Can Driver have CC Claim transferred to them instead of Registered Keeper?

consumer0130

An update on this case and a couple questions I am hoping someone can shed some light on.

A letter dated 26 Feb - Notice of Transfer of Proceedings, that the claim has been transferred to a County Court Hearing Centre for allocation.  I've checked the money claim online account and that is the last update listed, so presumably they are still in the process of allocating a hearing date.

Q - I also noted in the MCO that they say DQ was filed 26/02.  However, the DQ was emailed to CCBCAQ on 16/02.  Does it matter that the date listed in MCO is 10 days later? The 26th would have been outside the time window of 7 days from the service of the Order (Order dated 07/02).  Do they not count the date it was submitted as the date it was filed? I'm wondering if the date discrepancy matters as a point of error which can be used in the Defendant's favour? It seems a minor point I know minor points can matter in terms of legalities.

Q - In order to resolve the case at this stage and avoid proceeding any further to a hearing, is there a chance of agreeing a settlement amount with DCB legal, or would the entire amount now need to be paid? I am asking because the RK likely needs the matter resolved now. I know the recommendation is to push all the way to hearing and wait for DCB legal to blink, but that is not my decision and if the RK requests it, I will pay in order to resolve this at this juncture.  Just wanting to see if there's still a shot I could pay any less than the stupid amount they're asking, of if any chance of settling for a lesser amount with them has now passed until the Hearing.

Also, if it must be paid in full, how would I pay? Would I contact DCB legal directly? Or the court?

Thank you in advance to anyone who is able to advise.

KeithP

consumer0130 said:

A letter dated 26 Feb - Notice of Transfer of Proceedings, that the claim has been transferred to a County Court Hearing Centre for allocation.  I've checked the money claim online account and that is the last update listed, so presumably they are still in the process of allocating a hearing date.

The MCOL Claim History is solely a tool used by the CNBC.
Once a case is transferred from the CNBC to a hearing court the MCOL Claim History serves no further purpose.
You might want to get the Defendant to contact the hearing court and ask them when he can expect a hearing date. 

consumer0130 said:

Q - I also noted in the MCO that they say DQ was filed 26/02.  However, the DQ was emailed to CCBCAQ on 16/02.  Does it matter that the date listed in MCO is 10 days later?

That's not an issue. If that were ever to become a problem you will be able to wave the email receipt that was received at the time showing that the DQ was filed in a timely manner.

consumer0130 said:

Q - In order to resolve the case at this stage and avoid proceeding any further to a hearing, is there a chance of agreeing a settlement amount with DCB legal, or would the entire amount now need to be paid? I am asking because the RK likely needs the matter resolved now. I know the recommendation is to push all the way to hearing and wait for DCB legal to blink, but that is not my decision and if the RK requests it, I will pay in order to resolve this at this juncture.  Just wanting to see if there's still a shot I could pay any less than the stupid amount they're asking, of if any chance of settling for a lesser amount with them has now passed until the Hearing.

I suggest you re-read this whole thread. You seem to have forgotten all that was said last year.

Did you even bother to follow the link given you on 23 September 2023 at 1:49PM?

Here it is again...
DCB LEGAL RECORD OF PRIVATE PARKING COURT CLAIM DISCONTINUATIONS

That thread shows that there is almost a guaranteed discontinuation around the corner - provided you follow the script and get a Witness Statement and evidence filed at the appropriate time.

consumer0130

KeithP said:

I suggest you re-read this whole thread. You have clearly forgotten all that was said last year.

Did you even bother to follow the link given you on 23 September 2023 at 1:49PM?

Here it is again...
DCB LEGAL RECORD OF PRIVATE PARKING COURT CLAIM DISCONTINUATIONS

That thread clearly shows that that there is almost a guaranteed discontinuation around the corner - provided you follow the script and get a Witness Statement and evidence filed at the appropriate time.

That is a bit harsh. I have categorically not forgotten everything I have read and all that was said.  I couldn't possibly guess at the hours I have spent researching this forum, reading dozens upon dozens of different threads, setting bookmarks and making notes over the past several months, while also dealing with some very distressing personal circumstances. I have read through the DCB legal record of discontinuations several times, and just read again the latest postings so I am clear it is highly likely they would discontinue.

I have spent many hours trying my best to fight this and do the right thing, but at the end of the day I am not the RK, it is not my name on the line and it is not my decision how to proceed. It doesn't matter how likely DCB Legal are to discontinue. I've managed to persuade the RK to fight for the past several months but they are no longer willing to do so and I will respect their decision. Ultimately, the right thing now to stop the claim from proceeding further, at the request of the RK.  

This forum is there to help people fight, but it should also be there to help them when they are no longer able to fight. Not everyone has the time or energy to do so and for some it reaches a point where it becomes necessary to pay, even for something unjust and to complete shysters.

All I am asking is how I would go about seeking to settle or stop this from proceeding further.  Do I have to engage with Secure A Space? DCB Legal? The court?  Is it even possible?

I'd great appreciate anyone who knows how I would go about this.

Coupon-mad

But why do that, before they'd discontinue?

Wait until it's past the date when the WS and hearing fee are due. Do the WS as normal (really easy statement).

If it appears to be still going ahead a week before the hearing THEN make an offer (if the D really wants).

What will actually happen is that they'll discontinue by then.

nopcns

But the defendant will receive either a phone call or text or letter from DCB Legal just before any hearing date with an offer to settle for slightly less than the claim amount. That is the preamble to their discontinuation.

They are hoping that their victim is low-hanging fruit on the gullible tree and will jump at the chance to fund their scam. You/your ex, are free to throw away good money and fund the scammers, marking yourselves as complete "mugs" and ripe for future extortion by accepting their "offer".

100% of victims who follow the advice, based on much experience, and ignore/refuse the settlement offer end up with their usernames in lights in the DCB Legal Discontinuations thread. I'm assuming that you will offer to pay your ex the amount he agrees to settle at. As long as you don't mind funding a scam, therefore becoming a part of the problem, and can afford to do so, so be it.

Not following all the advice and time you spent on research up to this point is the real sad issue here. No one who comes here for advice, especially for a claim issued by DCB Legal, ever pays. You are about to become the first one. Such a pity.

consumer0130

FYI, while trying to find out the process to reach a settlement, the judge has struck out the defence I put together using the advice from this forum, saying 'it appears to be a document copied largely from the internet.' Apparently not all judges are swayed by the arguments and references to other cases and judgements.

Seems unlikely DCB legal will offer a settlement since it seems they could actually win the case with this judge. Worried now they may not even accept a settlement offered from the defendant, but we shall see. 

Including below for reference.

 

BikingBud

consumer0130 said:

FYI, while trying to find out the process to reach a settlement, the judge has struck out the defence I put together using the advice from this forum, saying 'it appears to be a document copied largely from the internet.' Apparently not all judges are swayed by the arguments and references to other cases and judgements.

Seems unlikely DCB legal will offer a settlement since it seems they could actually win the case with this judge. Worried now they may not even accept a settlement offered from the defendant, but we shall see. 

Including below for reference.

 

Isn't that how Law works?

You do your homework and see what caselaw has been established as this provides a gauge against what may previously have been interpreted and deemed reasonable.

Compelling arguments from appeals and clear indications of non-compliance with Legislation and CPR are entirely relevant.

Also how can the judge impose a 4 page limit on your defence?

How can this perspective be challenged? 

BTW what date is 111th Jun 2024

Coupon-mad

consumer0130 said:

FYI, while trying to find out the process to reach a settlement, the judge has struck out the defence I put together using the advice from this forum, saying 'it appears to be a document copied largely from the internet.' Apparently not all judges are swayed by the arguments and references to other cases and judgements.

Seems unlikely DCB legal will offer a settlement since it seems they could actually win the case with this judge. Worried now they may not even accept a settlement offered from the defendant, but we shall see. 

Including below for reference.

 

Daft Judge, IMHO.

Never seen that ever.  You are allowed to use a relevant template from the internet and he/she shouldn't be sniffy about it.

Chop out the middle of the defence and the Chan images (if you had those) and it should be under 4 pages.  Keep the first ten paragraphs, the headings and the conclusion. You must do that but it will be fine. Show us the resulting draft this weekend.

LDast

That judge is an !!!!!! and should retire. The use of a template defence, especially one that has been widely accepted in thousands of similar cases, should not be dismissed solely based on its generic nature if it addresses the specifics of the case.

Given the additional context regarding the inadequacy of the PoC as they failed to even give a cause of action and therefore the Claimant, using a legally qualified person, failed to comply with Civil Procedure Rule 16.4(1)(e) and Practice Direction Part 16.7.5., how else is the Defendant supposed to explain that this is a legitimate procedural concern that has been recognised in recent case law?

The template defence was adapted to include the specific facts known to the defendant and addressed the deficiencies in the PoC. The use of a well-established template is a reasonable approach for a layperson, especially in small claims where legal representation is uncommon.

Judges have a duty to ensure that justice is accessible, particularly for self-represented litigants. Striking out a defence simply because it appears to be a template hinders access to justice, especially if the defence is otherwise adequate and responsive to the woefully inadequate particulars of claim.

This excuse for a judge has put the defendant at a disadvantage by restricting their ability to defend properly and at a cost disadvantage if they wanted to apply to vary or set aside the order for the reasons stated above.

The only positive thing I can see, and correct me if I'm wrong, is that if the defendant writes to the court requesting that the claimant file amended PoC, according to order #3, the Claimant would have to pay the N244 fee to amend those PoC.

Even without the CEL v Chan preliminary matter, the whole defence can easily fit on 4 x A4 pages (double sided).

consumer0130

Just to say thanks for the responses/ reactions. Those were exactly some of the thoughts I was having regarding law consisting of quite a lot of referencing other cases and judgements. It seems like a case of very bad luck with a judge who has some sort of bone to pick. I've decided it's a lost cause drafting an updated defence since I'm facing court action from the RK if I don't arrange to settle this within the next week.

However, I'm thinking it may at least help to request that DCB legal file further details of the claim to support the defence, and notify DCB legal that this has been requested, if that may at least help slightly in terms of reaching a settlement with them, if it means it would avoid them paying a fee to update their claim.