IMPORTANT: Please make sure your posts do not contain any personally identifiable information (both your own and that of others). When uploading images, please take care that you have redacted all personal information including number plates, reference numbers and QR codes (which may reveal vehicle information when scanned).
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!

CNBC Claim defence advice needed

Options
2»

Comments

  • Coupon-mad
    Coupon-mad Posts: 152,434 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 10,000 Posts Name Dropper Photogenic
    edited 6 August at 12:20PM
    Remove 'from Ashby v Tolhurst [1937]' which isn't a relevant case.

    And change:

    "
    It is also true that the Defendant was under the impression that the location at which the vehicle was pictured was an unrestricted road and adjacent pavement..."

    to

    It is also true that there were a lack of signs and lines, therefore the Defendant believed this was an unrestricted public road...


    But hang on a minute, isn't this a Gladstones claim? Show us the POC. You should be using the linked para 3 with Chan & Akande, shown in the Template Defence.


    PRIVATE 'PCN'? DON'T PAY BUT DON'T IGNORE IT (except N.Ireland).
    CLICK at the top or bottom of any page where it says:
    Home»Motoring»Parking Tickets Fines & Parking - read the NEWBIES THREAD
Meet your Ambassadors

🚀 Getting Started

Hi new member!

Our Getting Started Guide will help you get the most out of the Forum

Categories

  • All Categories
  • 351.2K Banking & Borrowing
  • 253.2K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
  • 453.7K Spending & Discounts
  • 244.1K Work, Benefits & Business
  • 599.2K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
  • 177K Life & Family
  • 257.5K Travel & Transport
  • 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
  • 16.1K Discuss & Feedback
  • 37.6K Read-Only Boards

Is this how you want to be seen?

We see you are using a default avatar. It takes only a few seconds to pick a picture.