4 Year Old Claim Form!!!!

Jenni_D

4yearoldclaim said:

Jenni_D said:

You don't have time to wait on a SAR to be serviced before you need to file your defence. Use the template defence from the NEWBIES and update it with your paragraphs 2 and 3 - show only your updates in a reply here for critique. (We don't need to review @Coupon-mad's homework, only yours).  

@Umkomaas @Redx

I was advised when initially posting that I wouldn't have time to wait for SAR so I never requested one.

Do you think I should call their bluff and essentially blag their NTK was not POFA compliant from the get-go even if I did not request a SAR?

I don't see how I could possibly know if their NTK was POFA compliant if I did not a) receive a NTK and b) request a SAR

Please read what I actually said ... nowhere did I say to not request a SAR! I simply said that you would be highly unlikely to get it back before you would need to file your defence.

4yearoldclaim

Hi all,

1 week until the hearing! 

Am posting on the original thread as @Fruitcake made a great observation - the images supplied as part of their witness statement appear to be from different locations. (ie, some show £22.50 for 24 hrs, another £12.50 and another £12). 

Given this is about 2 separate PCNs - I would totally understand why there might be two different prices shown as the sites may charge different amounts. However, given there are 3 different amounts shown in their images. I am a little puzzled...

Am reposting their witness statement here.
My defence here.

Interested to hear from some of the regulars on this matter? Slam dunk? Or not quite?

Fruitcake

I noted the following when you posted on your duplicate thread. I had hoped to you would repost the claimant's WS on this thread as I would have commented on it back then.
You should add the following to your observations about the contradictory prices, all of which indicate they are not from the alleged site at the material time.
You could fire of a supplementary WS today, otherwise you need to make crib notes and rip the claimant's WS apart at the hearing, point by point. Personally I would do both.



Note the images of signs on pages 19 and 20 are readable, but only have one icon under the white writing on the black background.

The signs at the car park on pages 23 and 24 cannot be read, but clearly have three icons under the white on black background. Note they were taken in daylight whereas it was dark when your car arrived, so couldn't have been read.

The stock image taken from a computer file on page 27 has two icons.

The signs at the site on page 25 are unreadable (save for the free parking for two hours) have two icons under the black writing on yellow background. Again, note they were taken in daylight whereas it was dark when your car arrived, so couldn't have been read.

The stock image taken from a computer file on page 26 has two icons.

This means that on the balance of probabilities, the images of readable signs are not the ones actually at the site in question.

There is no date/time/location stamp on any of the images, therefore there is no proof they were in place at the material time, at the site in question.

The VRM is unreadable on the "IN" image on the NTK, so there is no proof it was your vehicle. 



Note that this next part may not fly with the judge, but it cannot hurt to bring it up.


Page 2 Index states that Exhibit 1 is a copy of the landowner agreement.

It isn't. It is a letter from someone claiming that a landowner contract exists, but no contract has been provided. The letter fails to comply with the strict requirements of the Companies Act 2006 Sections 43 and 44, because it has not been signed by both parties, nor by authorised signatures. The letter therefore does not constitute a contract in its own right, (S43 of the above Act) nor a lawful execution of documents (S44 of the above Act)
It is averred that no contract between the claimant and landowner exist and the claimant is put to strict proof that the contrary is true.
It is reasonable to assume that if such a contract existed, it would have been produced in evidence. 

4yearoldclaim

@Fruitcake you are a god among us. Thank you very much for pointing out these particulars.

Would there be anything gained from filing a supplementary WS today over taking notes in and ripping them a new one?

Also, why may that last section not fly with the judge? Simply put, it is not a contract nor an agreement as it is only signed by one party. Pointing that out is merely a statement of fact according to section 44 of the Companies Act 2006:

"Execution of documents

(1)Under the law of England and Wales or Northern Ireland a document is executed by a company—

(a)by the affixing of its common seal, or

(b)by signature in accordance with the following provisions.

(2)A document is validly executed by a company if it is signed on behalf of the company—

(a)by two authorised signatories, or

(b)by a director of the company in the presence of a witness who attests the signature.

(3)The following are “authorised signatories” for the purposes of subsection (2)—

(a)every director of the company, and

(b)in the case of a private company with a secretary or a public company, the secretary (or any joint secretary) of the company."

I asked them to provide proof that they have the necessary authorisation from the landowner to issue parking charge notices, and to pursue payment by means of litigation. They simply gave a standard template letter as it is identical in the case of 2 different organisations. Also, the clear mistruth that this is not "A copy of my Company’s agreement with the Landowner (“Landowner Agreement”) is exhibited to this Statement at “EXHIBIT 1”. 

The two idiots that signed these letters are not even company directors nor are they company secretaries. Thus not even authorised to sign on behalf of a company according to Section 44 (3) of the Companies Act 2006.

Also re costs - how do I navigate this? I have spent a fair amount of time researching and building my defence (approx 40 hours over 5 months). I know I am able to claim for hotel expense for the purpose of traveling to the hearing (literally just moved homes to another city last week) so will be claiming this for sure. 

In terms of lost earnings / leave - I'm self employed so earnings vary month to month. Will the judge ask for a ballpark estimate or require bank statements etc?

Many thanks for all your help!

4yearoldclaim

Also - how exactly would I go about filing an additional WS? I checked the MCOL portal and nothing there? Do you just email it to the courts with reference # attached?

Cheers

Fruitcake

Hopefully you emailed your WS to the court of your choice where the hearing is to be held. A WS sent to MCOL would never have got to your local court.

There is no harm in sending a supplementary WS to the court (and of course the claimant) asap, ideally today. Either the court/judge will accept it, or they won't. In my opinion you have nothing to lose. Just don't get into SWS ping-pong with the claimant.

You have grasped the idea behind S44 of the CA 2006, which refers to execution of documents, but it you are going to include it, then include S43 as well which deals with contract requirements.

Coupon-mad

4yearoldclaim said:

Also - how exactly would I go about filing an additional WS? I checked the MCOL portal and nothing there? Do you just email it to the courts with reference # attached?

Oh dear. No WS or evidence yet? Oops.

MCOL and the CCBC was just a doorway in 2021.

In 2022 you should have been dealing with your local court and following what the NEWBIES thread already tells you - 'DEFENCE IS NOT YOUR ONLY JOB'.

With a week to go until the hearing, you are now in breach of the court Order because you are telling us that you haven't filed & served a WS yourself, with evidence?

Oh dear.  Do it TONIGHT.

Copy and adapt examples of WS by:

@Daiapolon2021

or

@aphex007

You can do this in one evening. Easy!  Much of it is copy & paste again.

Get it done and hope your Judge is lenient on lateness (but don't draw attention to the lateness in your email to the LOCAL court, copying in the Claimant's solicitor of course, as they did to you when they complied with the Order by sending you their bundle).

You've gone way 'off piste' and not followed our advice in the NEWBIES thread.  Defendants can't just file a defence then sit on their hands and rock up to a hearing with no witness statement or evidence filed.

YOU MUST RESCUE THIS TONIGHT.

Just like this person. No panic. Just copy and adapt.  You are not the first to miss your WS deadline and won't be the last:

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/79428011/#Comment_79428011

Same boat as you, and he/she has posted direct links to the good examples of WS bundles.  A very easy but vital stage!

4yearoldclaim

Submittted! Will update you after the hearing.

Many many thanks for all the help guys. 

Fruitcake

Did you send it to the claimant as well as your local court?

GeorgeFormby

Looking at claimant WS, point 19, they state you do not dispute being the driver on both occasions. 

First time reading the thread for me but pretty sure you stated you were most definitely not driving on both occasions.