Help with Hearing Bundle !! (Set aside Default Judgment)

bbwoi

Umkomaas said:

Did you not put this date as one on which you were not available in the Directions Questionnaire (N180) you returned to the CCBC?

The last thing you want is a non attendance and a hearing 'on the papers' - every one of these we have seen here has resulted in a loss, and in one case this past week the Defendant was loaded with extra costs for 'unreasonable behaviour' for not turning up (despite his prior notice to the court). Now any birthday enjoyment is going to be severely dented if this happens to you. 

Contact the court (the one at which the hearing is scheduled, not the CCBC) and ask the possibility of a change of date (not an 'adjournment').  Do this in writing - although you might want to test the water by phone first (if you can ever get through!) - but subsequently confirm in writing.  There is no guarantee the court will agree to change, but don't ask, don't get. 

How far away is the hearing date?

Thanks for the advice. The hearing is at the end of October, so there should be enough time to have it changed I'd hope? I'll let you know their response.

I did not realise I had to send an N180 to CCBC, so I didn't do this. I really wish I had now! 

Coupon-mad

Costs you money to change a hearing date I'm afraid. But ask anyway.

YOU MUST ATTEND. EVEN IF BY PHONE FROM ABROAD.

bbwoi

Hi All,

Thanks again for your ongoing help. Before I had a chance to change the date of the court case, the solicitor firm had sent me their witness statement.

Ive attached and redacted as much as possible.

HERE

They've got me on a number of cases:

1. I did not respond to PCN's or try to appeal - Frankly, I had been told to pretty much ignore private pcn's - but i know thats a rubbish excuse. (They also sent latter correspondence after i had moved addresses)
2. A letter stating that my parking permit (which was on display) had been changed to 'only valid on marked bays' - a letter which I certainly did not receive 
3. I entered contract with them simply by parking my car on site
4. My template witness statement - I did basically copy the one of the newbie page but edited to fit my situation.
5. They now want a total sum of £160 + 8% 

My defence is still:

1. They sign does not say permits are not valid here
2. I did not receive any letter saying the rules for where you can use your permit had changed.
3. I did not knowingly breach contract with them. I had, to the best of my knowledge, a valid parking permit

Please can you advise if I have a strong enough defence? At this point I would much rather pay the £160+ than go to court and lose. Is it even still possible to settle the case?

Please let me know what you think.

As always - thank you!

Coupon-mad

But surely your hearing (going by the thread title) is about setting aside the CCJ, or are you past that stage and now into a second hearing about the PCN?

Of course you don't need to settle. They haven't 'got you' at all.  You did nothing wrong and breached no contract communicated to you.

Haven't you seen that template WS on other threads? We have...

bbwoi

Coupon-mad said:

But surely your hearing (going by the thread title) is about setting aside the CCJ, or are you past that stage and now into a second hearing about the PCN?

Of course you don't need to settle. They haven't 'got you' at all.  You did nothing wrong and breached no contract communicated to you.

Haven't you seen that template WS on other threads? We have...

Hi @Coupon-mad

Exactly, I am past that stage. I have submitted the template WS 3 times now and I have been called to defend the case in court.

This is also one of the points the claimant uses against me, stating: 

"Template Defence

50. It appears the Defendant within the Defence, has utilised numerous template paragraphs taken

from the internet. Should the Honourable Court elect to not strike out the defence for this reason,

the Claimant simply repeats the evidence contained within this statement which confirms the

Claimant's entitlement to the monies claimed, the formation of the contract and its right to bring

proceedings in its own name."

Coupon-mad

Yes but that's as seen in other threads. Like I said, it's a template.

bbwoi

Coupon-mad said:

Yes but that's as seen in other threads. Like I said, if's a template.

Sorry @Coupon-mad , I’m a little confused as to what you mean. Are you saying I should still use the template and ignore the claimants comments around it? Or is there some new information in a different thread?

Jenni_D

THEIR WS is largely a template, and has been seen many times before here. (Which is why it galls when they say a defendant is using templates - pot, kettle, black).

Note: YOUR WS won't be a template. It may be based on other WSs from here, but at least your WS has been tailored based on your own witness knowledge. Theirs is largely hearsay as nobody from the claimant has any direct knowledge of this specific incident.

Fruitcake

The claimant's comments about you using a template, is a template, that we have seen dozens of times before. It's hypocritical and attacks the defendant rather than the content of your defence.

You could if you wish state that it is an Argumentum ad hominem. Look it up. It's a legal term used where one party has attacked the character or motive or some other attribute of the person making an argument (you) instead of commenting on the substance of the argument itself.
It's a type of mud-slinging, a distraction technique.

A certain Mr Johnson did this recently when he commented about members of the Tory party ganging up on him, rather than addressing their concerns about his behaviour. 

At least one judge recently complimented a poster who used the template about the thoroughness of their defence, and another, when the claimant complained about the defendant using a template said, "So what?"

bbwoi

Ah, this makes sense! I will use this in my defense also.

Do you still think I have a case though? they're arguing that:

1. I did not respond to PCN's or try to appeal - Frankly, I had been told to pretty much ignore private pcn's - but i know thats a rubbish excuse. (They also sent latter correspondence after i had moved addresses)
2. A letter stating that my parking permit (which was on display) had been changed to 'only valid on marked bays' - a letter which I certainly did not receive 
3. I entered contract with them simply by parking my car on site

My only defense is:

1. They sign does not say permits are not valid here
2. I did not receive any letter saying the rules for where you can use your permit had changed.
3. I did not knowingly breach contract with them. I had, to the best of my knowledge, a valid parking permit