PPS notice issued advice please

flopstocks

OK a bit of progress.  BW legal doing the usual rubbish. Offering me a Pre-Approved payment plan and a very generous 25% discount.

Interestingly they need to pay a hearing fee of £27 by the 19th of April for a hearing date of 17th of May.  Yet my 25% discount period is valid until the 10th of May.

flopstocks

Is it possible to see if the claimant has decided to pay the hearing fee and is intending to proceed?  Typically my Mum passed away two weeks ago so my focus has been on other things (funeral next week).  Is there anything that I should not be saying in my basic WS below

FOR HEARING ON 17/05/2022

 

1.       I am xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, and I am the defendant against whom this claim is made. The facts below are true to the best of my belief and my account has been prepared based upon my own knowledge.

 

2.       I can confirm my Vehicle was present at the time of Contravention, but I was not driving so I believe I cannot be held liable.

 

3.       I have checked with the Driver of the vehicle, and they confirmed that they placed £1 into the machine typed in the Vehicle registration for one hours stay.  The machine displayed the Vehicle Reg and a leaving time but did not produce a ticket.

 

4.      The vehicle was there for less than an hour and believed everything was legitimate, why would we risk a £100 fine for the sake of £1?

 

5.       However, I received a PCN of £100 to which I appealed explaining the situation.  I don’t know whether there was a keying error, machine error or simply a user error but to be charged this excessive amount for a missing £1 does not seem justified.

 

6.       Since then, Premier Parking Solutions Limited have instructed Bwlegal to act on their behalf.  Now the balance due has been inflated to an extortionate £249.02

 

Coupon-mad

Firstly, I am so very sorry to hear about your Mum.  Sincere condolences.  

I hate parking firms doing this to vulnerable people, during Covid and otherwise, often at the worst of times; generally most of them literally do not give a flying fig about people.

That is a basic WS - a good start but you should add it to the stuff about the DLUHC banning the fake debt recovery costs in February.  This can be seem in the first WS by @ricky_balboa

flopstocks

Coupon-mad said:

Firstly, I am so very sorry to hear about your Mum.  Sincere condolences.  

I hate parking firms doing this to vulnerable people, during Covid and otherwise, often at the worst of times; generally most of them literally do not give a flying fig about people.

That is a basic WS - a good start but you should add it to the stuff about the DLUHC banning the fake debt recovery costs in February.  This can be seem in the first WS by @ricky_balboa

Thankyou, my Mums passing has been very bad timing.  I have found out that the claimant has paid the hearing fee, so I guess that are they are very keen on continuing.  I have until 4PM tomorrow to submit a WS, but part of that day will be taken up meeting the funeral director unfortunately.  Would I be correct in thinking that the quality of my WS would be the deciding factor on whether they attend at court or bail at the last minute?  

Le_Kirk

Your defence should be the deciding factor but the witness statement is there to back up and support your defence with evidence.  There are some very good recent witness statements on the forum and I see that @Coupon-mad has already pointed out the most recent for you.

Coupon-mad

Yes, WS and evidence might sway them.

You can also mention your current bereavement near the start of the WS, and ask the Claimant to consider your vulnerable state and discontinue.

Ricky's username takes you to his profile.  Click on one of his two Discussions and find his WS.  Copy the style and the second half about the DLUHC declaring the false added 'costs' to be extortion.  You want the Judge to know all that!

flopstocks

I cannot thank you enough.  This is my WS as it stands.  You will see I have pasted in a lot of info.  Expecting some needs removing.  Is it possible to clarify which points need removing.

https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/s4d2gtquz5pzr2i8ttz8u/WS.docx?dl=0&rlkey=rnf1s3y9y33kidsbqfznt7ltl

Coupon-mad

Looks fine, except for point 25 which says Excel v Wilkinson is exhibit 12.  You do need to append that transcript but I don't think you have twelve exhibits?

flopstocks

Thanks so much, I will look into editing and doing the contents page.  Do you think I have enough content there now?

Coupon-mad

Yes.  I like it.  

Have you had their WS and evidence and if so, can you pick holes in it (e.g. are their signage pics undated or very old/misleading 'stock photos' and their site map just a GoogleEarth screenshot with coloured dots ?).  Say so...