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.
County court letter assistance
Options
Comments
-
nosferatu1001 wrote: »LOADS of repetition I'd say
For example 22 and 28
This is quite simple: you were not the driver, can prove it, and they have admitted they dint rely on pofa. You submit there has never Ben a case o answer, the claimant knew this,,and this is merely a last ditch attempt to scare you into paying something you have no liability in
No need for a detailed breakdown of e v l as you can prove you were not the driver.
Should I therefore remove this altogether?0 -
Yes, and DJ Wright already knows her stuff!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 -
I will take out the e v l points. Is the rest ok?0
-
I would remove some repetition here by making this just 2 points, #30 and #31:30. At 8.1 the claimant states that the defendant was entering into a contract with the claimant. Similarly, at 8.2 the claimant states that the defendant agreed to pay a PCN for any action breaching the Terms and Conditions. At 8.4 the claimant states that the claimant would be entitled to take legal proceedings against the defendant to recover the charge(s) and that the defendant would also be liable for interest and any additional costs incurred. [STRIKE]i.e. parked without payment of the parking tariff for the VRM of the vehicle on site.[/STRIKE]
[STRIKE]31. This is denied, as only the driver can enter into the contract and there has been no proof of who was driving on any occasion and attest that I was not the driver. The claimant makes the assumption that the defendant was the driver and this is denied by the defendant and no proof to the contrary being provided by the claimant. The Claimant is put to strict proof of their claim to prove driver identity.[/STRIKE]
[STRIKE]32. At 8.2 the claimant states that the defendant agreed to pay a PCN for any action breaching the Terms and Conditions, i.e. parked without payment of the parking tariff for the VRM of the vehicle on site.
33. This is denied, as only the driver can enter into the contract and agree to pay a PCN .There has been no proof of who was driving on any occasion and attest that I was not the driver. The claimant makes the assumption that the defendant was the driver and this is denied by the defendant and no proof to the contrary being provided by the claimant. The Claimant is put to strict proof of their claim to prove driver identity.[/STRIKE]
[STRIKE]34. At 8.4 the claimant states that the claimant would be entitled to take legal proceedings against the defendant to recover the charge(s). The defendant would also be liable for interest and any additional costs incurred.[/STRIKE]
31. These assertions are denied, as only the driver can enter into the contract and there has been no proof of who was driving on any occasion and attest that I was not the driver. The claimant would be potentially entitled to take legal proceedings against the defendant to recover the charge(s), if the defendant was the driver or if they had followed rules on Registered keeper liability detailed under the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012, which they have not.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: »I would remove some repetition here by making this just 2 points, #30 and #31:
I will do that. Thank you for the advice.0 -
nosferatu1001 wrote: »LOADS of repetition I'd say
For example 22 and 28
This is quite simple: you were not the driver, can prove it, and they have admitted they dint rely on pofa. You submit there has never Ben a case o answer, the claimant knew this,,and this is merely a last ditch attempt to scare you into paying something you have no liability in
No need for a detailed breakdown of e v l as you can prove you were not the driver.
Are you saying I should remove 22 and 28 and replace it with wording along the lines of what is written above?
E v L is Elliot v Loake yes?0 -
Standard forum shorthand for the case.E v L is Elliot v Loake yes?Please note, we are not a legal advice forum. I personally don't get involved in critiquing court case Defences/Witness Statements, so unable to help on that front. Please don't ask. .
I provide only my personal opinion, it is not a legal opinion, it is simply a personal one. I am not a lawyer.
Give a man a fish, and you feed him for a day; show him how to catch fish, and you feed him for a lifetime.Private Parking Firms - Killing the High Street0 -
Should I be adding anything about signs etc.0
-
You add in absolutely everything relevant to your defence. This isnt a tricky concept - the defence sets out legal arguments, the WS provides the evidnece to support the defence.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