Imperial War Museum North - Excel Parking Services Ltd. Amount claimed £288.52 from 05/02/2016!

longtale_Parker

All done.

Thanks for your help - I'll let you know if and when I get a response

Coupon-mad

longtale_Parker said:

All done.

Thanks for your help - I'll let you know if and when I get a response

What's the latest please?

Same thing has just happened to this poster:
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6340786/highview-parking-dcb-legal-county-court-claim#latest

longtale_Parker

Hi all,
Apologies for not updating sooner.

As was suggested, the only response I got from the court was that they won't respond to informal requests. I had anticipated that in the email and asked if I could claim back the cost of submitting a formal request if the case didn't proceed, or if we were successful. That aspect was ignored so, at present, we are faced with the prospect of submitting the same arguments in court in the hope (expectation) that they will see sense and dismiss the claim on the basis that procedures have not been followed on many occasions

Coupon-mad

Yep, it will have to be brought up at the hearing then.  What a waste of your time!

Do you have a hearing date?

longtale_Parker

No date given.
It was a bit of a waste of time, but did drive me to put a list of the failures together

longtale_Parker

Good morning all, and Merry Christmas!

I thought I received a giant card yesterday, but it appears to be a listing notice for January...

Within the pack are:
Form N244 - asking for the order to be applied WITHOUT a hearing
Amended particulars of claim - 
Draft order - requesting "There be no order as to costs in respect of this Application"
Witness statement - acknowledging there is no excuse for failing to file, but calls out an IT malfunction as the cause for their failure (to meet a deadline which was already more than 6 years after the event). They report their developer was called in to repair the problem. They claim in the witness statement that they "did comply with all other directions", though we had never been served the application to reinstate, nor the particulars of claim from them directly.

On this occasion, the courts order instructs the Court Office to send copies of the N244, witness statement and particulars of the claim to the defendant by the 9/12/22 - which arrived (due to postal strikes perhaps) on the 18/12/22 - and an instruction for us to respond by the 23/12/22.

On a positive (though apparently pointless) note, the court do reference our emailed request from September - although the arguments contained (and shared earlier in this thread) appear to have made no difference.

Our arguments, I think, remain the same - DCB have failed to comply with many/ most of the directions, and have limited our time available to argue, and the key point is that they have waited for over 6 years to get to this point.

Any suggestions please?

Coupon-mad

See what @Jonersh suggests if he stops by.

You do need to email your response and a summary of the issues in bullet point form for the Judge to easily assimilate.  Can you summarise those bullet points here?

longtale_Parker

I will add the bullets but think I need to get a copy of the paperwork on here, or at least an extract. It is very confusing language but I think the Court have reversed the decision to let them continue!

The order seems to take into account the 6 reasons for our objection to the decision on 8th September and, because "The Claimant did not intimate its application formally or at all (ii) The Office (who are they?) suggested it was a 'with notice' application & it appears the D did not receive a copy of the application, nor was she given a CPR 23.10 notice...

The Court is of the view for the reasons outlined above that the previous order should be set aside and the application listed on notice.

It seems the Court have found the witness statement from DCB is not wholly true, in its assertion that all other orders had been complied with!

It goes on to invite us to submit a witness statement (or to rely on the assertions in our referenced email) and to state that a date has been set for the 25th January to consider the Claimant's application. This is the bit where I didn't know if we need to attend?

I'll scan the doc and share...

Thanks

Coupon-mad

You don't need to attend if their application is to be 'considered' on that date without a hearing.

It is very confusing language but I think the Court have reversed the decision to let them continue!

Not exactly.

The court has set aside the previous Order and will now 'consider' their application AND your objections, as long as you email them in time.

Show us a photo of this latest Order.

longtale_Parker

Please see attached.

I will also copy down (from earlier in this thread) the 6 reasons for the objection as referenced in the order...

Thank you