CEL CCJ set aside successful but now I have to defend the original claim. Please help.

Sitries1

After consideration of the above comments i am having 2nd thoughts about my defense and with the deadline being 4pm today i am running out of time.  With all the hassle this has caused and is likely to cause moving forward with more court dates and paperwork- would it be worth me just sucking it up and making a 'without prejudice offer' to pay the original value of the PCN - £60.  When all this started my main objective was to have the CCJ set aside which i have achieved.  Having done that it was all about whether or not i wanted to make a stand against CEL, dig my heels in and prove a point out of principle, however in reality, doing so is not only causing me stress and anxiety, it will likely cost me more than just paying a fine!  

If i wanted to submit, would i just make them (the court and CEL) an offer via e mail in lieu of sending a defence?

Also, i have already sent the court a letter yesterday so would that be classified a defence?  At that point i had not seen the PCN!

Sitries1

How does this look?

2.   It is admitted that the Defendant was the registered keeper of the vehicle in question but liability is denied. It is probable that the defendant was the driver of the vehicle at the time of the contravention however as the incident is from back in 2018 it's very hard to establish this with 100% certainty.  The vehicle is owned  by ......................................Ltd and is used my multiple individuals.  The photos on the PCN are unclear and whilst an SAR application has been made – these details have not been sent to me by the claimant.

 

3.  All correspondence relating to this incident was sent by the claimant to an old address so the first the defendant heard about this matter was when an old neighbour forwarded on some mail which looked ‘important’ and ended up consisting of a CCJ from the claimant. The defendant has since successfully had the CCJ set aside in court where bye the claimant did not attend.  Despite numerous attempts by the defendant to obtain details of the alleged contravention, the claimant has provided insufficient details and only provided a copy of the original PCN to the defendant at 4pm on the day before the court mandated date to submit a defense.  Company vehicle with VRM XXnn YYY entered car park at *location* on date DDMMYYYYThe car park in question services an establishment called '%%%% Gym' upon which the defendant has visited on several occasions.  Upon entering '%%%% Gym' patrons/members are asked to enter their VRM details onto a screen which the defendant has always done.  In light of the above the only explanation is that maybe there was an error with the machine on that day or it wasnt the defendant driving. As the defendant cannot be sure he was the driver he cannot be held liable due to the Claimant not complying with the ‘keeper liability’ requirements set out in the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012, Schedule 4. 

 

Sitries1

If anyone could help on he above 2 posts it would be of great help. I need to submit to the court by 16.00 today and I’m really unsure on what to do. 

Le_Kirk

Sitries1 said:
2.   It is admitted that the Defendant was the registered keeper of the vehicle in question but liability is denied. [It is probable that the defendant was the driver of the vehicle] at the time of the contravention however as the incident is from back in 2018 it's it is very hard to establish who was driving on an unremarkable day nearly four years ago. this with 100% certainty.  The vehicle is owned  by ......................................Ltd and is used my by multiple individuals.  The photos on the PCN are unclear and whilst an SAR application has been made – these details have not been sent to me supplied by the claimant.

 3.  All correspondence relating to this incident was sent by the claimant to an old address so the first the defendant heard about this matter was when an old neighbour forwarded on some mail which looked ‘important’ and ended up consisting of a CCJ from the claimant. The defendant has since successfully had the CCJ set aside in court where bye when the claimant did not attend.  Despite numerous attempts by the defendant to obtain details of the alleged contravention, the claimant has provided insufficient details and only provided a copy of the original PCN to the defendant at 4pm on the day before the court mandated date to submit a defence defense.  Company vehicle with VRM XXnn YYY entered car park at *location* on date DDMMYYYYThe car park in question services an establishment called '%%%% Gym' upon which the defendant has visited on several occasions.  Upon entering '%%%% Gym' patrons/members are asked to enter their VRM details onto a screen which the defendant has always done.  In light of the above the only explanation is that maybe there was an error with the claimant's equipment machine on that day. or it wasn't the defendant driving.  As the defendant cannot be sure he was the driver has not been identified he the defendant as keeper cannot be held liable due to the Claimant not complying with the ‘keeper liability’ requirements set out in the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012, Schedule 4. 

I would not be putting [this] It is for the claimant to prove their case, don't help them.  However, if you are using the "not the driver therefore no liability as keeper" this will depend upon whether or not the original PCN was POFA compliant.  Since you don't have the original paperwork it is not possible for you to say with any certainty.  I hope you get the defence in on time.  Make sure you add the rest of the template back before submitting and make sure you receive an auto reply from CCBC.

Sitries1

Le_Kirk said:

Sitries1 said:
2.   It is admitted that the Defendant was the registered keeper of the vehicle in question but liability is denied. [It is probable that the defendant was the driver of the vehicle] at the time of the contravention however as the incident is from back in 2018 it's it is very hard to establish who was driving on an unremarkable day nearly four years ago. this with 100% certainty.  The vehicle is owned  by ......................................Ltd and is used my by multiple individuals.  The photos on the PCN are unclear and whilst an SAR application has been made – these details have not been sent to me supplied by the claimant.

 3.  All correspondence relating to this incident was sent by the claimant to an old address so the first the defendant heard about this matter was when an old neighbour forwarded on some mail which looked ‘important’ and ended up consisting of a CCJ from the claimant. The defendant has since successfully had the CCJ set aside in court where bye when the claimant did not attend.  Despite numerous attempts by the defendant to obtain details of the alleged contravention, the claimant has provided insufficient details and only provided a copy of the original PCN to the defendant at 4pm on the day before the court mandated date to submit a defence defense.  Company vehicle with VRM XXnn YYY entered car park at *location* on date DDMMYYYYThe car park in question services an establishment called '%%%% Gym' upon which the defendant has visited on several occasions.  Upon entering '%%%% Gym' patrons/members are asked to enter their VRM details onto a screen which the defendant has always done.  In light of the above the only explanation is that maybe there was an error with the claimant's equipment machine on that day. or it wasn't the defendant driving.  As the defendant cannot be sure he was the driver has not been identified he the defendant as keeper cannot be held liable due to the Claimant not complying with the ‘keeper liability’ requirements set out in the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012, Schedule 4. 

I would not be putting [this] It is for the claimant to prove their case, don't help them.  However, if you are using the "not the driver therefore no liability as keeper" this will depend upon whether or not the original PCN was POFA compliant.  Since you don't have the original paperwork it is not possible for you to say with any certainty.  I hope you get the defence in on time.  Make sure you add the rest of the template back before submitting and make sure you receive an auto reply from CCBC.

They sent me the original PCN last night and it makes reference to POPLA on the small print on the back so thats a good thing right?  I have made the alterations you suggested and hopefully i can now get it in on time!  

This has stressed me out so much for the past 48 hours - i really would rather just pay the original fine - is there any way i can do this now??  or is my only option to provide the defence???

Sitries1

Sitries1 said:

Le_Kirk said:

Sitries1 said:
2.   It is admitted that the Defendant was the registered keeper of the vehicle in question but liability is denied. [It is probable that the defendant was the driver of the vehicle] at the time of the contravention however as the incident is from back in 2018 it's it is very hard to establish who was driving on an unremarkable day nearly four years ago. this with 100% certainty.  The vehicle is owned  by ......................................Ltd and is used my by multiple individuals.  The photos on the PCN are unclear and whilst an SAR application has been made – these details have not been sent to me supplied by the claimant.

 3.  All correspondence relating to this incident was sent by the claimant to an old address so the first the defendant heard about this matter was when an old neighbour forwarded on some mail which looked ‘important’ and ended up consisting of a CCJ from the claimant. The defendant has since successfully had the CCJ set aside in court where bye when the claimant did not attend.  Despite numerous attempts by the defendant to obtain details of the alleged contravention, the claimant has provided insufficient details and only provided a copy of the original PCN to the defendant at 4pm on the day before the court mandated date to submit a defence defense.  Company vehicle with VRM XXnn YYY entered car park at *location* on date DDMMYYYYThe car park in question services an establishment called '%%%% Gym' upon which the defendant has visited on several occasions.  Upon entering '%%%% Gym' patrons/members are asked to enter their VRM details onto a screen which the defendant has always done.  In light of the above the only explanation is that maybe there was an error with the claimant's equipment machine on that day. or it wasn't the defendant driving.  As the defendant cannot be sure he was the driver has not been identified he the defendant as keeper cannot be held liable due to the Claimant not complying with the ‘keeper liability’ requirements set out in the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012, Schedule 4. 

I would not be putting [this] It is for the claimant to prove their case, don't help them.  However, if you are using the "not the driver therefore no liability as keeper" this will depend upon whether or not the original PCN was POFA compliant.  Since you don't have the original paperwork it is not possible for you to say with any certainty.  I hope you get the defence in on time.  Make sure you add the rest of the template back before submitting and make sure you receive an auto reply from CCBC.

They sent me the original PCN last night and it makes reference to POPLA on the small print on the back so thats a good thing right?  I have made the alterations you suggested and hopefully i can now get it in on time!  

This has stressed me out so much for the past 48 hours - i really would rather just pay the original fine - is there any way i can do this now??  or is my only option to provide the defence???

SUBMITTED so thanks to all that have helped. fingers crossed now

Le_Kirk

I hope it made reference to POFA on the back!

Umkomaas

More often than not, after a set aside, followed by a defence, CEL rarely come back. No guarantees, but all I can report is what I read here and on other parking forums. 

Sitries1

Gents, I assume now I’ve submitted a defence it’s just a waiting game to hear from the court? 

Fruitcake

Did you get an auto response telling you that your defence had been received? If not, you need to check again tomorrow and follow it up with a 'phone call if it still hasn't been acknowledged.

Then, you need to keep on with your complaints, and re-visit the check list in the guide to court that tells you what to do and when.