Jump to content

JackD13

Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Posts

    79
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by JackD13

  1. @brassnecked Good shout, I will upload later today. @FTMDave So in the Allocation to Small Claim Track it had the date of my hearing on there already. I rang the court on Monday and confirmed that there is nothing I need to do other than turn up on the day. I will redact and upload later today. @lookinforinfo Appreciate you taking the time to look over this! Hopefully the Judge agrees!!!
  2. A little bit to update you on here. It appears as though Highview have decided to proceed with the small claims track hearing in early July so I have a couple of weeks to prepare. They have sent through a bundle of their documents and also court letters, but it doesn't display any contract as per the request of the courts representative during the dispute resolution hearing. I can upload upon request it will just take me a while as it contains lots of personal data. I've taken a look through the CAG site but couldn't really find much, is there anything I need to take to the hearing? Anything I should know that might be helpful on the day? Any tips welcome it's my first hearing so slightly nervous!
  3. Hi Both, I attended the dispute resolution hearing this morning. The matter was not resolved and has been referred to a final hearing. The courts representative went through both the witness statements and made some initial comments on the evidence. I have bullet pointed below: Claimant's Legal was questioned why the matter was taken this far as there was no keeper liability. They would need to prove this in front of a judge. Then I was asked if I was the driver to which I said no I wasn't. The court representative mentioned that simply stating that may not be enough in court and asked if anyone else was insured to drive the car. I said yes other people have been insure to drive the car in the past, such as friends and family members. I also mentioned that as it had been so long ago that i would find it hard to confirm who was driving. They then quizzed the Claimant's Legal that no evidence had been provided of a contract in place between Highview and the landowners and that stating one is in place wouldn't be enough. It was recommended that they provide evidence on this before the final hearing. The final hearing will be scheduled for 4 weeks from now at the earliest. It was advised that the contract be sent at least 14 days before the hearing date so it would give me time to add comment. They offered me a resolutions but I advised unless the claimant was willing to walk away from the case I wouldn't be accepting a reduce offer. Be interested to hear your thoughts on the above especially regarding point 2. Thanks!
  4. I have received a letter from DCB requesting i send them the details of the driver. They made it clear that I would be cross examined in court and if found to be lying i could be in contempt of court. Am i obliged to reply to this letter? How should i proceed?
  5. I will give the court a ring tomorrow and just confirm they have received my witness statement along with my contact number
  6. Thank you both for looking at this in your time. @FTMDave I have sent it to their Legal team [email protected] Unsure if this needs forwarding on to a Highview Parking email address.
  7. I hope to send this by the end of the night, this is what I have. Any thing to add before I send the final version? Do I just include the Legal Team and the court? I can't find the email address for Highview Parking. Note: The numbering is off below as i have removed the section that contains PID. 1. Background 2.1 Defendant received the Parking Charge Notice (PCN) on the 1st of November 2022 following the vehicle being parked at Urban Exchange, M4 on the 22nd of August 2022 which is 71 days after the alleged contravention. The PCN (Exhibit 1, Page clearly states the Date of Notice was the 27th of October which is 66 days after the event. This contradicts Point 8 of their witness statement where it is explained the Issue date was the 22nd of August 2022, this is incorrect. 2. Contract 3.1 No Locus Standi, I do not believe a contract exists with the landowner that gives Highview a right to bring claims in their own name, no contract has been produced either after my CPR request or in the Claimants Witness Statement (a letter saying a contract exists is not the same thing as producing a contract). Definition of “Relevant contract” From PoFA (Protection of Freedoms Act) 2 [1] means a contract Including a contract arising only when the vehicle was parked on the relevant land between the driver and a person who is- (a) the owner or occupier of the land; or (b) Authorised, under or by virtue of arrangements made by the owner or occupier of the land, to enter into a contract with the driver requiring the payment of parking charges in respect of the parking of the vehicle on the land. According to https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2006/46/section/44 For a contract to be valid, it requires a director from each company to sign and then two independent witnesses must confirm those signatures. The fact that no contract has been produced with the witness signatures present means the contract has not been validly executed. Therefore, there can be no contract established between Highway Parking and the motorist. Even if “1 Hour Free Parking” could form a contract (which it cannot), it is immaterial. There is no valid contract. 3.2 As stipulated in Exhibit 1 (Pages 13-18) sent by DCB Legal following the defendants CPR request the signage displayed in their evidence clearly shows 1 hour 30 minutes. The defendant puts it to the claimant a request for strict proof when the signage changed to 1 hour as the DCB Legal’s letter stipulated 1 hour 30 minutes was indeed the time permitted at the time defendant parked and included as a letter in Exhibit 1. 3. Illegal Conduct – No Contract Formed 4.1 At the time of writing, the Claimant has failed to provide the following, either in response to the CPR request from myself, or in their Witness Statement. 4.2 The legal contract between the Claimant and the landowner (which in this case is Town Centre Securities) to provide evidence that there is an agreement in place with landowner with the necessary authority to issue parking charge notices and to pursue payment by means of litigation. The Claimant has produced a one page “Witness Statement” Exhibit 1(Page 7), but this does not seem to be a contract. It certainly does not give them permission to litigate on behalf of the Town Centre Securities. 4.3 Proof of planning permission granted for signage etc under the Town and country Planning Act 1990. Lack of planning permission is a criminal offence under this Act and no contract can be formed where criminality is involved. 4.4 I also do not believe the claimant possesses these documents. 4. Unfair PCN 5.1 The PCN provided as part of the Claimants Witness Statement does not establish what the defendant was being charged for. This de facto removes any chance for the defendant to appeal as there is no explanation for the charge. 5.2 This also applies to the subsequent PCNs dated on the 13/11/2017 and 30/11/2017. 5.3 The Claimant did not respect PAPLOC and never sent a Letter Before Claim. 5.4 It is also unfair to delay litigation for so long and claim nearly five years' interest. 5. No Keeper Liability 6.1 The defendant was not the driver at the time and date mentioned in the PCN and the claimant has not established keeper liability under schedule 4 of the PoFA 2012. In this matter, the defendant puts it to the claimant to produce strict proof as to who was driving at the time. 6.2 The claimant did not send the PCN in sufficient time according to the POFA 2012. The defendant received the PCN on the 1st of November 2017 which is 71 days after the contravention. The PCN clearly states it did not get posted until the 27th of October which is 66 days after the event. Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 The notice must be given by- (a) handing it to the keeper, or leaving it at a current address for service for the keeper, within the relevant period; or (b) sending it by post to a current address for service for the keeper so that it is delivered to that address within the relevant period. (5) The relevant period for the purposes of sub-paragraph (4) is the period of 14 days beginning with the day after that on which the specified period of parking ended. 6.3 At the time of receiving the PCN the defendant telephoned the Supermarket and Gym, both said that they are unable to do anything about it retrospectively. 6.4 When the defendant requested evidence from DCB Legal I received Exhibit 1(Pages 13-18). This illustrates signage that there was 1 hour 30 minutes of free parking accompanied along side this was the PCN’s that were sent, explaining the duration of the drivers stay was 1 hour 16 minutes. 14 minutes within the free parking time permitted. 6. No Breach of Contract 7.1 When the defendant left the car park, they felt they had respected the signage and the PCN did not state what the defendant had done wrong. 7.2 Highview's solicitors' reply to the CPR request shows signage indicating a limit of 1 hour 30 minutes free parking which the defendant respected, suddenly after nearly five years Highview have ambushed the defendant with a new story that there was only one-hour free parking. 7. Double Recovery 8.1 As well as the original £95 parking charge and £50 allowed court/legal costs, the Claimant seeks recovery of an additional £70. 8.2 PoFA Schedule 4, paragraph 4(5) states that “the maximum sum which may be recovered from the keeper is the amount specified in the notice to keeper”. Which in this case is £95. 8.3 The Parking (Code of Practice) Act 2019 is also quite clear that the maximum amount recoverable is £100. Government ministers and government web pages explaining the Act refer to extra charges as "a rip off". 8.4 Unless the Claimant can clearly demonstrate how these alleged additional costs have been incurred this would appear to be an attempt at double recovery. 8.5 Previous parking charge cases have found that the parking charge itself is at a level to include the costs of recovery i.e. Parking Eye Ltd vs Beavis (2015) UKSC 67 which is the authority for recovery of the parking charge itself and no more, since the sum £85 was held to already incorporate the costs of an automated private parking business model and the Supreme Court Judges held that a parking firm not in possession cannot plead any part of their case in damages. It is indisputable that an alleged “parking charge” penalty is a sum which the Supreme Court found is already inflated to more than comfortably cover all costs. The case provides a finding of fact by way of precedent, that the £85 (or up to a Trade Body ceiling of £100 depending on the parking firm) covers the costs of all the letters. Since 2019, many County Courts have considered claims in excess of £100 to be an abuse of process leading to them being struck out ab initio. An example, in the Caernarfon Court in VCS v Davies, case No. FTQZ4W28 on 4th September 2019, District Judge Jones-Evans stated “Upon it being recorded that District Judge Jones- Evans has over a very significant period of time warned advocates (...) in many cases of this nature before this court that their claim for £60 is unenforceable in law and is an abuse of process and is nothing more than a poor attempt to go behind the decision of the Supreme Court V Beavis which inter alia decided that a figure of £160 as a global sum claimed in this case would be a penalty and not a genuine pre-estimate of loss and therefore unenforceable in law and if the practise continued, he would treat all cases as a claim for £160 and therefore a penalty and unenforceable in law it is hereby declared (...) the claim is struck out and declared to be wholly without merit and an abuse of process.” 8.6 In Claim numbers F0DP806M and F0DP201T, Britannia vs Crosby the courts went further in a landmark judgement in November 2019 which followed several parking charge claims being struck out in the area overseen by His Honour Judge Iain Hamilton-Douglas Hughes GC, the Designated Civil Judge for Dorset, Hampshire, Isle of Wight & Wiltshire. District Judge Taylor echoed earlier General Judgement or Orders of District Judge Grand, stating “It is ordered that the claim is struck out as an abuse of process. The claim contains a substantial charge additional to the parking charge which it is alleged the Defendant contracted to pay. This additional charge is not recoverable under the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012, Schedule 4 nor with reference to the judgement in Parking Eye v Beavis. It is an abuse of process from the Claimant to issue a knowingly inflated claim for a addi8onal sum which it is not entitled to recover. This order has been made by the court of its own initiative without a hearing pursuant to CPR Rule 3.3(4) of the Civil Procedure Rules 1998. 8.7 The addition of costs not previously specified on signage are also in breach of the Consumer Rights Act 2015, Schedule 2, specifically paras 6, 10 and 14. 8.8 It is the Defendant’s position that the Claimant in this case has knowingly submitted inflated costs and thus the entire claim should be similarly struck out in accordance with Civil Procedure Rule 3.3(4). 8.9 The Defendant is of the view that the Claimant knew, or should have known, that to claim in excess of £100 for a parking charge on private lands is disallowed under the CPRs, the Beavis case, the PoFA AND THE CRA 2015, and that relief from sanctions should be refused. 8. In Conclusion 9.1 I believe the Claimant has got use to intimidation tactics and has got greedy. I believe the truth of the manor is the Claimant has used bullying tactics successfully for too long and is therefore assured that innocent drivers will fall into the trap of paying rather than going through the hours it takes to defend themselves. In the process, wasting the time of the Court, the time of the Defendant and everyone else who has advised the Defendant, out of sheer decency to help have a fair hearing and see justice delivered. 9.2 I am still in disbelief that I am being heard in this court, defending myself nearly 5 years after receiving a charge through my door. I have had to spend weeks’ worth of my life studying the letter of the law in order to defend myself from this ridiculous attempt at a swindle. 9.3 I believe that the facts stated in this witness statement are true. I understand that proceedings for contempt of court may be brought against anyone who makes, or causes to be made, a false statement in a document verified by a statement of truth without an honest belief in its truth.
  8. Thank you both! It's a relief to hear that I'm getting close to the finish line. I will update my witness statement today and repost in due course. Thanks again for your help so far!
  9. I agree I am cutting it fine. I have most of the day tomorrow to work on this so hopefully I can get it close to a place to being finished. If not I will let the court know I need an extra day to provide the witness statement. I am going to have another read of Justice143's post as I still need to add the double recovery and no breach of contract. Here's what I have so far. I will look to spend another couple of hours on this tonight. Appreciate the help so far!! Witness Statement of XXXXX Introduction 1. I, XXXXXX am the Defendant in this claim. I represent myself as a in-person, with no formal legal training. Everything in the following statement is true to the best of my knowledge and belief. 2. In my statement I shall refer to exhibits within the evidence section supplied in this bundle, referring to page and reference numbers where appropriate. 3. I was the registered keeper of the vehicle: XXXXXXX 4. Background Defendant received the Parking Charge Notice (PCN) on the 1st November 2022 following the vehicle being parked at Urben Exchange, M4 on the 22nd August 2022 which is 71 days after the contravention. The PCN (Exhibit 1 ) clearly states the Date of Notice was the 27th October which is 66 days after the event. This contradicts Point 8 of their witness statement where it is explained the Issue date was the 22nd August 2022, this is incorrect. 5. Contract 5.1 No Locus Standi, I do not believe a contract exists with the landowner that gives Highview a right to bring claims in their own name, no contract has been produced either after my CPR request or in the Claimants Witness Statement (a letter saying a contract exists is not the same thing as producing a contract). Definition of “Relevant contract” From PoFA 2 [1] means a contract Including a contract arising only when the vehicle was parked on the relevant land between the driver and a person who is- (a) the owner or occupier of the land; or (b) Authorised, under or by virtue of arrangements made by the owner or occupier of the land, to enter into a contract with the driver requiring the payment of parking charges in respect of the parking of the vehicle on the land. According to https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2006/46/section/44 For a contract to be valid, it requires a director from each company to sign and then two independent witnesses must confirm those signatures. The fact that no contract has been produced with the witness signatures present means the contract has not been validly executed. Therefore, there can be no contract established between Highway Parking and the motorist. Even if “1 Hour Free Parking” could form a contract (which it cannot), it is immaterial. There is no valid contract. 5.2 As stipulated in Exhibit 2 sent by DCB Legal following the defendants CPR request the signage displayed in their evidence clearly shows 1 hour 30 minutes. The defendant puts it to the claimant a request for strict proof when the signage changed to 1 hour as the DCB Legal’s letter stipulated 1 hour 30 minutes was indeed the time permitted at the time defendant parked and included the letter as a letter in Exhibit 2.[JD3] 6. Illegal Conduct – No Contract Formed 6.1 At the time of writing, the Claimant has failed to provide the following, either in response to the CPR request from myself, or in their Witness Statement. 6.2 The legal contract between the Claimant and the landowner (which in this case is Town Centre Securities) to provide evidence that there is an agreement in place with landowner with the necessary authority to issue parking charge notices and to pursue payment by means of litigation. The Claimant has produced a one page “Witness Statement” Exhibit 3 but this does not seem to be a contract. It certainly does not give them permission to litigate on behalf of the Town Centre Securities. 6.3 Proof of planning permission granted for signage etc under the Town and country Planning Act 1990. Lack of planning permission is a criminal offence under this Act and no contract can be formed where criminality is involved. 6.4 I also do not believe the claimant possesses these documents. 7. Unfair PCN 7.1 The PCN provided as part of the Claimant's Witness Statement does not establish what the defendant was being charged for. This de facto removes any chance for the defendant to appeal as there is no explanation for the charge. 7.2 This also applied to the subsequent reminder letters on the 13/11/2017 and 30/11/2017. 7.3 The Claimant did not respect PAPLOC and never sent me a Letter Before Claim. 7.4 It is also unreasonable to delay litigation for so long and claim nearly five years' interest. 8. No Keeper Liability 8.1 The defendant was not the driver at the time and date mentioned in the PCN and the claimant has not established keeper liability under schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012. In this matter, the defendant puts it to the claimant to produce strict proof as to who was driving at the time. 8.2 The claimant did not send the PCN in sufficient time according to the POFA 2012. The defendant received the PCN on the 1st November 2017 which is 71 days after the contravention. The PCN clearly states it did not get posted until the 27th October which is 66 days after the event. Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 The notice must be given by- (a) handing it to the keeper, or leaving it at a current address for service for the keeper, within the relevant period; or (b) sending it by post to a current address for service for the keeper so that it is delivered to that address within the relevant period. (5) The relevant period for the purposes of sub-paragraph (4) is the period of 14 days beginning with the day after that on which the specified period of parking ended. 8.3 At the time of receiving the PCN the defendant telephoned the Supermarket and Gym, both said that they are unable to do anything about it retrospectively. 8.4 When I requested evidence from DCB Legal I received Exhibit 4(Exhibit 4). This illustrates signage that there was 1 hour 30 minutes of free parking accompanied along side this was the NTK’s that were sent, explaining the duration of the drivers stay was 1 hour 16 minutes. 14 minutes within the free parking time permitted. 9 I believe that the facts stated in this witness statement are true.
  10. Thank you both for getting back to me! I'm pretty confident I can put this into words and get the updated witness statement back on here. With the hearing date set for the 20th, does this need to be sent by EoD today or can it be sent on the 6th?
  11. Hi All, See below a first draft of my witness statement. I leant on Justice143's post so some points may need refining/removing. I have inserted comments in red below. Is there anything else that I might need to include? Appreciate the help! Witness Statement 1. The facts from this statement come from my personal knowledge except where I have indicated otherwise. Where the facts are within my knowledge, they are true. Where they are not within my knowledge they are true to the best of my information and belief. 2. I have included a pack of evidence with this statement. 3. The claimant has failed to show a cause for action by NOT responding to a CPR 31.14 request for documents and I think the claim should be summarily dismissed under CPR 16.4(4) This was included in the post by Justice143 unsure whether this applied to me? They did respond to an evidence request should, should I take this point out? 4. The defendant was not the driver at the time and the claimant does not rely upon the Protection of Freedoms act (POFA) 2012 to create a keeper liability in this matter so the defendant puts it to strict proof as to who was driving at the time. 5. The claimant has not complied with the IPC code of practice in one instance by not adhering to the POFA 2012 amongst other errors. See evidence Is there any evidence of this in the WS? (Members of the IPC who issue parking charges within the private parking sector are required to subscribe to the AOS and adhere to this Code which defines the core standards necessary to ensure transparency and fairness. The Code complements the existing laws concerning parking enforcement on private land. It is designed to enhance the conduct and culpability of members in order to increase consumer confidence and raise standards within the industry. It remains the duty of the operator to appraise themselves with any legal provisions concerning their operations and to adhere to them. In particular, operators should have a sound working knowledge of the following areas: · The Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (for operations in England and Wales) · Contract - with particular reference to unfair contract terms. · Tort – In relation to trespass. · Occupiers Liability – both in statute and tort. · Data Protection · Consumer Protection and Disability Discrimination) 6. The POFA 2012 (Copy supplied) is the relevant law in respect of transferring liability to the keeper in the event of a legitimate parking charge. The claimant, in their submissions, accepts that the defendant was not the driver[JD1] , and confirms that they do not rely on POFA 2012 as the basis of holding the keeper liable. In the defendant's view, not only is this fatal to the claimant's case, but is likely a breach of GDPR with potential damages due. In any event, the defendant is confused about the relevance of the 'law of agency' which the claimant relies solely upon for creating keeper liability - particularly as they have not supported it's relevance and suggested application within their submissions. This was included in the post by Justice143 unsure whether this applied to me? They did respond to an evidence request should, should I take this point out? 7. The claimant did not send the Notice to Keeper (NTK) in sufficient time according to the POFA 2012. The defendant received the NTK on the 1st November 2022 which is 71 days after the contravention. The NTK clearly states it did not get posted until the 27th October which is 66 days after the event. Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 The notice must be given by- (a) handing it to the keeper, or leaving it at a current address for service for the keeper, within the relevant period; or (b) sending it by post to a current address for service for the keeper so that it is delivered to that address within the relevant period. (5) The relevant period for the purposes of sub-paragraph (4) is the period of 14 days beginning with the day after that on which the specified period of parking ended. 8. The contract for parking states it is for customers only and so patrons of the retail park can never be offered the terms without the certainty that they will be breached, the signage represents an unfair contract under s62 of the Consumer Rights Act 2015 Consumer rights act 2015 Section 62 Requirement for contract terms and notices to be fair (1) An unfair term of a consumer contract is not binding on the consumer. (2) An unfair consumer notice is not binding on the consumer. (3) This does not prevent the consumer from relying on the term or notice if the consumer chooses to do so. (4) A term is unfair if, contrary to the requirement of good faith, it causes a significant imbalance in the parties’ rights and obligations under the contract to the detriment of the consumer. (5) Whether a term is fair is to be determined— (a) taking into account the nature of the subject matter of the contract, and (b) by reference to all the circumstances existing when the term was agreed and to all of the other terms of the contract or of any other contract on which it depends. (6) A notice is unfair if, contrary to the requirement of good faith, it causes a significant imbalance in the parties’ rights and obligations to the detriment of the consumer. (7) Whether a notice is fair is to be determined— (a) taking into account the nature of the subject matter of the notice, and (b) by reference to all the circumstances existing when the rights or obligations to which it relates arose and to the terms of any contract on which it depends. 9. At the time of receiving the NTK the defendant telephoned the Supermarket and Gym, both said that they are unable to do anything about it retrospectively. 10. When I requested evidence from DCB Legal I received Exhibit 1(Exhibit 1 will be the Hearing.pdf). This illustrates signage that there was 1 hour 30 minutes of free parking accompanied along side this was the NTK’s that were sent, explaining the duration of the drivers stay was 1 hour 16 minutes. 14 minutes within the free parking time permitted. 11. I believe that the facts stated in this witness statement are true. [JD1]
  12. @FTMDave Thank you so much! I am part way through reading this thread which is a great help. I will keep reading other posts and wait for your reply!
  13. Got a response to my evidence request... I have attached the .pdf to this Reply. One thing that immediately stands out to me is that the duration of my stay was 1 hour 16 minutes and the sign states that free parking is permitted for 1hr 30 mins for customers. This seems so obvious that I am doubting if I have misinterpreted something? I will begin writing my witness statement this afternoon. It's the first time I have written one, what sort of detail should I write in there? Will the judge be interested in hearing my reasons for parking there etc? Or should I just focus on the legal aspect of why the parking charge isn't correct? I have provided the court with a telephone number to reach me on. It states on the hearing.pdf that they must receive my evidence no later than 14days before the hearing. The hearing is scheduled for the 20th does this mean that they need to receive my witness statement by the 6th? What other things would be good to included with my witness statement? I have just received a witness statement from Yvette Yates (an employee of Highview) I will read through this and pdf and upload later this afternoon. A slightly lengthier witness to digest. It looks as though they have conveniently moved the goalposts to fit the time with the signage. In this witness statement it say 1 hour free parking where as the evidence they have set out previously contradicts this as 1hr 30 mins of free parking. I am looking at conveying this in my witness statement along with the first pcn falling outside of the allowed times scale. I will look to draft my witness statement and post here. Any help or pointers would be greatly appreciated! Claimants WS .pdf
  14. I have had the "Notice of Dispute Resolution Hearing" letter attached to the "General Form of Judgement or Order" delivered. It explains the date of the hearing will be the third week of April by Telephone and that I need to provide witness statements and evidence. I will reach out to the court by email in order to give them a direct dial telephone number for them to reach me on. I know you mentioned in a previous message that i would ideally need their witness statement. How do I arrange this? Thanks!!!
  15. I have received the Notice of Transfer of Proceedings explaining that it has now been transferred to the county court for allocation. I am still awaiting the notice of allocation. I assume that it is now likely I will need to attend court and therefore make a defence case. Any help on this or templates would be much appreciated! @dx100uk I will use the advance search box in order to find previous examples but if you have any to hand please kindly post them on this thread for user who may be able to use in the future!
  16. Thanks dx got that from the information Andyorch sent. Will send before the weekend and keep you updated.
  17. @Andyorch Thanks for you response - I will fill out the form following the instructions you have provided. @dx100uk I am not seeing all these threads you mentioned with the N180 replys, the very closes one I have found is the below but this has no N180 reply on it:
  18. I have now been sent the Notice of Proposed Allocation to the Small Claims Track. I have been directed to fill out a Directions questionnaire. They have also explained that both parties should make every effort to settle their case without having to go to a hearing. There is an option on the form in section A1 "Do you agree to this case being referred to the Small Claims Mediation Service?" Should this be something should explore? Section C1 "Do you agree that the small claims tack is the appropriate track for this case?" I'm assuming this would be yes? I have taken a look through the forums to find similar situations but I am unable to find any that have gone this far? Any advice on next steps would be much appreciated!
  19. I have received a letter from Highview's solicitor explaining that they intend to proceed with the claim after reviewing the defence. They have also offered to settle the case within the next 7 days.
  20. I just followed the instruction and advice from the below post that you sent through previous: This was the defence template, should this not have been done? Apologies for the confusion, as you probably have already noticed this isn't my area of expertise. I have no knowledge of 3-5 pcn defence. I am soley reliant on your guidance so your patience is appreciated.
  21. Hi, Just a quick question before i submit the defence. Point 1 would be " The Defendant contends that the particulars of the claim are vague and generic in nature which fails to comply with CPR 16.4. The Defendant accordingly sets out its case below and relies on CPR r 16.5 (3) in relation to any particular allegation to which a specific response has not been made. 1. The Defendant is the recorded keeper of [car]." I was just wondering if this is my admission that i was driving the vehicle? I just want to be clear incase it gets queried further down the line.
  22. I was unable to find the Q&A sticky that you referenced. Could you kindly provide a link so i am sure i am in the correct area? Thanks!
  23. Hi Dx, Thank you for your guidance so far! I have sent CPR Letter to their solicitors. I have been taking a read through some of the examples DragonFly has put up earlier in the thread which where fairly helpful. This one was the most relevant I believe as it has an appeal to POPLA: One question - Should I approach the county court in the same way that DF has wrote to POPLA? I am going to continue reading through the forum and hope to submit a defence tonight. Any help would be appreciated!
×
×
  • Create New...