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 QR codes, number plates and reference numbers.
NCP Scamming Motorists Using Pole Mounted ANPR without Planning Permission
Options
Comments
-
With a Claim Issue Date of 17th October, you have until Monday 5th November to do the Acknowledgement of Service, but there is nothing to be gained by delaying it. To do the AoS, follow the guidance offered in a Dropbox link from post #2 of the NEWBIES FAQ sticky thread.The 17th Oct
Having done the AoS, you then have until 4pm on Monday 19th November 2018 to file your Defence.
Almost three weeks. Loads of time to produce a perfect Defence, but don't leave it to the very last minute.
When you are happy with the content, your Defence should be filed via email as described here:
1) Print your Defence.
2) Sign it and date it.
3) Scan the signed document back in and save it as a pdf.
4) Send that pdf as an email attachment to CCBCAQ@Justice.gov.uk
5) Just put the claim number and the word Defence in the email title, and in the body of the email something like 'Please find my Defence attached'.
6) Log into MCOL after a few days to see if the Claim is marked "defended". If not chase the CCBC until it is.
7) Wait for your Directions Questionnaire and then re-read post #2 of the NEWBIES thread to find out exactly what to do with it.0 -
With a Claim Issue Date of 17th October, you have until Monday 5th November to do the Acknowledgement of Service, but there is nothing to be gained by delaying it. To do the AoS, follow the guidance offered in a Dropbox link from post #2 of the NEWBIES FAQ sticky thread.
Having done the AoS, you then have until 4pm on Monday 19th November 2018 to file your Defence.
Almost three weeks. Loads of time to produce a perfect Defence, but don't leave it to the very last minute.
When you are happy with the content, your Defence should be filed via email as described here:
1) Print your Defence.
2) Sign it and date it.
3) Scan the signed document back in and save it as a pdf.
4) Send that pdf as an email attachment to CCBCAQ@Justice.gov.uk
5) Just put the claim number and the word Defence in the email title, and in the body of the email something like 'Please find my Defence attached'.
6) Log into MCOL after a few days to see if the Claim is marked "defended". If not chase the CCBC until it is.
7) Wait for your Directions Questionnaire and then re-read post #2 of the NEWBIES thread to find out exactly what to do with it.
Thank you. Acknowledged already..0 -
Do you think The ANPR which has no planning is being used in an excessive way and does and is not complying with GDPR. Bear with me. The ANPR is catching peoples data 24/7 who enter the car park who have no intention of parking. This maybe because, there is no space available or they are dropping someone off etc.
Do you think this practice fails to meet the tests of 'fairness and transparency' in the Consumer Rights Act 2015 and also breaches the CPUTRs 2008 as an unfair commercial practice and a 'Misleading Action. Is this worth a go?0 -
OK defence nearly done.0
-
Do you think The ANPR which has no planning is being used in an excessive way and does and is not complying with GDPR. Bear with me. The ANPR is catching peoples data 24/7 who enter the car park who have no intention of parking. This maybe because, there is no space available or they are dropping someone off etc.
Do you think this practice fails to meet the tests of 'fairness and transparency' in the Consumer Rights Act 2015 and also breaches the CPUTRs 2008 as an unfair commercial practice and a 'Misleading Action. Is this worth a go?
Our experience on the forum is that technical arguments like these usually don't work.
The reason for this is that it's a small claim and the judge only has a limited time to address the issues.
That of course is wholly wrong, you're entitled to argue legal points whether it's a claim for £100 or £100,000, and the law is the law. However, you have to accept the reality which is that trying to argue a series of technical points is more likely to annoy a judge who has 10 other similar cases to hear that day.
Particularly where you don't have other strong defences. It makes you look like you're clutching at straws.
it's annoying because you should be entitled to argue any relevant defence, but it's the way it is and you need to understand that.
I am a terrible hypocrite because in my own case (which I did on behalf of an elderly relative) I argued everything under the sun (it settled the day before with the PPC offering a drop hands - they could see I was going to be an utter nightmare and as a lawyer I may have persuaded the judge that even in a small claim I'm entitled to argue anything that's relevant).Although a practising Solicitor, my posts here are NOT legal advice, but are personal opinion based on limited facts provided anonymously by forum users. I accept no liability for the accuracy of any such posts and users are advised that, if they wish to obtain formal legal advice specific to their case, they must seek instruct and pay a solicitor.0 -
Loadsofchildren123 wrote: »Our experience on the forum is that technical arguments like these usually don't work.
The reason for this is that it's a small claim and the judge only has a limited time to address the issues.
That of course is wholly wrong, you're entitled to argue legal points whether it's a claim for £100 or £100,000, and the law is the law. However, you have to accept the reality which is that trying to argue a series of technical points is more likely to annoy a judge who has 10 other similar cases to hear that day.
Particularly where you don't have other strong defences. It makes you look like you're clutching at straws.
it's annoying because you should be entitled to argue any relevant defence, but it's the way it is and you need to understand that.
I am a terrible hypocrite because in my own case (which I did on behalf of an elderly relative) I argued everything under the sun (it settled the day before with the PPC offering a drop hands - they could see I was going to be an utter nightmare and as a lawyer I may have persuaded the judge that even in a small claim I'm entitled to argue anything that's relevant).
OK thank you.0 -
Office of Fair Trading stated 5.1 It is unfair to impose disproportionate sanctions for breach of contract. A requirement to pay more in compensation for a breach than a reasonable pre-estimate of the loss caused to the supplier is one kind of excessive penalty. Such a requirement will, in any case, normally be void to the extent that it amounts to a penalty under English common law. I am trying to find the link which I believe now comes under the "Consumer Law" ?0
-
The Office of Fair Trading was closed down about 4 years ago. In addition, this argument has been superseded.
You'd be best to stop looking for angles and concentrate on the facts of the matter.0 -
Office of Fair Trading stated 5.1 It is unfair to impose disproportionate sanctions for breach of contract. A requirement to pay more in compensation for a breach than a reasonable pre-estimate of the loss caused to the supplier is one kind of excessive penalty. Such a requirement will, in any case, normally be void to the extent that it amounts to a penalty under English common law. I am trying to find the link which I believe now comes under the "Consumer Law" ?
You really need to familiarise yourself with the ATROCIOUS ParkingEye v Beavis decision, 2015, which is legal precedent for cases with similar facts. You need to know the facts of that case by reading about it, so you can see how to argue your case differs in facts.PRIVATE 'PCN'? DON'T PAY BUT DON'T IGNORE IT (except N.Ireland).
CLICK at the top of this/any page where it says:
Forum Home»Motoring»Parking Tickets Fines & Parking - read the NEWBIES THREAD0 -
Coupon-mad wrote: »You really need to familiarise yourself with the ATROCIOUS ParkingEye v Beavis decision, 2015, which is legal precedent for cases with similar facts. You need to know the facts of that case by reading about it, so you can see how to argue your case differs in facts.
Thank you. I will do that now..0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 343.2K Banking & Borrowing
- 250.1K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 449.7K Spending & Discounts
- 235.3K Work, Benefits & Business
- 608K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 173.1K Life & Family
- 247.9K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 15.9K Discuss & Feedback
- 15.1K Coronavirus Support Boards