Claim form issued 2015

KeithP

It is now over two weeks since you started this thread and and we have yet to see any progress with your Defence.

At this stage, your Defence must be a higher priority than chasing a SAR or trying to interest your MP.

Please do keep in mind what I wrote earlier...

...you have until 4pm on Monday 24th May 2021 to file your Defence.

When I wrote that, you had four weeks to file a Defence.
You now have less than two.

Fruitcake

Have you received the NTK yet? What you have shown us above isn't it.

Redx

Bazzoh said:

KeithP said:

Bazzoh said:

Just an update, the MP for Birkenhead has sent a reply (below), however my current MP has not replied…


“ Thank you for your email.

 

I regard the treatment you have received as grossly unfair. But, while I have pursued a number of cases involving car parking cases locally despite the fact that the incident you refer to took place in Birkenhead and at the time you were a constituent because you are no longer a Birkenhead constituent I am prohibited by strict parliamentary protocols from pursuing a case on your behalf. I am only allowed to pursue such cases on behalf of current constituents and residents of Birkenhead.

 

My advice is that you forward your case to your current MP with a request that they investigate it and challenge the excessive punishment that has been handed out”

Perhaps you should forward the Birkenhead MP's response to your current MP.

For two reasons...
1) to remind your MP that you are still awaiting his reply, and
2) to let your MP know the views of the MP who knows the car park situation where the parking event took place.

I have not received any further correspondence from the courts

You won't , you need to get on with your defence , they are waiting for you , not the other way round

Bazzoh

Redx said:

Bazzoh said:

KeithP said:

Bazzoh said:

Just an update, the MP for Birkenhead has sent a reply (below), however my current MP has not replied…


“ Thank you for your email.

 

I regard the treatment you have received as grossly unfair. But, while I have pursued a number of cases involving car parking cases locally despite the fact that the incident you refer to took place in Birkenhead and at the time you were a constituent because you are no longer a Birkenhead constituent I am prohibited by strict parliamentary protocols from pursuing a case on your behalf. I am only allowed to pursue such cases on behalf of current constituents and residents of Birkenhead.

 

My advice is that you forward your case to your current MP with a request that they investigate it and challenge the excessive punishment that has been handed out”

Perhaps you should forward the Birkenhead MP's response to your current MP.

For two reasons...
1) to remind your MP that you are still awaiting his reply, and
2) to let your MP know the views of the MP who knows the car park situation where the parking event took place.

I have not received any further correspondence from the courts

You won't , you need to get on with your defence , they are waiting for you , not the other way round

Thanks for this
i guess my defence is the lack of readable signage and the fact that i was assured the issue would be resolved - not much of a defence i guess!

“The facts as known to the Defendant:

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

Furthermore, it is admitted that the defendant was the driver of the vehicle at the time in question. 

3.  

3A The defendant was issued with a claim form by DCB LEGAL LTD who are acting on behalf of the claimant Highview Parking Limited  for a total amount of 302.01 (which is inclusive of a 25.00 court fee as well as 50.00 legal representatives costs). 

3B The defended the understands that this relates to a PCN issued over 5 years ago on 3 July 2015 at “Rock Retail Park, Birkenhead”.

3C The defendant has not owned this vehicle since 2017 and has moved address several times in the intervening years following changes in personal circumstances and employment 

3D The defendant does recall the PCN issued, but due to the elapsed time, does not recall any signage relating to any parking conditions on the site. 

3E on the date in question, the defendant was a customer of the McDonald’s store where an incident debrief and refreshment where being held following the attendance of the defendant at an emergency incident nearby.

3F A PCN issued 10 July 2015  arrived and the defendant took it to the McDonald’s store and asked to see the manager who assured him that he would have the ticket cancelled. 

3E the claimant has not provided any images of any signage taken at the time of the alleged contravention, its condition nor its location.”

And its all happening today! A letter from my current MP has arrived 

Thanks again

Bazzoh

Fruitcake said:

Have you received the NTK yet? What you have shown us above isn't it.

Sorry, all i recall receiving is the original PCN and then the claim form - i have moved house several times in the intervening years

thanks

Bazzoh

KeithP said:

It is now over two weeks since you started this thread and and we have yet to see any progress with your Defence.

At this stage, your Defence must be a higher priority than chasing a SAR or trying to interest your MP.

Please do keep in mind what I wrote earlier...

...you have until 4pm on Monday 24th May 2021 to file your Defence.

When I wrote that, you had four weeks to file a Defence.
You now have less than two.

Thanks for the note - you are absolutely right and admittedly i have been trying with MPs and McDonald’s rather than dealing with the important bit - i guess its all a bit scarey to me (think emu)

Many thanks 

Le_Kirk

The defence is about legal/technical arguments that refute the particulars of claim (POC).  You need your strongest points first and, in my opinion, that is the part about the incident debrief and being a customer of McDonalds.  You don't need to include the first three parts as that will all be on the claim form (and it is not a defence) and it is irrelevant that you have sold the car.  There are points about signage in the standard defence template so just make sure you do not repeat that, add to it if you want.

It is admitted that the Defendant was the registered keeper and driver of the vehicle in question but liability is denied. 
Furthermore, it is admitted that the defendant was the driver of the vehicle at the time in question. 

Change the above to make it more succinct.

Coupon-mad

 on the date in question, the defendant was a customer of the McDonald’s store 

Why are you admitting to driving when the HIghview examples in the threads by @Redman2186 and @ld123 as stated in every exact same Highview thread you care to read right now:

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/78318679#Comment_78318679

All the same.  No keepers can be held liable.  Unless you have a compelling reason to talk about an incident from years ago and throw away the 'no keeper liability' defence then with a Highview one I'd stick to those two examples.

Redx

The original postal PCN NTK was the NTK , a SAR should obtain a copy , but may not arrive in time

You should have appealed to HIGHVIEW and then to Popla at the time , 2 easy tasks that would have killed it off , meaning this would not have arisen !!

In future , get advice from here , do not ignore , do not just take the word of a shop manager , ensure that it's cancelled by following it up , it's never cancelled until the claimant confirms it , in writing

Let's hope for a landowner intervention , but crack on with your defence by reading those 2 examples by other membersdo not miss any deadlines either , because unravelling a CCJ is worse

Bazzoh

@Redx the image at the foot of page 3 is all that has been sent in response to the SAR

i will redo the defence now

many thanks