Jump to content


MPS Windscreen PCN Claimform ***Struck Out***


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2004 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 84
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Today was the day of the hearing. Tried phoning at 9:03am, 9:05am, 9:10am, etc but couldn't get through - so decided to head down to the court. The case wasn't listed!

 

I think that probably concludes the matter, albeit I was secretly looking forward to having the case heard.

 

One thing that jumped out at me from their WS, was the fact that they made no attempt whatsoever to address Keeper liability. Everything implied that the defendant was the driver. The only mention of POFA, was to deny my assertion that they weren't compliant due to the amount of monies being claimed. I was looking forward to making them attempt to explain the case for suing the Keeper when they've not presented anything or even mentioned anything in support of this fact. It's laughably shoddy work for so-called qualified lawyers.

 

For anyone else looking in and dealing with a similar matter

- I was going to argue that the signage was prohibitive in two ways, albeit it only came to me after I'd served my own WS.

 

One was the PERMIT HOLDERS ONLY.

The other was because the signs said "VEHICLES MUST PARK WHOLLY WITHIN A MARKED BAY" and "NO PARKING ON ANY...ROADWAY". This fits with the Bull case here

- if the term is prohibitive and cannot create a contract with a permit holder, then it absolutely cannot create a contract with a non-permit holder either (where a vehicle was parked on a roadway, as mine was).

It might seem like twisted logic, but it makes complete sense to me.

 

Thanks again for the guidance EB.

Link to post
Share on other sites

they discontinued so they can claim anything they want and it wont get them into trouble. It is only when they ahve to have to speak about it or have it considered as written evidence that it can be questioned.

 

 

 

The other problme is that things are never absolute so defeating a claim by showing the other side purjured themselves isnt straightforward. Lies are not absolute so for example claiming some injury when there was none wont get the claimant a spell in prison, just a telling off for exaggerating.

 

 

 

Judges work on the premise that everyone tells the truth but sometimes people make mistakes. The commonest you will seeis people claiming they didnt receive something through the post. The law says that it was deemed delivered 2 days after posting but parking co's often rely on hundreds of letters getting lost in the post and if you sue them they claim not to have received your letters when their internal communcations make it clear they have. All of no interest to a judge, they give the benefit of the doubt and plough on regardless.

Edited by honeybee13
Paras
Link to post
Share on other sites

The other problme is that things are never absolute so defeating a claim by showing the other side purjured themselves isnt straightforward.

 

Yes, and also the offence of perjury requires a 'lawfully sworn witness' to wilfully make a false statement. As the claim was struck out and never got as far as swearing in a witness I doubt that perjury could have taken place. And as you say it's not as simple as showing that the statement was wrong or inaccurate. You need corroborating evidence to show that the witness knew it was false and deliberately ('wilfully') stated it was true knowing it wasn't. Mere error in a statement isn't, in itself, perjury.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Had a letter from the court regards to my email request for costs. It states:

 

"Defendant must apply on notice for a costs order. The Claimant has now filed a witness statement....but the case remains struck out."

 

Thoughts? What's involved in applying for a costs order?

Link to post
Share on other sites

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...