County court claim form - Highview

ld123

Hi all

Thanks again for your help on this. I'm pretty much ready to submit the defence, just wanted to clarify on the below points, should I be requesting thin info directly from DCBL/Nexus before I submit the defence, or as part of the defence? I have still not heard a word from my SAR either, which was requested 30th April. I've chased it up again today.


beamerguy said:

In point 9 ..... I would not use use the word scam ... even though we know that DCBL is promoting the scam.  Most judges will know this is a scam and the purpose of a judge, who let's be fair is only a third party in this, is to place the scam into a category which as we see can mean the case is dismissed ... Judges will not use the word scam ... they should do ?

1: You need proof of the signage when the ticket was issued
2: You need an explanation of the term "damages"
3: You need confirmation from DCBL that they have legal authority to add an amount they are not entitled to claim
4: You need DCBL to answer why they are going against the Supreme court ruling which sets a precedence in a county court

What with the fabrications that a certain Yasmin Mia thinks it's all true, is she real, and was she there when the ticket was issued ..  a statement of truth suggests she was ?

If I placed a bet with a bookie that the DCBL rubbish would lose .... I would make money

And Group Nexus ??    A mega question mark ..... they want a drivers licence or passport to prove ID ...... total rubbish, we are waiting to see what the ICO say about this.

DCBL are hoping to mug a judge .... very sad bunch

Fruitcake

The scammers have 30 days to respond to an SAR, so they do not need to reply yet, and there is no point chasing them up unless they are late. An SAR is only used to obtain your personal data the scammers hold about you. They are not obliged to give you anything else, so they won't answer those four questions in a response to an SAR.

You don't need a response to the four points mentioned above in order to submit your defence.

Le_Kirk

You don't ask questions in a defence.  Yo can "put them to strict proof ............." of, for example, authority to pursue motorists on behalf of the landowner.

[Deleted User]

Hi all, should I add favourable letter sent in response to my complaint from my MP to my defence?
Thanks, CY.

Redx

Deleted_User said:

Hi all, should I add favourable letter sent in response to my complaint from my MP to my defence?
Thanks, CY.

No evidence is submitted with the Defence

ld123

Hi all

I have received a letter from DCBL today asking who was insured to drive at the time of the PCN. They also state they have requested this multiple times & haven't had a response though we have no recollection of receiving anything of the sort from them. See attached.

I have also yet to receive any response to the SAR submitted well over 30 days ago.

Assume I ignore/file the letter for later? Should I follow up on the SAR?

Thanks in advance

Redx

You reply

Read the same letter in other recent HIGHVIEW and c p plus threads etc , read the coy replies , that give nothing away , copy and paste and reply , do not ignore , but do not blab about who was driving , or who was insured !! Or who was driving either !! You have no legal obligation to do so , so don't

Reading other similar threads , like we do , prepares you , whereas sitting on your rear doing nothing causes a knee jerk reaction , or floundering

Read a dozen recent threads and posts , from this year only , because you should have been expecting this

Yes follow up on the SAR to the DPO at Group Nexus , giving 7 days notice as a reminder , copying in the original SAR request too

beamerguy

Regarding the SAR.    Highview have failed the 30 day rule and now, you report them to the ICO.

The DCBL wheeze asking such questions was seen the other day.

Nobody can remember who was driving in 2015, not even the judge.

AND THAT IS YOUR ANSWER

You WILL NOT be providing your insurance details as that cannot provide any proof 

As I said in the other thread, "cross examination" ???   DCBL think they are Perry Mason

But, as they bring up the issue of "contempt", you can take it to that level by asking the judge about the fake amount they have added which is "double recovery" and against the Supreme court ruling.

This has been signed as a statement of truth by Yasmin Mia ........ that really is contempt of court

ld123

Thanks very much - caught up on the other threads and all clear, I'd followed an earlier thread suggesting to ignore the letter.

Re: the SAR - it gives me great pleasure to report them to the ICO. Would it be worth mentioning I'm doing this in the letter back to them too, to flag where they are failing in other areas too? And emailing them to inform them? I do want them to release the info too prior to witness statement stage.

beamerguy

ld123 said:

Thanks very much - caught up on the other threads and all clear, I'd followed an earlier thread suggesting to ignore the letter.

Re: the SAR - it gives me great pleasure to report them to the ICO. Would it be worth mentioning I'm doing this in the letter back to them too, to flag where they are failing in other areas too? And emailing them to inform them? I do want them to release the info too prior to witness statement stage.

Yes you can ignore them but make sure in your WS you refer to their letter threatening you with contempt on a subject far too long ago to remember and that a judge will not remember.

Then highlight their own statement of truth signed by Yasmin Mie