URGENT: Court letter Parallel Parking- please help!

star1800

Le_Kirk said:

2. It is admitted that the Defendant was the registered keeper and driver of the vehicle in question but liability is denied. 

Isn't it the case that Grandma was driving?  If so, better to admit being driver and then, at Witness Statement stage, can give an honest first person witness account.

Thanks, iv amended that. 

Im just wondering can i remove paragraph 24, as I dont really want to claim for my cost if claimant drops the case. Il be happy if claimant cancels without going to court. Let me know if that would be ok to remove paragraph 24?

Coupon-mad

Yes you can drop para 24.

star1800

Coupon-mad said:

Yes you can drop para 24.

thank you, I will drop it as id rather my grandma dont go to court as she will not able to represent herself very well and will be too much pressure which will no doubt affect her health. 

GrumpyDil

Not sure if this has been pointed out but as this is all in grandma's name she should be signing the various documents. 

Coupon-mad

I totally see that.

It was scary for @Eminowa when they continued to pursue costs only. With help from @ParkingMad they had to flail around a bit, to quickly bung in a skeleton argument to support their call for costs, and had to withstand a last minute angry threatogram from BW Legal trying to claim close to £1000 in costs from the Defendant, for daring to cross them with this brave move.

The D did win and got £150 in costs, so it worked but wasn't the easiest thing.

That's not to say that people who leave para 24 in, are setting themselves up for anything onerous.  @Eminowa sent an email pushing for wasted costs after the discontinuance arrived, and people can choose whether to follow that path or not.

star1800

GrumpyDil said:

Not sure if this has been pointed out but as this is all in grandma's name she should be signing the various documents. 

yes no probs will make sure. thanks

star1800

Coupon-mad said:

I totally see that.

It was scary for @Eminowa when they continued to pursue costs only. With help from @ParkingMad they had to flail around a bit. to bung in a skeleton argument to support their call for costs, and had to withstand a last minute angry threatogram from BW Legal trying to claim close to £1000 in costs from the Defendant, for daring to cross them with this brave move.

The D did win and got £150 in costs do it worked but wasn't the easiest thing.

That's not to say that people who leave para 24 in, are setting themselves up for anything onerous.  @Eminowa sent an email pushing for wasted costs after the discontinuance arrived, and people can choose whether to follow that path or not.

Thank you, will discuss with granny but i think keeping it out will be best option. thanks will let you know the follow up

Trainerman

star1800 said:

Coupon-mad said:

I totally see that.

It was scary for @Eminowa when they continued to pursue costs only. With help from @ParkingMad they had to flail around a bit. to bung in a skeleton argument to support their call for costs, and had to withstand a last minute angry threatogram from BW Legal trying to claim close to £1000 in costs from the Defendant, for daring to cross them with this brave move.

The D did win and got £150 in costs do it worked but wasn't the easiest thing.

That's not to say that people who leave para 24 in, are setting themselves up for anything onerous.  @Eminowa sent an email pushing for wasted costs after the discontinuance arrived, and people can choose whether to follow that path or not.

Thank you, will discuss with granny but i think keeping it out will be best option. thanks will let you know the follow up

Unless I have missed something, you can Lay Rep and do all the talking for her, though she will have to be present

star1800

Trainerman said:

star1800 said:

Coupon-mad said:

I totally see that.

It was scary for @Eminowa when they continued to pursue costs only. With help from @ParkingMad they had to flail around a bit. to bung in a skeleton argument to support their call for costs, and had to withstand a last minute angry threatogram from BW Legal trying to claim close to £1000 in costs from the Defendant, for daring to cross them with this brave move.

The D did win and got £150 in costs do it worked but wasn't the easiest thing.

That's not to say that people who leave para 24 in, are setting themselves up for anything onerous.  @Eminowa sent an email pushing for wasted costs after the discontinuance arrived, and people can choose whether to follow that path or not.

Thank you, will discuss with granny but i think keeping it out will be best option. thanks will let you know the follow up

Unless I have missed something, you can Lay Rep and do all the talking for her, though she will have to be present

Hi, yes I would love to represent her. Do we neee to file anything before hand so the court knows il be talking in her behalf?  

Thank you  

Umkomaas

No need to file anything ahead of the hearing. Just inform the clerk that you'll be the LR (your daughter must be present for the hearing) and ask them to inform the Judge. Have a copy of the Lay Representatives (Rights of Audience) Order 1999 handy. 

By the way, I notice you have another thread open adjacent to each other on the first page - are they about exactly the same incident?