defendants application to set aside the judgment.

Sebastian83

Sebastian83 said:

Le_Kirk said:

Yes, it sets the scene and opens the door for full narrative and evidence at the WS stage.  I would make one more change: -

2.2. In The PCN, first time received by the Defendant on the XXX 2020, it has been claimed claims that the Defendant would have parked his car on in the car park at XXX Road in XXX Leicester from Saturday, XXX 2019 4:05 pm till Monday XXX 2019 12:08 pm.  The Defendant was working elsewhere on both days during the times in question and Therefore therefore the Defendant can could not have parked his car on in this car park.

Thank you very much, that helps me a lot.

I have now finished paragraph 3. I am still not sure if this is how it should be. Again I would appreciate any advise!

3.1. The Defendant first found out about this parking charge on the XX/10/2020 after getting credit declined the day prior.
The Defendant has never received any post prior to that day about this claim.

3.2. On the XX/10/2020 the Defendant made a Data Access Request to the Claimant to find out what this claim was about.

3.3. On the XX/10/2020 the Defendant made an application to set aside the judgement at the County Court in Northampton.

3.4. On the XX/11/2020 the Claimant replied back to the Defendant and has sent him 31 pages of letters, all sent to an address the Defendant did not live since more than 13 months prior to the County Court Judgment being entered.

It also needs to be mentioned that in this email the Claimant stated:
“Please note we are currently in the process of attempting to retrieve ANPR photos and a copy of the reminder letter from our archives. If we are able to obtain copies, they will be sent to you in due course.”
This has never been sent to the Defendant.

3.5. On the XX/11/2020 the Defendant replied back to the Claimant and made him aware that he was not parking on this car park and that the Claimant has sent all these letters to an address the Defendant did not live for 13 months before the CCJ has been entered. The Defendant told the Claimant that therefore he expects him to drop the claim and to compensate him for the court fees paid.
The Defendant never replied back to this email.

3.6. On the XX/05/2021 the Claimant sent an email to the Defendant and demanded £125 in order to support the Defendants application to set aside the judgment.

Anyone got some advise, if that's alright that way?

henrik777

3 makes no sense. If you get as far  as needing a defence you'll already have been granted a set aside. 

If you are using it to show a "real prospect" then none of that helps there either.

It seems like information to assist a set aside application. Nothing to do with the defence or draft defence.

Sebastian83

henrik777 said:

3 makes no sense. If you get as far  as needing a defence you'll already have been granted a set aside. 

If you are using it to show a "real prospect" then none of that helps there either.

It seems like information to assist a set aside application. Nothing to do with the defence or draft defence.

Problem being is that I couldn't bring in any of these points in my application as at the time I made the application I didn't know what the claim was about. 
So how else could I now bring in these facts to show a real prospect? 

henrik777

A witness statement or skeleton/oral submission.

Coupon-mad

I agree you do not need that #3 in the defence, because that comes into play AFTER having the CCJ set aside.

Instead, in #3, state that:

The Defendant has reason to believe that the images show two separate visits and the PCN was issued in error and that the Claimant failed to carry out the manual checks needed to find 'orphan images' in cases where a vehicle visits a retail park twice in two days. This is a well known flaw and inherent failure of ANPR systems because these systems default to 'first in, last out' images within 24 or 48 hours.  ANPR is so unreliable in this respect, that Local Authorities were banned in the Deregulation Act 2015 from using it for parking enforcement and the Government refused to reconsider this in 2020 when the British Parking Association and ParkingEye lobbied for it again.  The fact that private firms use the systems knowing the flaws, is abhorrent, and the fact that ParkingEye obtained the registered keeper DVLA data due to their own failure to check that the car had not left on the Saturday and returned on the Monday, is a breach of the BPA Code of Practice, the DVLA KADOE licence and the DPA 2018 because there was no reasonable cause to obtain, process and share the data, at all.  The PCN and CCJ flowed from an illegal act.