PE discontinued at the site of the Beavis case! (Alleged overstay, Equality Act defence)

Boat_to_Bolivia

Yes the court should send you a N180. You can check if they have by looking at your MCOL history.

drellix

As I thought then - MCOL doesn't say they've sent a letter. I can only imagine PE have sent this blank one to me either by mistake or try to get me to submit it despite the 28-day deadline passing to catch me out. Either way, I'll wait for the Court letter to arrive, if one ever does.

B789

Go back and have another read of the Template Defence thread, first post, item #7 on the checklist. Maybe print it off and keep it handy, like wot I've done here:

https://www.dropbox.com/s/lexezsjdz7rypct/CC_Checklist.pdf?dl=0

drellix

Oh I'm very silly indeed. Thanks B.

Boat_to_Bolivia

drellix said:

As I thought then - MCOL doesn't say they've sent a letter. I can only imagine PE have sent this blank one to me either by mistake or try to get me to submit it despite the 28-day deadline passing to catch me out. Either way, I'll wait for the Court letter to arrive, if one ever does.

They may have sent you the old version of the N180? Ignore it anyway!

Check on MCOL every few days, and when it says one has been sent by the court, you can download one yourself, fill it in then email it to the Court and the Claimant.

drellix

I called MCOL this morning, as nothing had updated since their ackowledgement of the receipt of my Defence since March 13th, and I'd not received any further correspondence either by the Court or by the Claimant since the blank letter I got three weeks ago.

Somewhat good news: the case has been stayed, but there's a backlog since March 6th for MCOL to work through which might well include further correspondence from the Claimant. Given the length of time, I expect that there won't be much more to hear from this case for a while - though I'll still be checking the mailbox and MCOL's website every few days or so.

Fruitcake

I have only skim read so far, but have you checked with the local planning department to see if PE have planning permission for ANPR scameras and advertising consent for their signs? Not having the latter is a criminal offence.

Even if they have (they don't always and have discontinued claims where they don't have it), see what the original planning approval stated about parking time as PPCs have a nasty habit of unilaterally reducing the previously permitted parking time. 
If the time has been reduced without re-applying for advertising consent for new/amended signage, it should elicit a complaint to the council from you.
You can't bring it up at your hearing if you haven't mentioned it in your defence, but you could warn them that you aware of their dodgy dealings.

Local and national press/media might be interested if the reduced parking time has not been approved. 

 

drellix

Cheers Fruitcake. I hadn't even thought about contacting the local planning department - but this is the Beavis car park, so my guess is that they likely have done their homework. Still, never hurts to try, so I'll do so anyway.

That said, I do know that the parking time was reduced from 3 hours to 2 hours prior to Beavis (though I'm not sure when exactly this took place), and I did indeed make mention of this in my Defence.

I'll look into the above and post if I find anything interesting.

Boat_to_Bolivia

drellix said:

Somewhat good news: the case has been stayed, but there's a backlog since March 6th for MCOL to work through which might well include further correspondence from the Claimant. 

That's because they are inundated with all these spurious claims by parasitic PPC and should be charged for wasting so much of the court's time 

drellix

drellix said:

I expect that there won't be much more to hear from this case for a while

"A while" turned out to be three weeks or so. Checking the MCOL on the 30th showed that the case stay was lifted and that PE had submitted an N180. I've emailed my own N180 to the CCBC and copied in the Claimant. My wording for the new D1 is:

I oppose the Claimant’s request for any special directions or determination without a hearing. I wish to directly question the Claimant about their evidence, so as to expose any omissions, misleading claims, or incorrect evidence or assertions, at an attended hearing. I request that the case be listed for an oral hearing at my home court, pursuant to CPR 26.2A(3).

I'd have added more but the box is fairly small.

Otherwise filled in as directed in the newbies thread.