Draft Defence CEL

KeithP

Tomorrow definitely is not your Defence filing deadline.

Redx

they usually fail to comply with some or all that is contained in the law , wordings , timescales , missing documents, missing facts , any failure within that law is a failure, sometimes its on one count, sometimes on several counts, most parking companies fail to comply with that law, but its not mandatory, hence they go after the driver, like the police do in criminal cases, because they have less legal rights than passengers etc

post 1 of the newbies thread explains how to check any NTK received against a typical Parking Eye one that is fully compliant, so its like a spot the difference puzzle

like you I am an engineer (retired) , not a lawyer and never been one, hardly anyone on here is a lawyer, hence the signature below each and every post I make on here

you are on the wrong website completely if you want a lawyer to assist you, plus you usually have to pay for legal advice because its a professional industry

if you wanted parking charge notice advice, then you should have come here 12 months ago after that NTK arrived in the post ( the one you ignored ) - thats a definite fact, any engineer knows you put the oil in the vehicle or on the cogwheel BEFORE it breaks and costs more to repair or replace , you change a network rail track with a slight buckle reported BEFORE the train derails

Anonymouskeith

KeithP said:

Tomorrow definitely is not your Defence filing deadline.

No I have a few more days but I’m fed up of stressing over it and just want it done with to be honest mate. Unless somebody is prepared to give me some serious actual help, which I’m by no means to entitled to, then I think it actually counterproductive for me to continue keep on at this worsening my own mental health when I could just shelve it & enjoy my weekend knowing it’s out of my hands now 

Anonymouskeith

Redx said:

they usually fail to comply with some or all that is contained in the law , wordings , timescales , missing documents, missing facts , any failure within that law is a failure, sometimes its on one count, sometimes on several counts, most parking companies fail to comply with that law, but its not mandatory, hence they go after the driver, like the police do in criminal cases, because they have less legal rights than passengers etc

post 1 of the newbies thread explains how to check any NTK received against a typical Parking Eye one that is fully compliant, so its like a spot the difference puzzle

like you I am an engineer (retired) , not a lawyer and never been one, hardly anyone on here is a lawyer, hence the signature below each and every post I make on here

you are on the wrong website completely if you want a lawyer to assist you, plus you usually have to pay for legal advice because its a professional industry

if you wanted parking charge notice advice, then you should have come here 12 months ago after that NTK arrived in the post ( the one you ignored ) - thats a definite fact, any engineer knows you put the oil in the vehicle or on the cogwheel BEFORE it breaks and costs more to repair or replace , you change a network rail track with a slight buckle reported BEFORE the train derails

What can I say other than hindsight is a wonderful thing. I bet that made you feel good though. Well done I guess. 

Redx

been doing it for 8 years since starting as a newbie to assist family members with parking tickets and now on 34k posts in helping others on here (with thousands of thank yous), but the sooner we get them on here the better, not when the stable door is open and the horse is miles away and the owner wont pay for a drone or helicopter to assist in finding it

you have had some very serious help here, apart from one idiot in your other thread, but there is only so much we can do before you get asked the same questions in court, which is why lawyers prep their clients before a court case, in what to say , what not to say and what may be asked

I asked you a simple court question (or two actually)

you are in court and the judge or claimant asks you if you were the driver ? yes ? no ? or dont know/cannot remember ?

assuming its YES, as that is what you have said on here, their next question is

Mr Keith , in legal terms , why are you not liable for this invoice ?

what is your answer ?

no reply to either question so far , yet 4 weeks ago it was your own question

The issue with that template I’m having is it sort of leaves out the core part of what my actually defence should be. I know every case is different, but I don’t know what I actually ought to be looking for to say ‘well I shouldn’t have to pay because x & y wasn’t done’ if that makes sense 

so I was trying to figure it out, but failed myself, hence my replies

Anonymouskeith

I’m not liable due to poor signage would be my answer right now. Thanks for your help but I can’t get away from thinking your being deliberately reticent with a lot of this to be honest. You’re clearly intelligent & very well clued up in this field and I get the impression that with literally a couple of minutes of your time (of which you’ve already spent more of beating around the bush) you could give me a real push in the right direction with this. 

By no means am I suggesting I’m entitled to that, but you appear to be taking a little pleasure in the fact that you know something I don’t, when really we’re all on the same side here. 

Redx

then you havent read my posts correctly , when I may know something is when you answer your own question you asked 4 weeks ago and I have put in simple terms above, which is what will happen in court, where you must answer truthfully to avoid perjury

if or when you tell me what that something is, I may know what you need to look at to address that something, until then you are expecting us to pull a rabbit out of a hat (plus you are shooting the messengers)

Redx

if its down to poor signage, and nothing else, then read what the relevant BPA CoP says and quote the section in your draft, because you will be saying that it failed the BPA CoP 2020 January V8 edition on clause blah blah because blah blah

ps:- I dont even know what the actual contravention was on that incident date, be it non payment ?, not displaying a permit ? , overstaying ? , not parking within the bay markings ? , forbidding signage that forbade you to park there , etc

the inference in post 1 is that it was now a pay and display car park that used to be free, no extra signs to say so (as defined in the BPA CoP 2020 January V8 edition, clause blah blah blah ) , the signs were obscured and defective (as you mentioned in post 1) , so it would appear that its non payment , known as bilking in the original NTK PCN

SO THE BPA CoP IS WHAT YOU CITE, BUT IS NOT EVEN MENTIONED AFAIK IN YOUR DEFENCE

Anonymouskeith

Redx said:

then you havent read my posts correctly , when I may know something is when you answer your own question you asked 4 weeks ago and I have put in simple terms above, which is what will happen in court, where you must answer truthfully to avoid perjury

if or when you tell me what that something is, I may know what you need to look at to address that something, until then you are expecting us to pull a rabbit out of a hat (plus you are shooting the messengers)

Mate I’ve literally explained it as best as I can in my defence. I don’t think I’m liable because the signage was very poor & a reasonable person could not expect it to be visible to somebody entering the car park in the manner I did. Which I have pictures to back up later. 

I’ve done my best and I’m literally not even sure what more your asking from me at this point. I don’t really have much choice now but to go ahead with what I’ve got. This stress of this is having a serious effect on my mental health and I just want it done, win or lose, at this point. If you want to be a decent guy and tell me how I may be successful pursuing this then by all means. Whilst certainly helpful in some respects, in others coming on this board has made me feel 10 times worse about the whole thing unfortunately. 

Redx

read my extra comments now I have reviewed both threads again and tried to ascertain what your core points are, as you have just mentioned above

if the signage was changed and poor , then use the BPA CoP to define it, use the rules in that CoP in your defence to convince a judge that it breaks Lord Dennings red hand rule (say so) ( have you actually read last years BPA CoP yet ? the England & Wales section of course)

now you are telling us more, we can then point you at the right points and what to say (so dont tell me it was obvious in your previous thread or the first 2 pages of this thread, lol )

the revelation has only come to me in the last twenty minutes or so , because it would have been your popla appeal 12 months ago, so is relevant in court as well

so Lord Dennings red hand rule , plus last years BPA CoP , plus your original draft , paragraphed and enhanced