claim before court - dcblegal - overwhelmed

wobbvlyjelly

An hour and a half the overstay was 

I understand the need to be truthful so I apologise if this comes across very stupid but I cant understand the difference between saying I was not the driver or I dont know who was driving. As in, under the circumstance where I know who was driving, but im not going to be dobbing them in or sharing their information at all, how do I word this? I cant prove it and neither can they? Or is it better to just simply not know who it was. 

I've worked it out correctly and my 30 days is up on the 3rd so not much time left now. On the form it says 28 days from acknowledgement so may have already made a mess of this

Car1980

You're liable as keeper, even if not driving (usually).

State whether you were the keeper AND driver. Or if not, you can say "I confirm I am the keeper, but was not the driver" and leave it as that. You'll still be liable.

Or if you want to get the driver involved they can submit their own witness statement later on.

Some people like to defend as keeper even if not the driver because they can go to court with a friend or relative and both speak (even though 95% of cases are discontinued and never get to a hearing). Or the keeper is more knowledgeable, or just better able to deal with a court claim.

The scenario you're probably thinking of is if you genuinely didn't know the driver, told the parking company that earlier, and your court case would get into driver identity issues.

wobbvlyjelly

Okay thank you. So if it did go to court, then rather than still standing there saying i'm not naming the driver, i'd be better taking them?? 
I really dont know whether I can risk this going to court im having a baby very soon so wouldn't even be able to go
I've edited this as best as I can from the template and a few others I found saying the same thing about not being the driver.. 

1.  The Defendant denies that the Claimant is entitled to relief in the sum claimed, or at all.  It is denied that any conduct by the driver was in breach of any term.  Further, it is denied that this Claimant (understood to have a bare licence as agents) has standing to sue or form contracts in their own name. Liability is denied, whether or not the Claimant is claiming 'keeper liability', which is unclear from the boilerplate text in the Particulars of Claim ('the POC').

The facts known to the Defendant:

2. The facts in this defence come from the Defendant's own knowledge and honest belief.  Conversely, the Claimant sets out a cut-and-paste incoherent and sparse statement of case. The POC appear to be in breach of CPR 16.4, 16PD3 and 16PD7, and fail to "state all facts necessary for the purpose of formulating a complete cause of action". The Defendant is unable, on the basis of the POC, to understand with certainty what case, allegation(s) and what heads of cost are being pursued, making it difficult to respond. However, the vehicle is recognised and it is admitted that the Defendant was the registered keeper. As the registered keeper of the vehicle, the Defendant is not obliged to identify the driver and declines to do so. As there is no legal presumption that the keeper of a vehicle was its driver on any particular occasion, your client cannot pursue the Defendant as driver (see VCS v Edward, 2023) and the Claimant should cancel and erase all data belonging to the Defendant. 

3. Referring to the POC: paragraph 1 is denied. The Defendant is not indebted to the Claimant. Paragraph 2 is denied. The Defendant does not accept that a contravention occurred on 16/10/2024, as alleged.  Whilst the Defendant is the registered keeper, paragraphs 3 and 4 are denied. The Defendant is not liable and has seen no evidence of a breach of prominent terms.  The quantum is hugely exaggerated (no PCN can be £170 on private land) and there were no damages incurred whatsoever.

3.1 Due to the length of time, the Defendant has no recollection of the day in question and did not receive the first nor second PCN from Baysentry Solutions LTD.

Gr1pr

If this goes to an actual court hearing,  which is doubtful with our help and advice,  your baby could be 4 to  6 months old or more

One thing you mustn't do is commit perjury   ( by lying on paper or under oath   )  so be truthful if asked about who was driving,  or if you don't know,  say so  ( if it wasn't you driving, it's acceptable to say my partner,  my dad etc, without actually naming them   )

Coupon-mad

So if it did go to court, then rather than still standing there saying i'm not naming the driver, i'd be better taking them?

No. Nobody has to go to court. Neither you nor them and you won't be naming the driver.

Even if it went to a hearing it would be in about ten months time so you could certainly attend.  But it won't, because DCB Legal discontinue before hearings.  Follow the simple copy and paste process and trust us.

wobbvlyjelly

How does what I have written look?

Gr1pr

Looks OK to me,  assuming that you arent using the advice in the private message sent to you by troublemaker22 last week 

Today at 4pm is your defence submission deadline,  so you replace the template defence Paragraphs 2 & 3 with your own, add the claimant details,  court reference etc,  add a picture of your written signature to the bottom of the word doc, save it as a pdf document and attach it to your email to claim.responses at the CNBC,  details are in the defence template thread,  use all of the template,  around 30 Paragraphs, not just what you wrote earlier 

As we mentioned earlier,  any future court date is possibly later this year or next year,  pencilled in, but there are several stages before that date,  with the probable outcome being a discontinuation before they have to pay for the hearing,  same as hundreds of other cases on here 

Coupon-mad

Yep it looks fine but see @troublemaker22's message as he is an expert solicitor - acting free of charge - who may be be able to help you.