Dispute Resolution Hearing 26 March @ Huddersfield County Court NPML/Gladstones

LDast

Did you acknowledge service  (AoS) of the claim yet? You had until Wednesday 3rd July to do so. If you did, you now have until 4pm on Wednesday 17th July to file your defence.

If you did not file your AoS yet, then it is highly likely that you already have a default CCJ. Have you checked your MCOL to see the status? If you didn't file your AoS in time and the claimant has missed that fact, then do two things:

1. Submit a defence, anything, right now. All the info is in the defence template folder.
2. Buy a lottery ticket. 

BikingBud

skintbutwantstosave said:

The claim was issue d on 14 June. The claim form was issued to my parents house, I don't live there. This Firm is aware of my new address. 

Which Firm and how are they aware?

PPCs will use KADOE -

Our Vehicle Keeper service enables local authorities, bailiffs and private parking companies to query the DVLA KADOE (Keeper At Date Of Event) database. As a result, you can quickly establish the registered keeper of any vehicle on a given date. 

My emphasis. 

Not trying to be obtuse but the PPC can only work on DVLA RK data.

Did you know the second PCN was incoming or was provided to your parents' house? With different PPCs, unless you have advised them both using specific terms "Erase" the old data and replace with your new details will only have the RK data they can legally recover form DVLA.

The law firm cannot unilaterally send it to another John Smith.

skintbutwantstosave

LDast said:

Did you acknowledge service  (AoS) of the claim yet? You had until Wednesday 3rd July to do so. If you did, you now have until 4pm on Wednesday 17th July to file your defence.

If you did not file your AoS yet, then it is highly likely that you already have a default CCJ. Have you checked your MCOL to see the status? If you didn't file your AoS in time and the claimant has missed that fact, then do two things:

1. Submit a defence, anything, right now. All the info is in the defence template folder.
2. Buy a lottery ticket. 

Hi the AOS was filed on 24 June.  Just wanting advice on the draft Defence before it is submitted to the Court. Thanks 

LDast

You use the template defence with the added CEL v Chan preliminary matter in the hharry100 link. Show us only the first seven or eight paragraphs before you send it. We don't need to see the rest of the defence as it is unchanged.

Thorndorise

skintbutwantstosave said:

Half_way said:

Was this on a private road or public? 
Do you have a Google maps location?

312 A641 - Google Maps this is the location - this is an old image, but i was parked on the main road just after the bus stop on the double yellow lines. The car park where they said I was parked in private land, but clearly the pavement / road isnt. The banner which says Basma's is where the takeaway was, the shop where they said my car was parked is the blue money transfer

Hey, I'm not sure of you've answered the question about posting the NtK that went to your folk's place - thatwould be a good starting point to see what evidence they have - of they have none this isn't going anywhere!

I see from this photo a bit further up some rubbish signage on the site

https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@53.6618349,-1.7805499,3a,31.3y,82.95h,85.6t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1swOODIzC4ze0WGZ52RmlqXQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?coh=205409&entry=ttu

Importantly I cannot see an 'entrance sign' even though the site is small, there are some signs at the back (although looks like two different types and a great sign outside 'Downtown' explaining how if you park there the two shops next door will 'fine' you - I quite like they've called them out on it! (not that it's a fine of course).

skintbutwantstosave

LDast said:

You use the template defence with the added CEL v Chan preliminary matter in the hharry100 link. Show us only the first seven or eight paragraphs before you send it. We don't need to see the rest of the defence as it is unchanged.

Hi, the updated defence is in the thread- I've already posted it. 

Coupon-mad

You need the Chan case images of course.

Instead of this (below) you should admit to driving and state what happened and that the Defendant saw the scam signs on approach to a bay, had no wish to be bound by some notorious, unknown ex-clamper rogue parking firm, so the Defendant rejected the contract without parking, left the land and instead parked on the public highway.

6.       As the Claimant does not know the identity of the driver of the vehicle in question, it must be presumed that they are pursuing this claim against the registered keeper of the vehicle.

Don't play that game if you know it was you. Admit to driving in the appropriate paragraph.

skintbutwantstosave

Coupon-mad said:

You need the Chan case images of course.

Instead of this (below) you should admit to driving and state what happened and that the Defendant saw the scam signs on approach to a bay, had no wish to be bound by some notorious, unknown ex-clamper rogue parking firm, so the Defendant rejected the contract without parking, left the land and instead parked on the public highway.

6.       As the Claimant does not know the identity of the driver of the vehicle in question, it must be presumed that they are pursuing this claim against the registered keeper of the vehicle.

Don't play that game if you know it was you. Admit to driving in the appropriate paragraph.

Hi, coupon-mad, I wasn't driving the car at the time, which is why I included that paragraph, if you don't think it will help, I can remove?

Coupon-mad

Unless I missed it, I didn't see you respond to the allegation in the POC by denying being the driver and saying how you know it wasn't you.  Then you need to say what the driver did (my words will do).

LDast

Coupon-mad said:

...bound by some notorious, unknown ex-clamper rogue parking firm

Can someone or something that is unknown be notorious? An oxymoron methinks.