DCBLegal

Gr1pr

Ok , so that means that in your defence you are actually admitting that you are the defendant, and Registered keeper, and driver, so making it crystal clear to all parties. ( Not all defences do so )

Which then means that you are definitely a first person witness to the whole saga throughout the whole process, meaning that your witness statement and any future testimony are first hand accounts, which may be accounts from the only actual person present at the time 

So that latest draft above may be good to go , UNLESS anyone else has observations or amendments etc. ?

In the meantime, look at the difference between the above draft and the previous ones, noting the difference and why we have pushed you the way we did, in order that you may prevail with the best wordings 

Ensure that your draft defence is following the advice in this thread by Ldast 

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6529980/seeking-feedback-on-legal-defence-letter-for-private-parking-fine-county-court#latest

Gedukaz

Gr1pr said:

Ok , so that means that in your defence you are actually admitting that you are the defendant, and Registered keeper, and driver, so making it crystal clear to all parties. ( Not all defences do so )

Which then means that you are definitely a first person witness to the whole saga throughout the whole process, meaning that your witness statement and any future testimony are first hand accounts, which may be accounts from the only actual person present at the time 

So that latest draft above may be good to go , UNLESS anyone else has observations or amendments etc. ?

In the meantime, look at the difference between the above draft and the previous ones, noting the difference and why we have pushed you the way we did, in order that you may prevail with the best wordings 

So should I change it to the driver and not include the register keeper?

This Capital Car Park Control became a nightmare once the local land owner changed the subcontractor to them. Previously there was a traffic warder he knew they had no power over the area where we parked. The CCPC has installed the cameras and issued the fines. It is quite easy to appeal via POPLA and to win. But in this case, there was no original letter and I couldn't appeal via POPLA. That's why it is new to me and a learning process.

Thank you all for your support and I will keep you all posted on the updates

Gr1pr

I assume that you are the registered keeper because they usually issue the PCNs, reminders and court claims against the Registered Keeper, UNLESS the driver's details are known 

So I thought that you ate both entities. ?  You should know the facts, I don't 

Sometimes the defendant is the driver, or admits to being the driver, so a driver defendant, meaning that its probably irrelevant who the keeper is or was

Sometimes its all 3. Hence why I mentioned that you must decide on your role, one hat , 2 hats, or all 3 hats on your head 

CCPC LTD and other private parking companies cannot issue fines, magistrates do that in their courts, private parking companies issue invoices, like any other contractors 

The PCN and BPA appeal process has been around for almost 12 years, since POFA 2912

The small claims system started using paper back in 1973

The original letters could have gone to the wrong address or similar, usually due to a failure by a keeper in not updating the V5c , or lost in the normal First class post 

LDast

KISS... If the claim is in your name, you are the Defendant. In your Defence, you are stating whether you were the keeper, driver, both or neither. That's it.

If the NtK was not complaint with the requirements of PoFA and the driver has not been identified, then the Defendant should really be defending only as the keeper. If the Defendant has either admitted, inadvertently or otherwise to being the driver and they are also the keeper who was issued the NtK, then they defend as both the keeper AND the driver. If they were neither the keeper nor the driver then they are Defending as neither.

I don't know any simpler way of explaining it.

Edited to add: If the Defendant was the keeper, irrespective of whether they were also the driver, they can add the Preliminary Matter in their Defence about the failure of PoFA 4(5) because the claim is for more than the original £100 (or whatever) that was on the NtK.

Gedukaz

​

Tue 04/06/2024 18:50

Thank you for emailing the Claim Responses Team in the Civil National Business Centre. Please expect a response to your enquiry in 10 days

 

 

When sending us documents please ensure you comply with the Practice Direction 5B

 

https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part05/pd_part05b

 

 

Documents not complying will not be accepted. Documents over 10MB or 25 printed pages in size will be deleted.

---

This e-mail and any attachments is intended only for the attention of the addressee(s). Its unauthorised use, disclosure, storage or copying is not permitted. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy all copies and inform the sender by return e-mail. Internet e-mail is not a secure medium. Any reply to this message could be intercepted and read by someone else. Please bear that in mind when deciding whether to send material in response to this message by e-mail. This e-mail (whether you are the sender or the recipient) may be monitored, recorded and retained by the Ministry of Justice. Monitoring / blocking software may be used, and e-mail content may be read at any time. You have a responsibility to ensure laws are not broken when composing or forwarding e-mails and their contents

Coupon-mad

Good.  Now re-read the rest of the first 12 steps in the Template Defence thread.

And the 'IMPORTANT: KNOW WHAT HAPPENS WHEN' section in the second post of the NEWBIES thread, too.

Gedukaz

Coupon-mad said:

Good.  Now re-read the rest of the first 12 steps in the Template Defence thread.

And the 'IMPORTANT: KNOW WHAT HAPPENS WHEN' section in the second post of the NEWBIES thread, too.

Hi, Already downloaded the N180 filling it preparing for the future

Le_Kirk

Gedukaz said:

Coupon-mad said:

Good.  Now re-read the rest of the first 12 steps in the Template Defence thread.
And the 'IMPORTANT: KNOW WHAT HAPPENS WHEN' section in the second post of the NEWBIES thread, too.

Hi, Already downloaded the N180 filling it preparing for the future

Does the one that you have downloaded contain the "compulsory" mediation?  If so, it is recommended that you wait for the postal version from CNBC that does not contain it.

Gedukaz

Yes, it is mate. ok I will wait.

Le_Kirk said:

Gedukaz said:

Coupon-mad said:

Good.  Now re-read the rest of the first 12 steps in the Template Defence thread.
And the 'IMPORTANT: KNOW WHAT HAPPENS WHEN' section in the second post of the NEWBIES thread, too.

Hi, Already downloaded the N180 filling it preparing for the future

Does the one that you have downloaded contain the "compulsory" mediation?  If so, it is recommended that you wait for the postal version from CNBC that does not contain it

Gedukaz

News on the case:

received an email from dcblegal:

Good afternoon,
Having reviewed the content of your defence, we write to inform you that our client intends to proceed with the claim.

In due course, the Court will direct both parties to each file a directions questionnaire. In preparation for that, please find attached a copy of the Claimant's, which we confirm has been filed with the Court.

Without Prejudice to the above, in order to assist the Court in achieving its overriding objective, our client may be prepared to settle this case - in the event you wish to discuss settlement, please call us on 0203 434 0433 within 7 days and make immediate reference to this correspondence.

If you have provided an email address within your Defence, we intend to use it for service of documents (usually in PDF format) hereon in pursuant to PD 6A (4.1)(2)(c). Please advise whether there are any limitations to this (for example, the format in which documents are to be sent and the maximum size of attachments that may be received). Unless you advise otherwise, we will assume not.

I`ve just realised that the email was sent to my work email instead the one that I used for my defence.