Your browser isn't supported
It looks like you're using an old web browser. To get the most out of the site and to ensure guides display correctly, we suggest upgrading your browser now. Download the latest:
Internet Explorer
Google Chrome
Mozilla Firefox

Welcome to the MSE Forums

We're home to a fantastic community of MoneySavers but anyone can post. Please exercise caution & report spam, illegal, offensive or libellous posts/messages: click "report" or email forumteam@.

Main site > Forums > Household & Travel > Motoring > Parking Tickets, Fines & Parking > County court letter assistance
Go to page of 7
  • 3.5k views
  • 129 replies
Search
  • FIRST POST
    • User avatar
      User avatar
      Logblahar
      • 69Posts
      • 8Thanks
    • Logblahar
    • By Logblahar 20th Jan 18, 12:57 PM
    • 69Posts
    • 8Thanks

      What's this?

    Logblahar
    County court letter assistance
    • #1
    • 20th Jan 18, 12:57 PM
    County court letter assistance 20th Jan 18 at 12:57 PM
    I know you all must be sick of newbies.....I would like some assistance please with a PCN and court claim.

    On 05 January a Notice of Pending Court Claim was received ( dated 22 December) Nicely over the Christmas period. Where I had been away at family. Prior to this I had received nothing.
    The letter stated that they had sent a letter before claim on 27 November 2017 which I had not received.
    The notice is for a PCN from Oct 2016 for a vehicle that I am the registered keeper. The vehicle is used by other friends and family too.
    The contravention description being Parked without purchasing a valid pay and display ticket at a well known retail park in Keighley.

    I checked my time sheets at work and on the date in question I was working some 20 miles away from the contravention location. ( I have now been able to get pictures from the cctv system at work on the date showing me entering the place of work at 10.00, walking around the facility at 1410 (23 mins) after the so called contravention and leaving work at 1800 when my shift ended.
    I have got no correspondence at all from the parking company just the ones from the legal company and county court business centre?

    I have now received a claim form from the county court business centre on 09 Jan and 3 days later a notice of county court claim issued form from the legal company
    I called the legal company explaining my situation and they did not want to know and just told me that they can't help and I need to call the county court business centre. Tried about 30 times and just either rings and cuts off or does not connect.

    I have gone on money claim and completed the AOS and left evidence blank. That's it.

    The parking company is no longer at the car park in mention and the signs etc have gone and another company is in situ. So I have no evidence of bad signage.

    I could now do with some guidance on where and what to do please? Thank you.
    I will try and uploads the letters I received.

    Sorry!

    There are currently no thanks for this post.

Page 5
    • User avatar
      User avatar
      Logblahar
      • 69Posts
      • 8Thanks
    • Logblahar
    • By Logblahar 7th Apr 18, 8:15 AM
    • 69 Posts
    • 8 Thanks

      What's this?

    Logblahar
    “
    Para #35 is a catchall reference to a POFA alternative. The answer is a simple one of referring to para #2 and pointing out there is/was a remedy but they chose not to use it.

    Clearly this is premised, as was pointed out before, that the driver had a contract in the first place.

    Edit: You could that in the case of Bagri v BW Legal, the Claimant's solicitors boast of handling 1mn claims with only 6 supervising solicitors. The Defendant asks the court that they provide a remedy to Defendants to being exposed to shoddy vexatious claims and the abuse/misuse of the court process.
    Originally posted by IamEmanresu ”

    Should I be including this in my defence? If so could you help me understand this a bit more please.

    Sorry!

    There are currently no thanks for this post.

    • User avatar
      User avatar
      Logblahar
      • 69Posts
      • 8Thanks
    • Logblahar
    • By Logblahar 7th Apr 18, 9:21 AM
    • 69 Posts
    • 8 Thanks

      What's this?

    Logblahar
    “
    Remove #6 entire, it's just waffle. DJ Wright doesn't need that!

    And put the acronyms of the companies in capitals here:
    Originally posted by Coupon-mad ”
    I was wondering if #6 needed removing. Thanks
    The rest is from my original defence.

    Sorry!

    There are currently no thanks for this post.

    • User avatar
      User avatar
      The Deep
      • 9,095Posts
      • 8,791Thanks
    • The Deep
    • By The Deep 7th Apr 18, 9:52 AM
    • 9,095 Posts
    • 8,791 Thanks

      What's this?

    The Deep
    “
    Should I put anything in about the denouncement by mp after mp of these companies in the House of Commons?
    Originally posted by Logblahar ”
    Absolutely.
    You never know how far you can go until you go too far.

    Sorry!

    There are currently no thanks for this post.

    • User avatar
      User avatar
      bargepole
      • 2,262Posts
      • 6,572Thanks
    • bargepole
    • By bargepole 7th Apr 18, 10:17 AM
    • 2,262 Posts
    • 6,572 Thanks

      What's this?

    bargepole
    “
    Absolutely.
    Originally posted by The Deep ”
    The HoC debate, whilst of interest to us all, doesn't actually provide an arguable point of defence.

    Unless and until legislation is passed, and it can be shown that the PPC were operating in breach of that, the Judge can only apply the law as it currently stands, not as we or a group of MPs would wish it to be.
    Speeding cases fought: 24 (3 of mine, 21 for others). Cases won: 20. Points on licence: 0. Private Parking Court Cases: Won 32. Lost 10.

    Users saying Thanks (2)

    • User avatar
      User avatar
      The Deep
      • 9,095Posts
      • 8,791Thanks
    • The Deep
    • By The Deep 7th Apr 18, 10:50 AM
    • 9,095 Posts
    • 8,791 Thanks

      What's this?

    The Deep
    “
    The HoC debate, whilst of interest to us all, doesn't actually provide an arguable point of defence.

    Unless and until legislation is passed, and it can be shown that the PPC were operating in breach of that, the Judge can only apply the law as it currently stands, not as we or a group of MPs would wish it to be.
    Originally posted by bargepole ”
    Perhaps, but judges are human, and have opinions. If one can convince a judge that, invariably the claim is a con, you are half way there.

    A judge cannot divorce himself from the will of the people, cf the DPP's rapid decision not to prosecute in the OAP/Burglar killing.
    Last edited by The Deep; 07-04-2018 at 10:53 AM.
    You never know how far you can go until you go too far.

    Users saying Thanks (1)

    • User avatar
      User avatar
      Logblahar
      • 69Posts
      • 8Thanks
    • Logblahar
    • By Logblahar 7th Apr 18, 10:53 AM
    • 69 Posts
    • 8 Thanks

      What's this?

    Logblahar
    “
    The HoC debate, whilst of interest to us all, doesn't actually provide an arguable point of defence.

    Unless and until legislation is passed, and it can be shown that the PPC were operating in breach of that, the Judge can only apply the law as it currently stands, not as we or a group of MPs would wish it to be.
    Originally posted by bargepole ”
    Fair enough I will leave that out and I guess I will put my amended defence in as it currently stands in post 72.
    Last edited by Logblahar; 07-04-2018 at 10:56 AM.

    Sorry!

    There are currently no thanks for this post.

    • User avatar
      User avatar
      Logblahar
      • 69Posts
      • 8Thanks
    • Logblahar
    • By Logblahar 7th Apr 18, 11:14 AM
    • 69 Posts
    • 8 Thanks

      What's this?

    Logblahar
    “
    Perhaps, but judges are human, and have opinions. If one can convince a judge that, invariably the claim is a con, you are half way there.

    A judge cannot divorce himself from the will of the people, cf the DPP's rapid decision not to prosecute in the OAP/Burglar killing.
    Originally posted by The Deep ”
    Therefore it would not be of any detriment to add this?

    Sorry!

    There are currently no thanks for this post.

    • User avatar
      User avatar
      KeithP
      • 6,712Posts
      • 5,935Thanks
    • KeithP
    • By KeithP 7th Apr 18, 1:41 PM
    • 6,712 Posts
    • 5,935 Thanks

      What's this?

    KeithP
    “
    Therefore it would not be of any detriment to add this?
    Originally posted by Logblahar ”
    Depends on the judge.

    Some judges might view it as irrelevant rubbish and be annoyed to even have to read it, whilst others might like it.

    No way of knowing which DJ you will meet.

    Your decision.
    .

    Users saying Thanks (1)

    • User avatar
      User avatar
      Logblahar
      • 69Posts
      • 8Thanks
    • Logblahar
    • By Logblahar 7th Apr 18, 2:11 PM
    • 69 Posts
    • 8 Thanks

      What's this?

    Logblahar
    “
    Depends on the judge.

    Some judges might view it as irrelevant rubbish and be annoyed to even have to read it, whilst others might like it.

    No way of knowing which DJ you will meet.

    Your decision.
    Originally posted by KeithP ”
    Fair enough.

    Sorry!

    There are currently no thanks for this post.

    • User avatar
      User avatar
      bargepole
      • 2,262Posts
      • 6,572Thanks
    • bargepole
    • By bargepole 7th Apr 18, 4:12 PM
    • 2,262 Posts
    • 6,572 Thanks

      What's this?

    bargepole
    “
    Perhaps, but judges are human, and have opinions. If one can convince a judge that, invariably the claim is a con, you are half way there.

    A judge cannot divorce himself from the will of the people, cf the DPP's rapid decision not to prosecute in the OAP/Burglar killing.
    Originally posted by The Deep ”
    The DPP's decision in that case was based on a proper application of the law.

    The OAP used 'reasonable force' to defend himself, faced with a potentially violent criminal who was threatening to stab him with a screwdriver. It is unfortunate that the man died, but that was a consequence of the recklessness of his actions.

    Any prosecution on a charge of murder or manslaughter would inevitably have resulted in the jury returning a Not Guilty verdict, and a huge waste of public funds bringing it to trial.
    Speeding cases fought: 24 (3 of mine, 21 for others). Cases won: 20. Points on licence: 0. Private Parking Court Cases: Won 32. Lost 10.

    Users saying Thanks (2)

    • User avatar
      User avatar
      Logblahar
      • 69Posts
      • 8Thanks
    • Logblahar
    • By Logblahar 8th Apr 18, 8:02 AM
    • 69 Posts
    • 8 Thanks

      What's this?

    Logblahar
    Can you email your defence to skipton court?

    Sorry!

    There are currently no thanks for this post.

    • User avatar
      User avatar
      The Deep
      • 9,095Posts
      • 8,791Thanks
    • The Deep
    • By The Deep 8th Apr 18, 10:41 AM
    • 9,095 Posts
    • 8,791 Thanks

      What's this?

    The Deep
    Depends on the judge. Some judges might view it as irrelevant rubbish

    Then he/she must be sacked. How can the will if the people be thus regarded?

    Keep it in OP. Whilst my learned friend may have a better acquaintanceship with the law, I suspect that I a better grasp of human psychology.
    Last edited by The Deep; 08-04-2018 at 10:52 AM.
    You never know how far you can go until you go too far.

    Users saying Thanks (1)

    • User avatar
      User avatar
      The Deep
      • 9,095Posts
      • 8,791Thanks
    • The Deep
    • By The Deep 8th Apr 18, 10:47 AM
    • 9,095 Posts
    • 8,791 Thanks

      What's this?

    The Deep
    “
    The DPP's decision in that case was based on a proper application of the law. ... snipped

    ... The OAP used 'reasonable force' to defend himself, faced with a potentially resulted in the jury returning a Not Guilty verdict, and a huge waste of public funds bringing it to trial.
    Originally posted by bargepole ”
    So, are you saying Mr C that the will of the people, public opinion, had nothing to do with the decision?

    I seem to recall that quite recently the Parole Board, in their wisdom, decided to release Stephen Warboys. There was such a massive outcry from the people that the head of the Board has resigned, and the decision has been overturned.
    Last edited by The Deep; 08-04-2018 at 11:08 AM.
    You never know how far you can go until you go too far.

    Users saying Thanks (1)

    • User avatar
      User avatar
      Lamilad
      • 1,348Posts
      • 2,695Thanks
    • Lamilad
    • By Lamilad 8th Apr 18, 11:11 AM
    • 1,348 Posts
    • 2,695 Thanks

      What's this?

    Lamilad
    “
    Can you email your defence to skipton court?
    Originally posted by Logblahar ”
    Ring the court first to check they will accept it by email. I posted the email address on Capt Mainwaring's thread recently.

    Make sure the subject line contains your claim number and "defence attached". Request a confirmation reply or ring the court to check they've got it.

    Users saying Thanks (1)

    • User avatar
      User avatar
      Logblahar
      • 69Posts
      • 8Thanks
    • Logblahar
    • By Logblahar 8th Apr 18, 11:38 AM
    • 69 Posts
    • 8 Thanks

      What's this?

    Logblahar
    “
    Ring the court first to check they will accept it by email. I posted the email address on Capt Mainwaring's thread recently.

    Make sure the subject line contains your claim number and "defence attached". Request a confirmation reply or ring the court to check they've got it.
    Originally posted by Lamilad ”
    I will do that cheers

    Sorry!

    There are currently no thanks for this post.

    • User avatar
      User avatar
      Johnersh
      • 958Posts
      • 1,840Thanks
    • Johnersh
    • By Johnersh 8th Apr 18, 12:52 PM
    • 958 Posts
    • 1,840 Thanks

      What's this?

    Johnersh
    @The Deep (although i'm sure we'll have to agree to disagree on these points)... We're now a tad off topic....

    “
    So, are you saying Mr C that the will of the people, public opinion, had nothing to do with the decision?
    ”
    If he's not, he ought to be. If you kill anyone (in self defence or otherwise) you will always be arrested. That is for a number of reasons:
    1. It will entitle you to immediate legal advice
    2. It will prevent you returning to the scene whilst forensics do their thing
    3. It will protect the police insofar as they are required to investigate whether a crime has been committed and it will put in place strict procedural requirements.

    There is nothing wrong in any of that - even if it was always pretty clear in the recent case that no charges would be brought (as indeed they were not). Nothing to do with the newspapers or public opinion, but the operation of the criminal legal system.

    Similarly, it was always fairly clear (albeit some years ago now) that the farmer Tony Martin would be charged, given that he reloaded his shotgun in order to shoot at intruders, shot them in the back when they were running away and did not call the emergency services but checked into a hotel whilst his victim bled out...

    “
    I seem to recall that quite recently the Parole Board, in their wisdom, decided to release Stephen Warboys. There was such a massive outcry from the people that the head of the Board has resigned, and the decision has been overturned.
    ”
    The High Court looked at the Parole Board decision because of proceedings brought by two of his victims, not because of "public opinion" or the newspapers. The decision was overturned because of a failure to consider all of the appropriate materials, not because there was a general hankering to lock him up and throw away the key

    The head of the parole board is reported to have resigned, but was essentially sacked by the Justice Secretary because it was determined to be politically expedient. Indeed it is only this last point that is a nod to public opinion, in which the government bravely throw someone else under the bus to deflect criticism from them.

    *rant over*
    "The best advice I ever got was that knowledge is power and to keep reading."
    DISCLAIMER: I post thoughts as & when they occur. I don't advise. You are your own person and decision-maker. I'm unlikely to respond to DMs seeking personal advice. It's ill-advised & you lose the benefit of a group "take" on events.

    Users saying Thanks (2)

    • User avatar
      User avatar
      Logblahar
      • 69Posts
      • 8Thanks
    • Logblahar
    • By Logblahar 10th Apr 18, 1:39 PM
    • 69 Posts
    • 8 Thanks

      What's this?

    Logblahar
    “
    I will do that cheers
    Originally posted by Logblahar ”
    Rang the court and all sent as suggested.

    Sorry!

    There are currently no thanks for this post.

    • User avatar
      User avatar
      Logblahar
      • 69Posts
      • 8Thanks
    • Logblahar
    • By Logblahar 12th Apr 18, 5:38 PM
    • 69 Posts
    • 8 Thanks

      What's this?

    Logblahar
    Just received a Notice of Allocation to the small claims track (hearing).
    Deputy District Judge Flanagan has considered the statements of case and directions questionnaire filed and ordered that:
    Unless the claimant does by 4.00 pm on 01 June 2018 pay the court the trial fee of £25.00 or file a properly completed application (I.e one which provides all the required information in the manner requested) for help with fees, then the claim will be struck out with effect from 01 June 2018 without further order and, unless the court orders otherwise, you will also be liable for the costs which the defendant has incurred.

    The hearing of the case will take place at****** on ******** at the county court skipton.

    Sorry!

    There are currently no thanks for this post.

    • User avatar
      User avatar
      nosferatu1001
      • 2,315Posts
      • 2,760Thanks
    • nosferatu1001
    • By nosferatu1001 12th Apr 18, 5:43 PM
    • 2,315 Posts
    • 2,760 Thanks

      What's this?

    nosferatu1001
    Should also have a bit where it orders exchange of documents. Make a note of that.

    Sorry!

    There are currently no thanks for this post.

    • User avatar
      User avatar
      Logblahar
      • 69Posts
      • 8Thanks
    • Logblahar
    • By Logblahar 12th Apr 18, 5:54 PM
    • 69 Posts
    • 8 Thanks

      What's this?

    Logblahar
    There is a part where it states having considered the papers in your case, the court believes your case is suitable for mediation. To accept this offer call*******.

    Sorry!

    There are currently no thanks for this post.

Go to page of 7
Welcome to our new Forum!

Our aim is to save you money quickly and easily. We hope you like it!

Forum Team Contact us

Live Stats

4,215Posts Today

8,464Users online

Martin's Twitter

  • Facebook today admitted in parliament that after it heard of my defamation lawsuit against it for 50 fake scam ads? https://t.co/XttOnyH9sq

  • RT @jamiesusskind: After more than 10 years, and with such sadness, I am leaving Labour. I'm doing it for the same reason that I joined: be?

  • RT @Deeangelique_: I suggested @MartinSLewis get 'I Don't Do Ads' tattooed to his forehead yesterday. Today he posted this. I gave Martin L?

    • Follow Martin
NewsBlog