point 3,

say that the claimant can only pursue the driver, who is not the keeper and unkown to the claimant.

The fact it is almost 6 years ago is irrelevant, they can claim but by the time it gets to court you will be too late to counterclaim for breach of the DPA.

point 6, 14 and others,

there is no need to mention their solicitors at all,

you say they failed to answer and that is that.

If their solicitors didnt pass on the letters it matters not and they cant say a dog ate their homework,

it is their responsibility to do things right Dont muddy the waters,

we know the solicitors are rubbish and have screwed their clients

but Excel are greedy and stupid, serial offenders in this roboclaim exercise so deserve to suffer because they chose a rubbish mouthpiece.

Every case or article you mention you take copies of the reference material and send it to court as part of your evidence bundle.

If your reference is a web page a screen shot will have to do.

all of these things are in the public domain so it is rare for a judge not to allow evidence sourced online and not the original paperwork.

They have access to the original material if they feel like reading the whole thing

but most are well aware of these spurious claims and the chancers trying to use Elliott v Loake etc

and as you lnow have rubbished them but you need to show why it is different.

they like to know what you know even though it is a reverse of the burden of proof.

In the case of your point 4,

you can also mention that the amount claimed is in any case not a contractual sum,

that the claim doesnt say whether it is for a contractual consideration or a breach of contract

and if the latter what that breach supposedly was or evidence that it is i any way the same as the amount specified on the signage.

Civil procedure rules and the unfair trading terms pages of the consumer protection act in place at the time.

I would also drop the part where you say you are going to comaplain to all and sundry.

Not the jurisdiction of the court to consider this,

drop it after the words" automated debt collection and is a waste of time and court resources"

You want your statement to be the facts and try and avoid trying to lead the judge

because they may well assert their independence by shooting you down in flames for some small error just because they can.

They will be aware of Excel and BWL so give them the pleasure of tearing a new hole in Excel's rep on the day.

You should also acquaint yourself on the rules of representation as they will be hiring a person to show up and argue their case rather than anyone from Excel or BW actually attending.

If this rep is not a solicitor they cant speak and as you are challenging the veracity of their witness statement you can ask the judge to strike it out as inadmissible as you are not in a position to cross-examine the author and that you would challenge them to explain themselves as they have signed it off as a statement of truth based on their own personal knowledge ( which will be limited or even zero)

Just to update this thread.

After spending days pulling together all of the information for my defence in court,

a letter from Excel arrived the day before the deadline to submit their court claim.

They decided to withdraw their claim, I did not need to go to court.

In some ways this is brilliant as I did not have to face the small claims court, but I spent so much time for their robot claim not to proceed.

Thanks for your help.

I did feel very equipped to proceed to court thanks to this site.

well done CAG

I take it you mean discontinued?

don't forget to donate if you can please

you can still apply for a costs order under CPR 27.14.2(g) as they know there behaviour is unreasonable and that they had no claim in the first place.

You can ask for 5 hours research time at £19 ph litigant in person agreed rate and you post and printing costs.

I would go for it, just submit a letter to court with this in it

As for court being scary, it is no worse than a fairly informal interview