Set-Aside Hearing Tomorrow....need help!

B789

B789 said:

At the time of the alleged parking contravention, where it was you were living, did your V5C have that address or a different address? By the time of the CCJ, were you then at a different address from where you were living at the time of the original PCN? If so, how long after you received the original PCN did you move? Have you ever updated your V5C after a move or has your V5C always had your current address?

The above information is important for your "argument" for the set aside.

As @Snakes_Belly points out above, you need a very convincing and comprehensive WS to get the original Claim dismissed so for now, once and for all, please answer my questions, repeated above, in order to see how you are going to argue to the judge that your set aside should be so ordered.

Chloe_Meow

Coupon-mad said:

Your post is too long to read in a hurry but this is NOT OK because it means you won't get your £275 fee back!

Number v): Specifically, what does "No order as to costs" mean/imply?

You need to show that Bank Park and DCB Legal (you can safely name them, honestly!) DID NOT comply with the IPC Code of Practice which requires checks of addresses before litigation.

A DVLA address disclosed at the outset of a PCN is NOT provided as an 'address for service' of court papers.  It is NOT OK for AOS members to just use an old DVLA car address for a court claim, without any checks.  Especially if the recipient of the letters has been silent.

That silence in itself is 'reason to believe' the address may not be the place where the person resides.  That's why the CoP says a check must be made before litigation if more than12 months has passed after a PCN (was there over a year's gap?).

If so, print off a copy of the right page of the Code, and your proof of address, being on the voter's roll and/ or take some utility bills to prove you were not hiding and were 'there to be found'.

OBJECT TO THE DRAFT ORDER BECAUSE THEY ARE AT FAULT AND CAUSED THIS AND SHOULD PAY YOUR £275.

If they say you should have updated your V5C logbook they are right BUT - and this is important to say - parking firms are only allowed to ask the DVLA once.

So even if a V5C is updated a week late, ir a month late (or whenever...) a parking firm will not know - and that's why the CoP says they MUST TAKE STEPS to check the address with a CRA before litigation.

Have you updated your logbook address now?

My logbook is registered at my current address

Coupon-mad

I think as you are not out of pocket, and we now have a clearer picture of what happened, tell the Judge that you accept their Draft Order and will file a defence in time BUT ONLY IF THE CLAIMANT FIRST SENDS YOU A COPY OF THE CLAIM FORM THAT YOU'VE NEVER SEEN..

That's what you can hope to achieve tomorrow.  Make sure the Claimant has your correct address.

Chloe_Meow

Coupon-mad said:

I think as you are not out of pocket, and we now have a clearer picture of what happened, tell the Judge that you accept their Draft Order and will file a defence in time BUT ONLY IF THE CLAIMANT FIRST SENDS YOU A COPY OF THE CLAIM FORM THAT YOU'VE NEVER SEEN..

That's what you can hope to achieve tomorrow.  Make sure the Claimant has your correct address.

mmmwah! @Coupon-mad. Yes, I did inform BPL to update their records with my correct address when applying for SAR. "copy of the claim form..I've never seen", I never thought of that. Absolutely yes to that, so I mention this in the hearing?

Also, my WS for set-aside, in the part for order for dismissal, I requested I be provided with a whole lot of information, which I also requested in my SAR but has not been provided. Do I insist on the provision of this info? (although I've been knocked for requesting it on here as it's nothing to do with me - see 'tools' discussion, but I feel to disagree). In the WS, the request for this info is under "Claimant required to file Particulars which comply with Practice Directions and include following:" Here I list everything. Then I ask that once the Claimant has filed these Particulars, I be given enough time to prepre a defense. But Claimant in the their Draft-Order has requested 14 days for me to file and I have nothing from them yet.

Filing the defense: the Claimant wants it 14 days after tomorrow. I want the Claimant to file the Particuars I have requested and then for me to be given at least 28 days. IS that possible/doable?

AND...will the Claimant actually filethe Particulars I have requested in my WS?

Snakes_Belly

Chloe_Meow said:

Snakes_Belly said:

You would have to produce a very comprehensive WS for a judge to dismiss a claim during a set aside hearing. I have only seen this happen once when a judge was familiar with the issues at a certain car park.  

Love your optimism! I need more! What's your idea of a very comprehensive WS? 

The hearing in question involved a set aside where a number of claims (different defendants) had been successfully defended. The defendant had produced a comprehensive WS however the judge was familar with the issues surrounding this car park. He had dismissed at least thirteen claims already. It's unusual for judges to dismiss the claim at the set aside hearing but within their powers. 

These claims were also issued by an operator based in Sheffield.

Posters on this forum do successfully set aside the judgment and then defend the claim in a separate hearing. That is the usual pattern of events.

Chloe_Meow

Thank you @Snakes_Belly, my take away is "...but within their powers".

Chloe_Meow

Can someone explain to me why I cannot go down the route of bringing to the Judge's attention about the overcharging? If it's something thats going to be brought up in Defence then surely it's beneficial and efficient to bring it up now at the set-aside, no? Is there a thread I can read which will explain why the double-recovery,abuse ofpower etc.is old news? When I read the abuse of power thread there seemed to be so much excitement amongst the posters.But I've not come across a thread saying it's old news and not to be used. Can someone please give me a detailed heads-up. I want to know what I've made myself a fool over by sending that email to the Claimants asking for the leagal authority of the £60 'Damages' charge.

Chloe_Meow

Sorry @B789, just realised I've not got back to you yet. Yes, it's my current address. This alleged incident happend as soon as I was at the new place which was only meant to be for a quarantine period but kept on getting extended and other emergencies arose and it kept rolling like this. So the LBC was sent to the new place probably as @Coupon-mad said, becasue of a CRA. But, whilst I was there I did not receive any correspondence, reminders etc. Can they just suddenly drop the LBC like that without any previous communication to a new address that they've found? Would they have to not repeat the same process of NTK -> NTK reminder -> More reminders/warnings etc -> LBC at the newly found address???

Coupon-mad

I don't know why you read (or how you even found) an old thread about abuse of process and old cases being struck out three or four years ago.

If we had to write a new thread explaining why every old thread is old, we'd die...

It's a bit like asking why reading an old newspaper - that you found in an abandoned shed - with a nice article about the Queen is out of date news, and is she still not the Queen?!

Old threads are OLD NEWS unless they are sticky threads.

But the short answer is that two appeal cases stopped Judges striking out cases (even though they were right and the Circuit Judges were wrong).

Both those cases are mentioned in the Template Defence which is a top sticky thread that you SHOULD have read.

Chloe_Meow

Coupon-mad said:

I don't know why you read (or how you even found) an old thread about abuse of process and old cases being struck out three or four years ago.

If we had to write a new thread explaining why every old thread is old, we'd die...

It's a bit like asking why reading an old newspaper - that you found in a shed - with a nice article about the Queen is out of date news, and is she still not the Queen?!  

But the short answer is that two appeal cases stopped Judges striking out cases (even though they were right and the Circuit Judges were wrong).

Both those cases are mentioned in the Template Defence which is a top sticky thread that you SHOULD have read.

I did go through the Newbies stickys etc. and the template defence. It was through those threads (a link) which took me to the abuse of power thread. I don't know how to link a comment from a different thread. How abou this: Template defence to adapt for all parking cases where they add false admin costs - edited March 2022 — MoneySavingExpert Forum

IS this the Defence template to use in my Defence or is there another?