Need help with CCJ Set Aside and issues relating to SAR

nosferatu1001

You leave it blank 
it's fir the judge to fill out with a date. 

henrik777

Both claims were issued on 8th September 2020. Will this be an issue at all? 

Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha

So Jeff, you want me to rule that the claimant did not serve these claim form on you ?

"Yes"

Do you have any evidence to offer that they had reason to believe you didn't reside at the address they used ?

"the 2 claim forms were filed on the same date, please note the 2 addresses."

NEXT!

Jeff_Goldblum

Thanks to all of you again!
As you can probably tell, I have no experience in litigation and probably hadn't realised how strong this case was.
THANK YOU FOR GIVING ME HOPE! My heart sank when I found out about these and this community has been a saviour to me (and many others!)

Couple more questions, I did notice that someone had included an "Order Dismissing the Claim" at the bottom of their WS - should I include this for N244?
I know it was said earlier that only a few paragraphs were needed but was wondering if I should as I believe I have a fairly strong case.
Essentially, this was all regarding a former employers multi-storey car park (shared with other companies). I am concerned that I will have to say that I was the driver to put my case forward.

I was given a parking permit in June of me joining, had no "offences" between June and July.
August 1st - PCN
August 2nd - NO parking offence
August 3rd and 4th - Weekend - found my old contract and it states I don't work weekends
August 5th-9th - NO parking offences
August 10th - PCN
August 11th and 12th - weekend
August 13th, 14th and 15th - PCNs EVERY day
August 16th - NO parking offences
The permit I had was adhesive so there was no way it could have been removed and stuck back on - clearly an issue with their  ANPR
I unfortunately do not have a photo or copy of the permit and my former employer do not keep a record but what I DO have is the A4 sheet they gave us where you had to tear off the permit - this part states that the permit would expire over a YEAR AFTER I got the parking charges.

Additionally, I have it in writing from my former employer that you cannot gain access to the the multi-storey car park (heavy shutters at the front) without either:
 - a fob (for pedestrian access) - this is issued to all employees on the register
or
- TO GAIN ACCESS VIA CAR, YOUR CAR NEEDS TO BE ON THE REGISTER, OTHERWISE THE SHUTTERS WILL NOT OPEN
I'm hoping to use this to demonstrate that their ANPR cameras were clearly ineffective and they have no basis for the claim.




ORRRRRRRRRRRRRR - should I leave this for my defence and just get that bloody N244 out?!

nosferatu1001

Your n244 is short
yiu also include
- witness stating showing the facts 
- exhibits to support facts such as copies of council tax bills, that the two claims had two diff addresses etc. 

- draft 6 point order 

Jeff_Goldblum

Just a little help with my defence please. I'm using the rest of the defence in the Newbies post but this is concerning where it stated to add a timeline of events yourself. I have outlined this timeline in my defence as I have earlier in this post and I just wanted to ensure that I am not shooting myself in the foot by stating the following:

11. As stated in paragraph 9, the parking permit was self-adhesive and stuck to the windscreen, where it remained from the day of receiving until after leaving XXX COMPANY

12. The Claimant is put to strict proof that their ANPR cameras were not faulty during the dates of the alleged offences outlined in paragraph 10 (this is where I outlined the same timeline as my post above)

13. Additionally the Claimant is put to strict proof that the permit was not displayed in the windscreen of XXX REG OF CAR during the dates of alleged offences and if so, why no PCNs were issued during the dates outlined in paragraph 10 were no PCN was received.

I am worried that I am being too challenging in paragraph 13 and it might open another can of worms and them going back and saying they should have charged me on those days and will increase the allegations against me.

Essentially what I am trying to demonstrate and challenge in this paragraph is, why has the Claimant issued PCNs on some days and not others? I am trying to persuade the Judge that the only reason for this could have happened is faulty ANPR cameras.

Coupon-mad

Hmmm...the thing is, ANPR doesn't look for a permit.   It can't; it's not like CCTV taking footage and zooming in on windscreens.  ANPR merely picks up number-plates and compares them to a permitted list.  So this is very odd and so I would state that, given that the vehicle was on the exempt/permitted list at all times, this can only be the fault of the Claimant's systems.

You are NOT being too contentious to use the wording you have, it's fine but change 'ANPR' to a more broad 'fault with the Claimants systems'.

Jeff_Goldblum

Hi guys,
Got this email from the PCN's Solicitors a couple of hours ago

Is this saying they are agreeing to set the claims aside or just a simple agreement to consolidation? 
I don't like where it says "for each party to bear their own costs" as I want my £500 back for each of the two hearings that I filed for!
I do understand they are asking for a settlement too but obviously not paying that.
Very cheeky they've sent this now with on a few working days before the first hearing when they've had months to respond.

Thanks in advance for all of your help.

Dear [XXX],

We write further to your application to have the Judgment set aside for Claim Number [REDACTED] dated [REDACTED], set currently to be heard on [EARLY NEXT WEEK].

We have reviewed your application and we confirm we are instructed to propose a consent order be filed with the Court, which will agree for the two Claims to be consolidated, the Judgments entered into each Claim be set aside, for each party to bear their own costs and provide you the opportunity to provide a Defence to the conjoined Claims.

Our Client will make payment of the fee to file this with the Court and you will have an opportunity to review the document prepared by us. If you agree with the contents, you will then return the signed document and we will countersign the same and file it with the Court, for a decision to be reached in place of the two currently listed hearings relating to the set aside applications.

You will then be afforded the opportunity to file a Defence and the conjoined Claims will instead proceed to a single hearing for liability to be determined.

Alternatively, if you would like to avoid a further hearing, we could instead propose a settlement sum for the parking charges be agreed in place of you filing a Defence, payable after the outcome of the consent order has been determined.

We confirm our client would be agreeable to the sum of [NOT A CHANCE IN HELL AM I PAYING!], to represent full and final settlement of both Claims, following the Judgments in each being set aside.

Please let me know whether you would like to accept any of the above offers and I can then proceed with preparing a draft for your approval.

I look forward to hearing from you.

nosferatu1001

Yes, bear own costs means kiss goodbye to £500 if you sign it.  

They're in a panic.  They e only just looked at this now, not when you filed, and alarm bells are ringing.  

When's the hearing(2)? Both at same time I hope?

Jeff_Goldblum

No unfortunately. I written to the court several times and they haven't responded. One next week and one in early April. 

That's fantastic. Thanks for the reassurance. Think I have a pretty solid case to be honest thanks to the help of you guys on here! 

nosferatu1001

Did you, on each n244, not mention the other and ask fir a combined hearing?
Try again in the first hearing. Assuming you've got essentially identical documents - dates etc will be diff of course - it isn't a disadvantage