Jump to content

Mrs O'Frog

Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Content Count

  • Avg. Content Per Day

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

147 Excellent

About Mrs O'Frog

  • Rank
    Basic Account Holder

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Well it's not a LBA, just a "we may advise" and/or "they may consider" letter. Personally I wouldn't bother to respond at this stage, I'd wait until the LBA then give them a very short, very rude response, pointing out how useless they are when they are supporting their client in their criminal business activities. Certainly don't stress and feel you have to put any sort of legal arguments together for BWL (Britain's Worst Losers). Hopefully EB will be along shortly and advise too.
  2. Ah - typo N244, apologies (in my defence that was at 2am m'lud!). (there is also a CC version of the N255, but that's for costs and not relevant here) Here are a couple of links relating to strike outs Michael. Note in one they say that badly worded applications mean that although people may get the claim struck out, they don't get summary judgement. As you can see your "expert" has not asked for judgement, just a strike out. Nor have they asked for costs, so dependent upon the wording of the court order for the set aside (hopefully mirroring the 5 point draft order that you submitted?), it could be bye-bye £255. https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part03/pd_part03a http://www.civillitigationbrief.com/2018/04/05/civil-procedure-back-to-basics-1-the-humble-application-wording-and-timing/ They have worded it defence AND request for claim to be struck out. 1) There is no defence there, just whinging about the claimant (point 4 especially - sounds like a petulant teenager) 2) The court might be miffed that you are trying to bypass proper procedure and take that as your defence, even though it contains nothing relevant. You need to submit a defence, not a witness statement. They are interested in the main points of law that you will be arguing. They don't care at this point who wrote what and when. By all means complain about their sparse particulars of claim and ask for leave to amend your defence if they provide full particulars at a later point. All the bits about why you got the default judgement, about them not bothering to write etc are all ancient history now and totally irrelevant. You got your set aside so that judgement has gone. View this as a completely new claim and forget the old one. Key - don't bore the judge and P them off with waffle. Show us what you have before time runs out. Yep - well spotted Andy (posts crossed )
  3. That was in the 5 point draft order that you attached with your form (didn't you??). What is the exact wording on the new order?
  4. If you search for "criminal compact" you should find a few threads covering it. Is this a LBA from BWL as I can't see the heading? If it ever gets to court then you would need to have more bullets in your gun than just the PP fail because judges can be unreliable. I think of them as football referees - hopefully they know the rules, hopefully they act impartially, hopefully they don't make too many howlers.
  5. Why are you writing a witness statement? You should be writing a defence. You are talking about them sending letters to the address on your driving licence. They never have access to that information. The important thing is what was the address that the VEHICLE was registered to? Have they sent the NTK to the address on the V5?
  6. I don't read that as them saying you have appealed to POPLA, just that they are giving you a POLPA code so that you can appeal if you wish, plus they've enclosed a generic "how to" letter from POPLA. No change to the advice from EB though.
  7. Post 12, 14th March told you to get an SAR off to DVLA pronto. Please tell me you already did this??? If so what did you ask and where did you send the request?
  8. The thing stuck on the windscreen is a NTD. There's no obligation for them to issue one at all, but this will affect when they can send the NTK. (The PCN you receive through the post is the NTK). If there is a NTD they MUST wait until day 29 then they MUST get the keeper details from DVLA and get the NTK delivered by day 56. If there is NOT a NTD they MUST get the keeper details from DVLA and get NTK delivered by day 14. Each and every single time, they MUST get the details from DVLA. Put your photos in a PDF document (multipage doc if you have several photos). Read the forum guide.
  9. Big gap in the POC though - They don't say why the defendant is responsible for the CN - driver? keeper? If they say "keeper" then why £160 not £100? They can't claim the £60 from the keeper, only the driver. Oh yes, forgot for a moment there - they are ASS - U - ME ing that the driver and keeper are one and the same. Well if I see simple Simon buying lingerie in Victoria's Secret I'll assume that's for him to wear. Also looks like they have not complied with PAP and sent a proper LBC. You'll need to go online and acknowledge but basically VCS will be very silly to proceed once they've seen your defence (draft here first please) and will get a good slapping if they do.
  10. Nonetheless, if their vehicle is parked where there is "no stopping" could that be viewed as a decoy vehicle? Hmmm?? Thoughts peeps?
  11. and get that info from DVLA urgently. UKPC aren't going to volunteer that sort of thing to you.
  12. POFA number? I think you might mean a POPLA code? As it's a lease vehicle they WILL fail to meet the requirements of POFA 2012 to be able to hold the keeper liable as they WILL NOT include the extra documents as per section 13 Here Never seen a PPC that gets section 13 right yet. Neanderthals, they can't walk and chew gum at the same time.
  13. Just - doing a double-take on dtaes here. You said you have until 24th to sbmit your defence - that's not your hearing date is it? If it is, read 10th as per EB's post.
  14. Actually Rincon, you need to be more vague than concise and to the point. The thing is you can elaborate on points later, but can't introduce new ones. For example - if you say there was no contract formed with the driver, you can later go on to say that's because the signs were not there, worded incorrectly, obscured, driver left without agreeing etc etc. On the other hand, if you say there was no contract formed with the driver because the signs were worded incorrectly, you can't then introduce the other arguments later on. At this point more is less. Don't be so precise that you paint yourself into a corner.
  • Create New...