CCJ looking for consent or set aside

Redx

Yes it's usual , as it is with many parking companies who fail to comply with POFA , they assume that the defendant was both keeper and probably the driver and they proceed on that basis , POFA does not assist a driver , never has ( POFA is not mandatory either , for either party )

Concentrate on doing your tasks , ensure that you have submitted your WS plus Exhibits etc to both the court and to the claimant , because both parties have the same deadline

Raf123411

Thanks @Redx ! I’ll study their points as well to make sure I’m covering everything. 

I already sent everything to court and excel. I’ll also drop the call to court as last time they missed my documents. Hearing will take place in February with initial case started in November 2020 so it’s took a while! 

Coupon-mad

You've already sent your 'PCN defence related' WS and evidence?  As the recent Order asked for?  Not just a defence, also the defence-supporting WS, evidence, case law exhibits?

And your costs assessment including the £255 fee if it was reserved from the CCJ set aside hearing, plus any costs of you attending two hearings?

Just checking!

We don't mean the old WS you did for the set aside, about the CCJ.

As for their FALSE contention about 'good service' by running with a known unreliable DVLA address to which they had no response, have you already put in evidence, the IPC CoP that states that where more than 12 months had passed since a parking event, AOS members MUST take extra steps to check/trace the address of the potential defendant. Costs 29 pence for a bulk soft trace with Experian.  Cheaper even than the DVLA lookup was (£2.50).

Disingenuous of them to say 'nothing to see here' and pretend that it's OK to use an unchecked DVLA address , eh?

They hope you and the Judge don't know that the IPC CoP forbids them to just assume a DVLA keeper address might be good for court service.

And as for them citing Jennings, that's a flawed decision where the Defendant failed to appear and the Claimant's rep led the Judge astray re the law of agency.  If you haven't already, you must disprove that with Excel v Smith (a persuasive appeal case) which was ALL about this specific law doctrine.

DISINGENUOUS #2, eh?!

If you have not yet put in evidence either the IPC CoP from the time of the claim being filed, or Excel v Smith, email to the local court and the Claimant, a short and concisely-worded Supplementary WS on Monday pointing out these 'issues'!

Raf123411

ANOTER ONE BITES THE DUST! 

Big success today after 1.5 year of fighting with Excel! It took a while but want to say massive thank you to everyone on the forum. Didn’t believed  I will managed to win but there we go!

Special thank you for Coupon-mad and Redx! you all doing such a amazing job with this forum helping people win with this parking company cowboys. 

Thanks again! 

I actually have one question. Cost we're awarded . Are they sending the cheque or what is the process? 

Coupon-mad

Haha, brilliant!  Yes they should send a cheque this month.

Please tell us more.  What happened, what their rep said, were you worried at any point?

Was the Judge nice?

What point(s) won it?

Did they mention the new statutory Code of Practice that cane out from the Government on Monday?  Have you read it (you should read the thread by bargepole from Monday, once you've calmed down).  We are keen to hear if it is filtering down to Judges yet.

Raf123411

Sorry had a really long day at work but will try to summarise everything. 

The judge was very nice to me but really frustrated with the number of cases he have to deal with an overload of courts. He mentioned he had only 3 minutes to read through the files so I don’t think he was aware of all the points.  He kept saying he have 5 minutes to deal with the case when it actually takes an hour. 

He started by saying the address of the car park and saying: ‘ I’m walking past this car park very often and we have a lot of cases from it’ which make me smile straightaway. 

He asked me only a couple of questions around the time I moved old house, not even asking me for one point from my defence and really took the point about delivering NTK to the current address. When mentioned about excel not being POFA compliant he almost ignore it and move forward to a questioning the rep from Excel on the definition of register keeper current address. Rep from Excel was trying to use different points from POFA saying they were not obligated to check it, but the judge prove it have to be a current address and that wasn’t the case.

 On the side note rep from Excel frustrated him even more as was taking ages to reply to any questions and was clear he have another case starting very soon. 

I never explore any of my lines of defence as the whole hearing focused on notice to keep delivered to the wrong ( not actual) address. He made Excel look stupid a couple of times which was really nice, but still
almost disappointed I wasn’t able to use any arguments. 

 I asked for the cost to be awarded and after a few minutes, he agreed and then the Excel rep tried to ask for the court application cost to be awarded as well. He asked her if she is pretty new to this business as look like she don’t understand what was going on.
 

Excel asked for the right to Appeal but a judge dismissed it. 

I’m aware of the new COP as was preparing for this hearing for a good week but the judge don’t mention anything as the whole hearing was only about one point.

It was a really pleasant experience and judge that is really against parking scams. 

Coupon-mad

I loved this bit from your day in court:

 I asked for the cost to be awarded and after a few minutes, he agreed and then the Excel rep tried to ask for the court application cost to be awarded as well. He asked her if she is pretty new to this business as look like she don’t understand what was going on.