Thanks another user . Yeah I did feel like a bit of a fish out of water it is so intimidating and you feel absolutely terrified to question a thing the judge says. I think somebody better qualified than me could have made the point better. I don't know. She just seemed obsessed with that aspect of the signage

Hi All sorry for not getting back sooner. The judge was referring to the signage, and the part of referring to a £100 charge if something is not declared within 28 days. I cant remember specifically as I've binned all the paperwork now. In my defence I said to the judge but I didn't have to declare as per POFA, I had no obligation to do this, as this would compromise my name. I also said I did respond to them on the matter at the PAPLOC stage. She wasn't interested though as her mind was made up about 1 particular aspect of this signage, and that was that. She was well aware of Di Minimus, but she obviously felt this matter was more important to her. Im sorry I can remember specific wording of signage, but it is exactly that she decided the case would be judged on

Crackers isnt it! It really took my breath away tbh. Is there anyway this can be explained or appealed?

Thanks everyone for all your help, but unfortunately my case was dismissed. This is the 2nd time I've had this happen now so I doubt ill be taking on any parking firms in future sadly. The judge said I lost it on the grounds that the sign said I had 28 days to declare who the owner of the vehicle was, and said I should have complied with this. My costs are Judgment for the claimant £133.33 Issue fee Hearing fee Solicitors costs - total £265 grand total £398.33 Do those costs look about right? Im sure I only paid c.£250 last time so these figures seem highly inflated!

Thanks Nicky Ill ignore

just had this email received today… We thank you for your recent email. We take the confidentiality of our matters very seriously and as a result, we ask you to answer the following security questions in full before we can correspond with you via email. Please could you confirm: Your full name First line of your address Postcode By responding to this email, you consent for us to use this email address for communication in relation to your case, this may contain information that is personal to you. When communicating by email, please remember that it may be ‘unsecure’. If at any time, you no longer wish for your personal information to be communicated by email, or you no longer have access to this mailbox, please notify us immediately. Should you prefer to discuss this matter on the telephone, please do not hesitate to contact us on 0203 434 0437. Kind Regards, Alex Keogh Case Manager DCB Legal Ltd

Thanks Dave all thanks to yourself and the rest of the team. It's nice to have a bit ammunition on the day when I get. my chance to speak.

I Have emailed sorry, do you think I can make a minor amendment and resend? Or will I be able to use as ammunition on the day? Thanks for that input its much appreciated

Thanks all. I think I might need to have this emailed over quite shortly now, just to make sure the court receives my email ok.

Thanks all. Ill try and get rest sent over. Yeah that para 20 was the one that got me, the sheer arrogance of it there is a Parkonomy receipt also showing the car I drove with the wrong reg had not been paid for Claimants WS Exhibits.pdf

Thanks Dave

Hi Dave It is sorry yes. I've missed a couple of pages out with personal info, but that is the bulk of it. No not yet just thought I'd send this over quickly before I sent mine across asap

Part of their WS Claimants WS (part of).pdf

Hi Dave, thanks for getting back to me, and helping tidy up again. It really is appreciated as always. Yes it does appear to be a a more concise summary now, which as you say, I'm sure the judges much prefer to having to sift through reams of paper. I'll make those respective changes, along with the remaining tidying up of the document, then sit tight now before my submission date.

Time to refresh my memory and start to focus on my ws again. I believe it needs to be be submitted by 27th March, and a lot of this time between now and then I'll be working. If you're able to review my 2nd draft it would be appreciated as always. Defendants WS 2ndt draft.pdf

Thanks Dave, that’s reassuring to know. I’ve also been meaning to get back that my case has been moved to 10th April. But I’ve been so busy I haven’t had chance. This why I knew Feb was a bad idea I’m so glad they could shift it, the next date should be much better all being well.

Thanks all for your fantastic advice, I've already go too work on the amendments. Just to be sure tho will I still be ok to include the letters, even if they both draw attention to the 'house move'?

Thanks lookingforinfo, much appreciated. I will look into the costs to see how much I need to quote if it comes to it. Most of this has been advised by the good people of this website such as yourself so I can't take any credit for this. I hope its ok, and I will continue to tidy up.

Good evening all, would this wash as a first draft... Defendants WS 1st draft.pdf

Thanks all really appreciate that ands sorry again for the confusion. Better late than never from my point of view! Thats all understood then and I will remove any references to different addresses from my statement and not reference that particular letter. Still loads of other useful information as always that has also come about from todays correspondence which I can put to good use, thanks

Thanks Brassnecked. Is that clause something that needs to concern me?

Yes that is right, officially always at same address. (Tho I am residing at a temporary residence the last few weeks due to divorce!)

Thanks Dave and sorry again if I've confused anyone

Thanks DX No the reg was for the household 2nd car. It was just I gave Parkology one reg, and drove there in another. But both belonged to the same house. Im sorry if I've caused confusion.

Thanks Dave I feel really daft here as I'm still a bit confused sorry. I think I just assumed this as a hypothetical thing so never thought any more of it, but actually I don't think I fully understand