CCJ & High Court Rit

sh4rpy03

or am i better off sticking with the original 

Bazarius

sh4rpy03 said:

or am i better off sticking with the original 

IMHO it is better suited as a witness statement for set aside . However the facts appear to contradict your earlier admissions - you do have a claim form in hand ? 

A witness statement must contain statements of facts true to your knowledge.  

If it was properly served then you need to”some other good reasons why the court must take into consideration. 

Some aspects of Carr Appeal may apply to your case - the overriding objectives . 

Wait for experts to advise . @Coupon-mad

sh4rpy03

@Bazarius thankyou i have edited them paragraphs to driver instead of defendant 

sh4rpy03

So I should include that my wife had signed the claim form online for appeal without me knowing as previously mentioned by @Coupon-mad

ChirpyChicken

Yes change it to defence.
I would say leave that bit out. It's risky having it in its risky leaving it out
It isn't an appeal
You need to state on the n244 why you want a set aside.
Use the various threads on here and get it logged but don't confuse stuff.
Keep it simple straight forward and to the point and most important of all get it done and logged with the court today.

Bazarius

ChirpyChicken said:

Yes change it to defence.

It’s an application to set aside the writ ? Am I missing something here. ? 

sh4rpy03

@ChirpyChicken I have stated that on my n244 stay writ and discretionary set aside an no claim form received 

ChirpyChicken

Bazarius said:

ChirpyChicken said:

Yes change it to defence.

It’s an application to set aside the writ ? Am I missing something here. ? 

IMHO this is a weak case due to the wife doing what she did,  so this should not be admitted at this stage 
They are best in this case not logging a witness statement as such but stating the facts on the N244 as such along with a defence 
I would not log a separate witness statement in this case - I would simply state why i think the CCJ should be set aside along with a defence which shows the case has legs 

Bazarius

ChirpyChicken said:

Bazarius said:

ChirpyChicken said:

Yes change it to defence.

It’s an application to set aside the writ ? Am I missing something here. ? 

IMHO this is a weak case due to the wife doing what she did,  so this should not be admitted at this stage 
They are best in this case not logging a witness statement as such but stating the facts on the N244 as such along with a defence 
I would not log a separate witness statement in this case - I would simply state why i think the CCJ should be set aside along with a defence which shows the case has legs 

Knowing DCBLegal - the PCNs were never issued on those material dates noted in the PoC  - it  is a very strong defence - it is an attempt of unjust enrichment and an abuse of process  to make a claim for non existent PCNs. 

If DCBLegal provides a witness statement showing wrong issue dates the court should set aside the CCJ taking consideration with  the overriding objectives to ensure the claim is just as per Carr. 

ChirpyChicken

Bazarius said:

ChirpyChicken said:

Bazarius said:

ChirpyChicken said:

Yes change it to defence.

It’s an application to set aside the writ ? Am I missing something here. ? 

IMHO this is a weak case due to the wife doing what she did,  so this should not be admitted at this stage 
They are best in this case not logging a witness statement as such but stating the facts on the N244 as such along with a defence 
I would not log a separate witness statement in this case - I would simply state why i think the CCJ should be set aside along with a defence which shows the case has legs 

Knowing DCBLegal - the PCNs were never issued on those material dates noted in the PoC  - it  is a very strong defence - it is an attempt of unjust enrichment and an abuse of process  to make a claim for non existent PCNs. 

If DCBLegal provides a witness statement showing wrong issue dates the court should set aside the CCJ taking consideration with  the overriding objectives to ensure the claim is just as per Carr. 

the issue is the receiving of the Claim form by the wife