Reply To Defence - E S Parking Enforcement - Manchester

nosferatu1001

Yes, but unless you can get a WS AND ideally have them appear in court with you, then the fact a colleague was there doesn't mean you have a witness when it comes to the hearing
Can you type your defence out here, so we can see it? Im blocked from libb images. You have been allocated to court youre waiting on a hearing being allocated, so you should have started your WS, gathering your exhibits that support your WS, etc. 

Cryptjitsuu

Thanks @nosferatu1001. 
Defence is a pastebin link so should be able to click that but happy to paste it here if needed.
The most recent correspondence I received was a General Directions Order stating that the claim is to be transferred to Clamaints Local County Court Hearing Centre to be heard at notice. I then received the response to defence from Gladstones.

go-on-then

ES have form for being non POFA, have you checked your pcn ? 

Apologies if I'm wrong but from what I saw,  your defence states  ' the driver was also the driver at the time in question '.    So hopefully you haven't declared who was driving ?? 

KeithP

2. It is admitted that the Defendant was the registered keeper of the vehicle in question but liability is denied. It is admitted the the driver was also the driver at the time in question.

Could probably be better written as...
2. It is admitted that the Defendant was the registered keeper and driver of the vehicle at the time in question but liability is denied.

That's if you really want to admit that the keeper was the driver.

Cryptjitsuu

KeithP said:

2. It is admitted that the Defendant was the registered keeper of the vehicle in question but liability is denied. It is admitted the the driver was also the driver at the time in question.

Could probably be better written as...
2. It is admitted that the Defendant was the registered keeper and driver of the vehicle at the time in question but liability is denied.

That's if you really want to admit that the keeper was the driver.

Yes this was a grammar error on my part. Would have meant to write "It is admitted the defendant was also the driver at the time in question"

Does this change anything in relation to @go-on-then 's point above? 

@go-on-then PCN Image Link's: 

hxxps://ibb.co/qjvnQK8hxxps://ibb.co/x2y923v

go-on-then

They cannot hold the keeper liable under POFA 2012 if they have failed it, check your PCN. They prob have.
They cannot just presume the keeper and driver are the same,  so one of your defence points.  Who are they going to 'charge' when they dont know who was driving ?  

nosferatu1001

Trouble is if the OP gives evidence, they can be asked who the driver was

go-on-then

True but possibly a bridge to be crossed as and when. 

D_P_Dance

Can they not mention amnesia?

nosferatu1001

They must respond truthfully. Anything else is perjury