Post CCJ set aside - final hearing preparation

Coupon-mad

Some older threads might have it, such as the CCJ case threads by:

@hallie28

@Harvez63 (his involved bailiffs) 

@Jack5656

@parkingpains1

Please change your thread title to something like

Post CCJ set aside - final hearing preparation

Mega_Maniac

Thanks, have changes thread title and will look through those threads now.

WRT the exhibits, if I figure out the WS and include them there, do I just remove the references to the exhibits in my defence but keep the wording the same?

I'm also having trouble finding anything specific on costs. Are there any templates? Is there a specific form? At the moment it seems I can claim my original fees of £275 and a standard £95 for a lost day of work.. and maybe some amount for the work being done to put this together (can't find much on this). For clarity, I only requested the £275 at the original hearing - perhaps this is all I should be requesting again? 

Mega_Maniac

@hallie28 - this thread seems to have a Defence with exhibits but no WS. 
@Harvez63 - 71 pages yikes! I did my best to scan this thread and either I totally missed it or this doesn't seem to actually have a hearing and was agreed before court?
@Jack5656 - Judge sided with Defendant in original case, but left the door open to the C who dragged it to another hearing they didn't turn up to... Jack5656 drafted a Skeleton Argument, not a Defence and WS... not sure if any of it is relevant?
@parkingpains1 - Skeleton Argument again, is this relevant to me? It seems they won in the first hearing.

Struggling with this. Just spent the last hour doing me best to effectively look over these threads and find relevant info but either I'm not understanding what information I should be gleaning from them or I've completely missed it. 

I feel a bit like I'm running out of time on this. Super busy tomorrow then the deadline is the next day. I'll give writing another WS a crack and see how it goes, but I feel a little lost. My assumption is to re-do the WS, but make sure it's relevant to this hearing, which is about the relevancy of the original ticket and NOT about failing to serve at correct address. At the moment it feels like it is going to be rather similar to my defence...

edit: Out of curiosity... what happens when you attempt to submit a defence with exhibits. Do they just reject it? 

Mega_Maniac

Can i check - am I able to submit my WS and exhibits after the deadline? (submitting my defence itself before the deadline ofc. 

This would alleviate a ton of stress if possible. 

Coupon-mad

No.             

Mega_Maniac

Ok, no problem. 

Can anyone offer me some rough guidance on how I should be structuring this WS. There is so much variation in all of the WS I am finding, and I haven't found one that accompanies a defence at final hearing.

I am struggling to understand what information should go into the WS that isn't already in the defence. I don't know if I am supposed to leave the defence as is, and remove the references to exhibits, or thin down the defence, transferring some parts over to the WS.

I am also still unsure if this is appropriate for the ghost ticketing point: 

X) Given there was no ticket on the windscreen when the Defendant returned, the Defendant believes there is a strong chance he has been a victim of ghost ticketing, where the ticket is removed from the windscreen after the photos have been taken, allowing the parking company to rack up excess fees and further penalise drivers. 

Does this go in with the defence under "Facts Known"? As it seems more speculative?

As I feel like time is running out and I only have tonight and tomorrow morning to do this, and you good folks here only have so much time to help out - is there a 'plan B' I can enact here that doesn't involve a WS?

Coupon-mad

No alternative: you need to do a WS with evidence, to accompany the defence.

Maybe read some 'normal' WS examples (non-CCJ cases) instead and copy their structure.  Not repeating the second half that you will see pretty much mirrors what we put in defences.

No need for repetition in your 2 submissions.

I think the ghost ticketing paragraph goes best in the Witness Statement because you are giving evidence that there was no PCN and as it was only a matter of minutes(?) in between, it seems more than likely that this was the rogue practice of ghost ticketing (done to make more money because the discount is never on offer in the first letter).

A typical example of a WS is in the thread by:

@Defendant911

A less 'legalese/templatey' example which might suit you better (a good 'story plus exhibits' WS) is in the thread by:

@Harry77  

Those will give you the top headings and bottom (conclusion, costs & statement of truth) structure. Fill in the middle with your story!

Mega_Maniac

Fantastic, thank you, I'll have a look at those now. I have been re-reading the newbies thread as well and it is helping me figure it out a bit more too. I think I was getting lost in other peoples cases and being too unsure what applied. 

For clarity on the ghost ticketing: I don't think I am giving any specific 'evidence' there was no PCN. Only my 'word' based on my memory... I cannot prove anything as I do not have photos of my vehicle when I returned to it. 

From the photos filed by SiP at the first hearing:
They begin to take photos of my vehicle at 13:35 (I would assume to evidence there is no paper ticket)
The first image of the ticket is shown at 13:41
The last image of my vehicle (from the back, no ticket visible) is at 13:43

They have photos of the terms sign (NOT the tariff sign) directly above my vehicle. However, it is high up (more than 2.5m off of the floor) and the text is relatively small. I don't think I can reasonably argue I didn't see or read the terms however, they would have been directly in my eye line (even if high) as I parked.

Coupon-mad

Your word is 'evidence' because it is what you will say at the hearing.  It is good evidence.  It is also important for you to make this point because otherwise, SIP will say that you knew about the PCN from that day (even if no letters arrived at your correct address).

In fact you were never served with a PCN.

What are you accused of doing wrong?

Have you shown us that sign earlier?

Mega_Maniac

Coupon-mad said:

Your word is 'evidence' because it is what you will say at the hearing.  It is good evidence.  It is also important for you to make this point because otherwise, SIP will say that you knew about the PCN from that day (even if no letters arrived at your correct address).

In fact you were never served with a PCN.

What are you accused of doing wrong?

Have you shown us that sign earlier?

Ok, thanks. 

The PCN is for purchasing an 'invalid session' - I paid for parking, but SiP list a separate code on their tariff sign for a van (which I did not see, and the contractual sign does not inform me about). So I am accused of not purchasing the correct ticket.

Yea I posted both tariff and contactual sign at the bottom of my defence, but I'll attach here too. The Tariff sign was located next to pay machines (although the first judge at the first hearing noted that none of their images specifically showed the tariff sign above a pay station) and the contractual sign at various points in the car park, including directly over my vehicle.