Having a PCN CCJ Set Aside and Defending
Comments
-
The last bit of your Statement of Truth isn't right.2
-
KeithP said:The last bit of your Statement of Truth isn't right.
12- I believe that the facts stated in this witness statement are true. I understand that proceedings for contempt of court may be brought against anyone who makes, or causes to be made, a false statement in a document verified by a statement of truth without an honest belief in its truth.
0 -
bohomark said:KeithP said:The last bit of your Statement of Truth isn't right.
12- I believe that the facts stated in this witness statement are true. I understand that proceedings for contempt of court may be brought against anyone who makes, or causes to be made, a false statement in a document verified by a statement of truth without an honest belief in its truth.
1 -
2a- The claimant to pay the Defendant's cost of this application £275 in addition £228 due to Defendant’s time in preparation (12 hours as litigant in person at a rate of £19 per hour).
I can't see you have a case for PEye to pay you this fee because they didn't do anything wrong. A Judge will feel that the C was not at fault as they asked MCOL / CCBC to post the Claim to the right address.
PRIVATE 'PCN'? DON'T PAY BUT DON'T IGNORE IT (except N.Ireland).
CLICK at the top or bottom of any page where it says:
Home»Motoring»Parking Tickets Fines & Parking - read the NEWBIES THREAD1 -
Coupon-mad said:2a- The claimant to pay the Defendant's cost of this application £275 in addition £228 due to Defendant’s time in preparation (12 hours as litigant in person at a rate of £19 per hour).
I can't see you have a case for PEye to pay you this fee because they didn't do anything wrong. A Judge will feel that the C was not at fault as they asked MCOL / CCBC to post the Claim to the right address.
0 -
I would. It reads like a more honest application.
You need to separately email a complaint to the CCBC because they are pretending that it didn't happen and they need more complaints.
Here's a FOI where I got fobbed off:
https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/information_about_moneyclaims_af#incoming-2327373
PRIVATE 'PCN'? DON'T PAY BUT DON'T IGNORE IT (except N.Ireland).
CLICK at the top or bottom of any page where it says:
Home»Motoring»Parking Tickets Fines & Parking - read the NEWBIES THREAD1 -
Coupon-mad said:I would. It reads like a more honest application.
You need to separately email a complaint to the CCBC because they are pretending that it didn't happen and they need more complaints.
Here's a FOI where I got fobbed off:
https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/information_about_moneyclaims_af#incoming-2327373
Do you think it's worth wording the paragraph a little more aggressively?
"Failing to find other means of delivery, the County Court Business Centre continued sending out Claim Forms, by Royal Mail standard delivery, despite knowing full well that there were planned strikes which would have an undoubted effect on deliveries and that there would be a significant chance that many of the Claim Forms would be late, or remain undelivered. In doing so, the CCBC failed to show due diligence or regard for the effect that this lack of planning could have on innocent lives."
Too much?0 -
Sounds good to me.PRIVATE 'PCN'? DON'T PAY BUT DON'T IGNORE IT (except N.Ireland).
CLICK at the top or bottom of any page where it says:
Home»Motoring»Parking Tickets Fines & Parking - read the NEWBIES THREAD1 -
I have received the photos of the signage and the area of the carpark that I parked in. There is no signage near the space and the signage on entry is faded and peeling, making it almost unreadable in a passing vehicle. I now have photos and a video to corroborate the facts.
Could I have some feedback on this please?10- Should the judgment be set aside. I am confident I can robustly defend the original PCN.
a. The Claimant’s contract is based solely on the presumption that the Defendant saw and read signage in the carpark. The Claimant’s signage is woefully inadequate, being poorly maintained, severely faded and peeling, and is poorly placed, making it almost impossible to see, let alone read, from many parts of the carpark. It relies on the driver exiting his vehicle to enter the building, something which I did not do, as I stopped the vehicle to sleep, after being on duty all night. It is therefore rigorously denied that I saw the signage and that any such contract between the Claimant and I ever existed.
b. The charge of £100 for failing to pay the required amount to use the carpark (£15), is disproportionately high, making it penal, and therefore illegal, as per…
c. The Claimant’s high fees for stopping to rest at a motorway services, as well as the disproportionately high penalty charge, is severely prohibitive, actively discouraging tired drivers from taking necessary rest stops and adding to the many dangers on already crowded motorways.
0 -
Looks good. Do you want more here?The charge of £100 for failing to pay the required amount to use the carpark (£15), is disproportionately high, making it penal, and therefore illegal...I'd suggest change 'illegal' to unenforceable and just add that this is one of several facts which distinguish this case from ParkingEye v Beavis, where there was no quantified loss. In this case, it is £15 at most, not that the sign was visible to inform the driver about either the fee or the onerous 'penalty' clause.PRIVATE 'PCN'? DON'T PAY BUT DON'T IGNORE IT (except N.Ireland).
CLICK at the top or bottom of any page where it says:
Home»Motoring»Parking Tickets Fines & Parking - read the NEWBIES THREAD1
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply

Categories
- All Categories
- 348.4K Banking & Borrowing
- 252.1K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 452.4K Spending & Discounts
- 240.9K Work, Benefits & Business
- 617.3K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 175.7K Life & Family
- 254.1K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16K Discuss & Feedback
- 15.1K Coronavirus Support Boards