Claim Form Received / Highview Parking / DCB Legal

Jenni_D

• Watch your para numbering. (The sub-items in 7 show 1, 2, 3 etc. rather than i, ii, iii etc.)
• You also say in 10 "as I have demonstrated above in Paragraph 12" ... yet 12 is below.
• Your exhibits should be YourInitials-NN and referenced accordingly (e.g. DZ-01, DZ-02 etc.)
• You refer to the Cohen transcript, but it is not listed in your bundle summary as an exhibit
• Make sure all exhibit references tally up correctly

Those are the main things that jump out.

deezee3k

Jenni_D said:

• Watch your para numbering. (The sub-items in 7 show 1, 2, 3 etc. rather than i, ii, iii etc.)
• You also say in 10 "as I have demonstrated above in Paragraph 12" ... yet 12 is below.
• Your exhibits should be YourInitials-NN and referenced accordingly (e.g. DZ-01, DZ-02 etc.)
• You refer to the Cohen transcript, but it is not listed in your bundle summary as an exhibit

Those are the main things that jump out.

Thanks Jenni. I need to properly check through the whole statement for simple mistakes - like you mentioned a paragraph being below and not above and the Cohen reference. Thanks for the advice about the Exhibits too.

deezee3k

deezee3k said:

Jenni_D said:

• Watch your para numbering. (The sub-items in 7 show 1, 2, 3 etc. rather than i, ii, iii etc.)
• You also say in 10 "as I have demonstrated above in Paragraph 12" ... yet 12 is below.
• Your exhibits should be YourInitials-NN and referenced accordingly (e.g. DZ-01, DZ-02 etc.)
• You refer to the Cohen transcript, but it is not listed in your bundle summary as an exhibit

Those are the main things that jump out.

Thanks Jenni. I need to properly check through the whole statement for simple mistakes - like you mentioned a paragraph being below and not above and the Cohen reference. Thanks for the advice about the Exhibits too.

@Jenni_D That's strange - my original document has the sub items as i, ii etc. but when I posted on here, the formatting must have automatically changed it to numbers. Thanks for spotting and commenting though

1505grandad

As above -  check Exhibits  -  for instance:-

"24.           In the recent Court of Appeal case of Hancock v Promontoria (Chestnut) Limited [2020] EWCA Civ 907 for which a link to the transcript has been exhibited to this statement as “Exhibit 04” ......."

But Exhibit 4 is T& C

"34.           Therefore, I am appending with this bundle a fully detailed costs assessment (exhibited in this statement as ‘Exhibit 05’)..."

But Exhibit 5 is Excel V Wilkinson Judgment (no middle "e")  -  see the exhibit doc.

deezee3k

Hi everyone. Can I just ask a hopefully straightforward question?

The WS has to be submitted no later than 28 days before the hearing, which is on the 11 November. Does this mean I can submit at some time on Thursday?

Thanks, I just don't want to file it late.

KeithP

deezee3k said:

The WS has to be submitted no later than 28 days before the hearing, which is on the 11 November. Does this mean I can submit at some time on Thursday?

Yes it does - together with evidence and costs schedule - before 4pm on Thursday.
Remembering of course to send a copy to the Claimant at the same time.

deezee3k

Hi everyone. Hope you're all ok. I've had a couple of late nights recently so my eyes are stinging 

I’ve not included every defence point in my WS. Should I? e.g. Beavis, Cases about signage

Is my current WS sufficient without their inclusion? I've gone with Non compliance with PoFA, Abuse of process, Redacted Landowner contract.

 

The Claimant also states

“25. In view of the above, it is my Company’s position that the Defendant breached the Contract as set out in this Statement and as such the Defendant is liable.”

 Does this point and indeed case come down to keeper liability vs driver liability?

 

 Also, I’ve added v. and vi to paragraph 7 – do the points make sense and is it right to include them here?

We had a brief discussion on this thread about v. and the way it could be interpreted – my defence included the Beavis argument because my interpretation was that the Landowner didn’t agree with the charges. Should Beavis be added to the WS?

Should vi. be included in the non PoFA section, if at all?

 

“7. When I was finally made aware of this PCN, over 2 years after the event, correspondence with the Claimant has been confusing, frustrating, distressing and even non-compliant with legislation.

…

v.                   I submitted a Subject Access Request (SAR) in May 2021. I draw attention to the Landowner writing “seems harsh” in relation to the case being passed to a debt collection agency (exhibited in this statement as ‘DZ-02). Incidentally, the Landowner representative appears to be the same person who submitted a Witness Statement on behalf of the Claimant’s (detailed in the Claimant’s Exhibit 1).

vi.                 Further inspection of the original PCN shows that the notice was not given by the relevant period, so cannot be relied on.”

deezee3k

I just had a thought to check my bank statements on the day of the parking event. 

There are 2 transactions at a supermarket near my place of work (store ID also confirmed) - which is in a different city to the parking event, giving considerable weight to the probability that I wasn't the driver, as I would have got public transport to work.

I've also got the proof of purchase for a monthly public transport ticket 

Le_Kirk

deezee3k said:

I’ve not included every defence point in my WS. Should I? e.g. Beavis, Cases about signage

Is my current WS sufficient without their inclusion? I've gone with Non compliance with PoFA, Abuse of process, Redacted Landowner contract.

It is wise to put everything into a witness statement that will hep your case, particularly if it backs up and supports your defence.  Did you read other witness statements pointed out to you by @Coupon-mad here 8 October at 7:24PM <<<<LINK

Jenni_D

The only thing you don't need to include is copies of legislation. (e.g. CRA, POFA ... you can merely quote the relevant sections).