Permit at work VCS DCB Legal court claim

Coupon-mad

its fallen on my day off work,

Doesn't matter because the CPRs about costs (mentioned at the end of the Template Defence) allow £95 ordinary costs for loss of salary or loss of a day's 'leave'.  It's taking up your day off, when you could have been doing something normal and enjoyable!

Your Ordinary Costs for attending the hearing are therefore £95 plus parking ( + petrol?).

Kitkat8

Lovely thankyou I have added this now so Draft V2:
https://1drv.ms/w/c/67159a05d5ad89c2/ESk53TGyUgRKiCBEfOq_ebEBYewLHbhmJV9V5a2KgzC0NA?e=vWAly1

Kitkat8

They havent submitted their WS as of yet. I'm guessing theyre waiting until the last minute so i cant respond to any of their points. So is what I have suitable and should I submit? Any feedback greatly appreciated. The 15th is my last full day to edit; Id like to get it submitted by end of play on 15th if possible

Coupon-mad

I think you should change para 7 and admit to driving and explain that this is your workplace, otherwise they will question you at the hearing and you'll appear as if you were trying to hide the fact that you were driving.

Remove mention that the claim is for 'permit not displayed' if the POC don't actually plead the breach (which I assume the POC don't because you are using Chan and Akande?).

Kitkat8

Good spot! Ive changed para 7 and just realised the POC does state thast its permit not being displayed so will remove chan v akande argument

Kitkat8

uve tried to look for specific strike oouts for permit and and work parking but am unable to find anything. Ive added one of my payslips as evidence to show i was working at the site on the date of the alleged breach. Just not sure what to do for exhibit 1 to replace the informkation preciously there

Kitkat8

Okay so ive edited and added another 2 pieces of evidence and reworked exhibit 1.
Id like to get this in tonight but latest is tomorrow before 4pm
https://1drv.ms/w/c/67159a05d5ad89c2/EVhzv5thyW1OoPdYIEcUdToBjhWEaIfhXPvFQ_jOL-Y86w?e=TwkQkr

Coupon-mad

I'd remove 3, 5 and 29 (3 is not relevant, 5 is awful because you are ADMITTING TO BREACH, and para 29 is old and out of date: there's no DLUHC now so no ban is 'impending').

And also remove exhibit 6 which is far too much of a close-up of the sign.  Don't help them and do not admit breach. This isn't your fault.

Why haven't you pointed this out?  This sequence of events (below) gives a very good legal reason why the Judge should at least disallow one PCN, because the first sneaky 'penalty' was logged behind your back and thus breached the CRA 2015 regarding prominent, fair and timely consumer notices:

"There are x2 incidences here.
One occasion a PCN was not out on the windscreen and so the driver did not realise they had a fine. A notice to keeper was delivered to the keeper of the car on the same date as the notice to keeper of the following incident. Unfortunately no photographic evidence was taken as the driver was unaware they had a PCN.
The next day a PCN was on the windscreen following the drivers shift. "

A PCN is a 'consumer notice' and under the CRA 2015, it must be 'prominently' drawn to the driver's attention. It wasn't. The lurking ticketer - who has not provided a WS and won't attend the hearing to be questioned - hid the first one by doing it online.

As well as a CRA 2015 'unfair consumer notice' the first instance was arguably also a 'misleading omission' as defined under the CPUTRs. Had you found a PCN on the first day, there would never have been a repeat.  That has to be deemed unfair.

1505grandad

Para 5  -  "...windscreen. However, this was my fault or decision and was due to the tax disc holder losing it’s stickiness sometime after the start of my shift."

Is there a "NOT" missing?

Coupon-mad

Para 5 has to be ditched anyway!