We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.

This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.

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!
The Forum now has a brand new text editor, adding a bunch of handy features to use when creating posts. Read more in our how-to guide

Help with Court Claim

13»

Comments

  • Le_Kirk
    Le_Kirk Posts: 26,306 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 10,000 Posts Photogenic Name Dropper
    edited 31 March at 11:42AM

    For Chan & Akande only, use this link: -

    Chan_Akande

    Your paragraph 1.1 just stops!

    You deny that the car was parked at the location but then go on to state that the: -

    Visibility at the location was extremely poor due to darkness, and no signage was visible at the time of parking.

    Both cannot be correct! Also you should add the exhibits recommended in the NEWBIE sticky second post a) to i)

  • BMW_Mad17
    BMW_Mad17 Posts: 10 Forumite
    Name Dropper First Post Photogenic

    This is my first ever court hearing, please bear with me on this one.

    1. I don’t understand what I need to change with paragraph 1.1.
    2. The parking charge notice stated I was parked in Sandgate MSCP on the multiple PCNs (3 in total)
    3. Where I was actually parked was dark and the images from the parking charge notice shows that.

    I’ve attached some images of the said locations from google maps.

    I would highly appreciate any feedback, thanks 🙏

  • Le_Kirk
    Le_Kirk Posts: 26,306 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 10,000 Posts Photogenic Name Dropper

    Reread what you put in paragraph 1.1; it is as follows: -

    1.1 I’m a litigant in person with no formal legal training. I’ve done my best to present my evidence clearly, and I respectfully ask the court to take this into account.I dispute the entirety of the 

    See what I mean? I dispute the entirety of the ………………. WHAT?

  • BMW_Mad17
    BMW_Mad17 Posts: 10 Forumite
    Name Dropper First Post Photogenic

    your 100% right. That’s a mistake on my part.

    it’s supposed to be just this part nothing else.

    1.1 I’m a litigant in person with no formal legal training. I’ve done my best to present my evidence clearly, and I respectfully ask the court to take this into account.

    Other than re-naming the exhibits and sorting out 1.1. Any other recommendations?

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
  • 354.3K Banking & Borrowing
  • 254.4K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
  • 455.4K Spending & Discounts
  • 247.3K Work, Benefits & Business
  • 604K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
  • 178.4K Life & Family
  • 261.5K Travel & Transport
  • 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
  • 16K Discuss & Feedback
  • 37.7K 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.