Claim form received, please I need guidance!

Coupon-mad

That is useful to include.  I've not seen the first page but whoever first posted it may be able to send you a redacted copy by private message.

pawless_patrol

Coupon-mad said:

That is useful to include.  I've not seen the first page but whoever first posted it may be able to send you a redacted copy by private message.

Thanks Coupon-Mad. I've included that page (better than just mentioning the judgement) and submitted as it was the deadline today.
I will email the Claimant to agree on sending the bundle. Very dumb question but I have to ask: the bundle should include the defence besides the WS, shouldn't it?

Coupon-mad

Yes, defence as well.

pawless_patrol

Hi all, just to let you know that the hearing has been adjourned. I will keep you posted.
Thanks again for all your help!

pawless_patrol

Hi all, I just had my hearing. I lost, the judge (didn't catch her name, was too nervous) awarded £100 for the original penalty, plus interest (£8.68) plus £100 for fixed costs. She had the WS from the claimant but for some reason she didn't have mine, although she found it later. She dismissed my argument that signage was inconspicuous, that the contract was not signed by someone with authority at the company but she dismissed the claimant request for £60 for debt recovery because there was not sufficient evidence of how much had been spent on pursuing payment.
Disappointed? yes, of course. Surprised? No. Relieved? yes. I'm glad this got to an end.

I'm sorry mostly because it would have been nice to have a favorable outcome which would have helped other people being caught in this carpark. I've learned a lot and I can't thank you all enough for your incredible help and for dedicating considerable amount of your personal time to help people in this forum. Thanks a lot again! 

Le_Kirk

Shame you lost but at least you didn't have to pay the unlawful "debt admin" costs!

Coupon-mad

Not too shabby... and it cost them much more than it cost you!  Sorry to hear their evidence was enough in this case - it happens sometimes.

If she thought the signs were clear it's always harder.  I would have lost one like that in 2020 myself except for the incompetence of the Claimant and their legal firm who had not served the same WS to the D as they did to the court!

That Judge announced at the start that he knew the car park and thought the signs were clear, effectively warning me "you're doomed".  Then the case unravelled within 5 minutes, due to PPC and DCBLegal incompetence.

Anyway, point being, signs are key.  Very glad the Judge would not allow fake costs.