certainly never seen a council planning debt ever make or allow a no return order for parking in any planning permission for a shopping centre nor restrict it to 90mins. usually its 3hrs if they state anything at all.

DPD in the 1st post.. topic moved to postal servs forum and title updated dx

Your latest ramblings make no sense in relation to the issue (which is whether a person hearing an SD can question the maker as to its truthfulness and reject the declaration if they are not satisfied as such). It's not within 21 days of the hearing it's within 21 days of learning of the conviction of which they were unaware. I don't know what it is you are reading or are referring to but there is no "debtor" involved in an SD that is made to have a conviction set aside. When an SD is heard in court the only officers involved are the court's Legal Advisor and the Magistrates themselves. I’ve just been looking

I (almost) give up !!!!!!!!!! My highlighted section does not say he cannot confirm the truth of the statement. It says (quite clearly) it is not his function to do so. In post #4 on the original thread at 21:17 last Friday you said this: It was that with which I took issue and it is that which led to this entire "debate". You gave the OP the impression that there is a possibility that her Statutory Declaration (your "initial part of the hearing") might be rejected and that it was incumbent on her to convince them that her "...story about not knowing about the missed hearing" was true. That is

Beware using the word "mitigating". That is only if you're admitting it and asking them to be lenient because x,y,z or whatever. You are not admitting it so there can't be anything to mitigate something you didn't do.

Apart from the time extension (beyond 21 days) the above is incorrect. Why do you restrict your argument to a Magistrate? An SD can be made before other people. Do they pass applications to a hearing to resolve any matters with which they find fault? You seem to be moving now towards errors and lack of correctness rather than whether the statement made in the declaration is true or false. So which is it? Of course if there are errors in the paperwork the court’s Legal Advisor will put them right before the matter is heard before Magistrates and if the declaration is before a solicitor or Commissioner for Oaths they will correct them. The issu

The points are that you believe that a person or court hearing a Statutory Declaration has the option of rejecting it if he or they believe it is untrue. You must presumably believe that the person or court has a duty to question (perhaps more properly, cross-examine) the person making the declaration. Y ou started by saying this about the declaration as a whole then went on to concentrate on the 21 day rule. I asked you to let us know how you have arrived at that conclusion. In particular I asked why you had provided specific advice to the OP in the original thread (a) that she was likely to be q

I am fully cognisant with the legislation, as is Man in the middle. You are wrong and repeating your wrong advice ad nauseum will not make it right.

Sorry, I've only just noted the above. I think you can do that in this thread without fear of the moderator's sword falling. Perhaps firstly you could explain how the court in this particular case will have reason to believe that the OP would not be telling the truth in her declaration. Then, I'm sure the OP would be interested in the legalities you describe (as would I). In particular perhaps you can point us to the legislation that determines that a person hearing a Statutory Declaration can reject it if they believe it is untrue. That way the OP can be properly prepared for that eventuality which you seem to believe has a good chance of oc

I'm not going to continually argue this point. The purpose of a court hearing a Statutory Declaration is to verify that it has been made, not to verify its truth. An SD is not an "application". It is a declaration and it can be made before a court, a solicitor or a Commissioner for Oaths. None of these would make any enquiries about the veracity of the declaration. It is not an inquisitorial or adversarial process and the person hearing the declaration does not have to be concerned with its truth (or otherwise). The applicant needs to bring no documentation to support their declaration and would not normally be questioned on it u

How would the court know it was in 21 days? As has been stated several times by Man in the middle, this is a Statutory Declaration, not a court hearing. The applicant takes an oath or affirms according to preference, that the application, including their first becoming aware of the prior hearing, in front of the Justices. The circumstances of why this comes about has absolutely no bearing on the SD. You do seem to be confusing an SD with a set aside order at the County Court where the judge would need to be satisfied that there is a good reason for the judgement to be set aside and also that there is a realistic prospe

We know of no such thing so please don't unnecessarily worry the OP. On the contrary what we do know is that the court has no discretion but to hear the Statutory Declaration provided it is made within 21 days of learning about the conviction (with which the OP will be compliant) and it has no power to "reject" it once it has been heard. It is simply witnessing the declaration as it is made. It has no authority to enquire into the veracity or otherwise of the declaration. The only discretion is has is whether to hear the SD if it is to be made outside the 21 days since learning of the conviction but if it is decided to hear it then it must be

Of course Freemen of the Land would suggest that the court has no jurisdiction to deal with these offences at all. I have witnessed FOTL in court and their philosophy has nothing to do with any of this. I'm suggesting nothing at all to do with FOTL and my advice is simply to follow the law and the usual processes which are seen every day in Magistrates' Courts throughout England and Wales. Quite why Dodgeball seeks to confuse the OP in such a way is a mystery.

there a search top right time to get reading up on the process and the different stages the claim will go through. these will help as well https://cse.google.com/cse?cx=partner-pub-8889411648654839:3134625398&q=lowell claimform cat debt&oq=lowell claimform cat debt&gs_l=partner-generic.3...60263.68186.0.68486.25.25.0.0.0.0.153.1988.24j1.25.0.gsnos%2Cn%3D13...0.7957j3166461j25...1.34.partner-generic..25.0.0.vvzYEQ3I7F0