Illiterate and got a CCJ

grassmarket

knightstyle said:

a lawyer, known to fight these parasites has PM'd me and may take on this case pro bono at no cost to the victim. 

Isn’t the parasite-fighting stage long gone? Surely it’s just a CCJ to be set aside now? What’s in it for the lawyer? 

Isthisforreal99

Genuine question - how does someone illiterate as claimed get a driving licence, how can they read road signs, a number plate for the eyesight test? Are they fit to drive these days, no way could they pass the current theory test.

Coupon-mad

grassmarket said:

ChirpyChicken said:

Sorry but CAB are the worst group to help with parking tickets
They are utterly hopeless

The post is about getting a CCJ set aside - not a parking ticket. Don’t know about CAB, but National Debtline link does specifically say they can help with CCJs

But the OP is already being helped by pm.

You could also ask 'what's in it for Contestor Legal' when they offer their no win no fee strike out service.

We know what we're doing and it is FAR better advice than a person could get from Citizen's Advice or National Debtline because we've done this for years.

Look at the thread this week by bargepole. It answers your question. 

elsien

Car1980 said:

The claim (assuming we're talking private parking ticket here) is based entirely on a written contract. Nothing to do with finances.

You can't agree to most contracts if you don't have mental capacity. 

With parking set asides it almost certainly will fly, under the court's discretion in CPR 13.3.

Parking CCJs are different because most parking charge notices are unfair right now, so it doesn't take much to convince a judge that your case to defend has prospects of success. That's the bar. Not a high bar to reach v most PPCs..

Not disputing that part of it. Just querying the illiteracy link. Just as a general thing, someone reads a contract out to you. You understand it, you sign it. 

Obviously for parking this may not work if you’re the only person in the car. But again if there’s a passenger, they could read it out to you and you could understand and agree. I’m just not sure it’s clear cut as you’re making it sound.

prowla

Isthisforreal99 said:

Genuine question - how does someone illiterate as claimed get a driving licence, how can they read road signs, a number plate for the eyesight test? Are they fit to drive these days, no way could they pass the current theory test.

That is a good question.

The gov driving test information (https://www.gov.uk/driving-test/what-happens-during-test ) states: "You’ll have to read a number plate from a distance of: ..." and "You’ll fail your driving test if you fail the eyesight check. The test will end.".

So, you can't have a driving licence if you can't read.

However, you don't need a driving licence to be the owner/keeper of a car.

So therefore, for example he may be the keeper rather than the driver and thus receive the invoices & papers.

(This is not in any way intended as a put down against the neighbour.)

Car1980

We're all making a lot of assumptions here, but then that's the only option in order to give a summary of possible advice.

Some responses to points:

• The driving theory test only came in in 1996.

• Illiteracy is a spectrum. A lot of people manage to muddle through and a lot can identify individual letters. Memorising 26 shapes is one of the building blocks of reading - and would enable you to pass the eyesight test - but it doesn't mean you can read.
• To say you can't have a driving licence if you can't read is not true.

• A CCJ set aside is easier if you have a good reason for defending a claim. So CCJ set asides and factors involved with the original PCN are related.

• But yes, this could be a case of the keeper not being the driver. But even then, we could be talking about a passenger getting out to put coins in a machine, who can clearly read prices, for all we know.

knightstyle

Well I will try to answer the points raised after I see him on Monday. At the moment I only have my daughters remarks. But she is syre it is a CCJ and was because of a uncontested PCN. I don't know how much he can read if anything, again I will find out.
The lawyer is well known for fighting cases like this at no cost to the victin. If any money is paid to him he donates it to a charity.

prowla

Car1980 said:

We're all making a lot of assumptions here, but then that's the only option in order to give a summary of possible advice.

Some responses to points:

• The driving theory test only came in in 1996.

• Illiteracy is a spectrum. A lot of people manage to muddle through and a lot can identify individual letters. Memorising 26 shapes is one of the building blocks of reading - and would enable you to pass the eyesight test - but it doesn't mean you can read.
• To say you can't have a driving licence if you can't read is not true.

• A CCJ set aside is easier if you have a good reason for defending a claim. So CCJ set asides and factors involved with the original PCN are related.

• But yes, this could be a case of the keeper not being the driver. But even then, we could be talking about a passenger getting out to put coins in a machine, who can clearly read prices, for all we know.

Well, I pointed out possibilities rather than made assumptions.

Just some points of order on your responses:

1. The theory test is a red-herring, due to the number plate requirement.
2. Number plates have letters and numbers, so it's 36 shapes.
3. Even being able to identify those individual shapes in a number plate is not sufficient; you also have to obey speed limit signs and therefore understand that (eg.) 40 is the number forty and not just two symbols.
4. Some road signs are text or contain text information (eg. "No left turn", "Road closed", "Slow", "STOP 100 yds", "REDUCE SPEED  NOW", "No footway for 400 yds", "IF NO LIGHT - PHONE CROSSING OPERATOR", a circle with height or width restrictions in feet and metres, "URBAN CLEARWAY Monday to Friday") (https://www.gov.uk/guidance/the-highway-code/traffic-signs ), which require comprehension rather than just symbols; indeed, some of those signs have mixed case, so therefore the "26" shapes has doubled to 52 (plus 10 digits).
5. The driving test requires you to drive with an examiner and act in accordance with the rules; "Not responding correctly to traffic signs" is listed as a reson for a fail in (https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/top-10-reasons-for-failing-the-driving-test/top-10-reasons-for-failing-the-driving-test-in-great-britain ), "You must be able to understand and react correctly to all traffic signs.".

Therefore, though there may be edge cases where people have passed and/or gained their driving licence before the driving test was introduced in 1935, I would suggest that the ability to read is implicit in having a UK driving licence.

Car1980

Fine. Nobody in the last 90 years who cannot read has ever managed to drive an examiner around for 20 minutes and been given a licence.

prowla

Car1980 said:

Fine. Nobody in the last 90 years who cannot read has ever managed to drive an examiner around for 20 minutes and been given a licence.

I said there may be edge cases where people have passed (eg. if there were no road conditions which required reading a sign during that particular test).