Jump to content

jazzhands111

Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Posts

    32
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Reputation

0 Neutral

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. Thanks for the advice RE: delaying. I've submitted a request to the court and we'll see what they say. If things go as I expect then it will probably be a January hearing. If not then I can always buy some satellite internet data which wouldn't be governed by the Ugandan equivalent of OfCom and therefore cannot be remotely shut off.
  2. There is very spotty internet where I'm going and unreliable. I have a business in Uganda that requires some attention and due to the recent terrorist attacks the government are shutting down the internet there temporarily. Is that actually the case in regards to nobody being able to present the case on my behalf given that Link Parking are not representing themselves? I'll have to look into it more.
  3. @FTMDave yeh they all got through. Hiccup with the one to the solicitor I got an out of office auto reply and was told to send to a different email if I'm sending court related stuff. UPDATE: The hearing came and went. Nothing major to report as it was adjourned to the first available date within 28 days. The judge seemed reasonable and so did the solicitor on the other side in allowing my Witness Statement and evidence to stand. The solicitor claimed to have seen my WS this morning which was a flat out lie as I sent the court proof of delivery (email sent receipts) along with my apology. The judge made a "no costs order" for the hearing and went on to explain because I was slightly late with my response it could be argued that I was acting unreasonably. However she then also said that the Solicitors lying about not having received anything when there is undeniable proof in front of her is also unreasonable and therefore there was no charge for this hearing. The judge explained that my initial response upon receiving a summons (the brief defence) was TOO brief and that the purpose of that response is to raise my WS points in brief and then expand upon them later. As I only said about there not being a contract and therefore no liability (I think my full response was on one of the first pages in this thread), however my WS brought up a whole lot more. I replied that what she was saying was not the advice I received at the time and figured it was the best thing to do given that this is my first and only experience with a courtroom, she seemed to understand that as I am not familiar with procedure and accepted it. The judge has pointed out that a decision will probably be made based on my Supremacy of Contract ( starting at para 11 of my WS) arguments and that the Claimant will have time to file a response to that in an updated witness statement addressing those concerns specifically. What should I be prepared for here while I wait to see how they argue against it? Also I may need to apply for an advocate for the next hearing as I was planning on being out of the country at some point in the near future, how do I do this? There is somebody I know is also very familiar with this case and so could step in if need be. Cheers
  4. Unfortunately I was called into work so haven't had a chance to reply, but I was making notes to add to my case throughout the day. @FTMDaveI made the changes you suggested. I'm not sure which other case you are referring to for supremacy of contract? The article only mentions the one case which was quoted. I will post/email at or around 1pm tomorrow (certainly before 2pm) to give anyone else who might have some input some time. Do you suggest emailing my WS to the fleecers rather than posting given the shorter time frame or is it one of those situations where it does not matter when I hand this to them as long as I do so. @lookinforinfo When I first opened the post I think I made reference to the fact that no time frame was specified, but didn't receive a response from anyone saying that might be ok to use. I have now added it to the WS. Attached a 3rd draft with amendments, note that some paragraph numbers have been altered as I've chopped and changed. notes: forget about the postage thing, had a read of CPR, I need to present to them within 7 days of court so if I post it tomorrow I should be fine. added the following to 13.1 after i redacted personal info to the draft i uploaded. Not sure if relevant but I suppose it can't hurt my case. I'll remove it under advice. Consumer Contracts Regulations 2013 (Regulation 41) and rules of the regulator Ofcom also require all costs associated with premium rate telephone numbers to be displayed: “Help-line charges over basic rate 41. (1) Where a trader operates a telephone line for the purpose of consumers contacting the trader by telephone in relation to contracts entered into with the trader, a consumer contacting the trader must not be bound to pay more than the basic rate. (2) If in those circumstances a consumer who contacts a trader in relation to a contract is bound to pay more than the basic rate, the contract is to be treated as providing for the trader to pay to the consumer any amount by which the charge paid by the consumer for the call is more than the basic rate.” wir draft 3 redacted.pdf
  5. Thanks Dave, if you were to get a chance tomorrow, do you know when roughly it would be? Just so I know when to check and not aimlessly, F5'ing all day. If not don't worry i'll check it every hour or so from when I wake up. Made those changes you suggested and had a quick look through again for similar mistakes. Again I really appreciate this, was feeling so low the other day when I opened the thread back up but this has genuinely perked me back up. So thank you.
  6. Thanks for your input @FTMDave, I've been working on it in my breaks today and will attach a 2nd draft I know it's late but you're not busy I hope you can have a look tonight so I can make any revisions before the morning. This thing has consumed my entire day it's all I've been thinking about that I'm surprised I got any real work done lol. I'll probably be awake until around 4am to where I can instant reply following that I'm available all day tomorrow (day off) for any potential revisions. A few notes here: In terms of Locus Standi as far as I can tell the contract from their evidence package between the landowner and operator give them to right to issue PCN's on behalf of the landowner, this is specifically stated in their contract so I can't see a way around that. I can't see anything else wrong with the NtK in relation to PoFa (I read through the relevant details during my lunch break which I believe are in schedule 4 para 8-9) and checked the NtK and surprisingly, in my opinion, seems to be fully compliant. Which car the ticket relates to - The registration plate is mentioned What land the car was parked on - location where the car was parked is mentioned The period the car was parked - The issuing time and date of the ticket are mentioned Advise that the driver is liable for the parking charge and the amount and that it has not been paid in full - There is a whole paragraph dedicated to this State whether a notice to the driver was given either to the driver or placed on the vehicle and if so to repeat the information in that notice about paying the parking charge and when - The reason has been reiterated, verbatim from the initial windscreen ticket Specify the outstanding amount of the parking charge and of the maximum additional costs they may seek to recover, and of the dispute resolution arrangements - Amount is stated Invite the registered keeper to pay the outstanding parking charge or, if he was not the driver, to provide the name and address of the driver and to pass a copy of the notice on to that driver - There is a whole paragraph dedicated to this Identify the “creditor” who is legally entitled to recover the parking charge - There is a line that states "We, The Creditor" as well as contact information for Link on the overleaf Warn the keeper that if the parking charges remains outstanding after 28 days and the name and address of the driver has not been given, or otherwise known to the person entitled to the parking charge, that “creditor” will be entitled to recover the parking charge from the registered keeper. - This is mentioned Details of the discount for payment within 14 days, The Discount should be at least 40% of the full charge under the BPA Code of Practice (applies to BPA Members only) - No Discount offered, they want the full £100 for each ticket Date of the notice - This is mentioned I could be wrong though. In regards to that I have omitted the keeper liability part you suggested given that I can't argue strongly enough that they haven't done enough to identify the driver with the NtK. In regards to post 20 in this thread, the sign does display the necessary information that was outlined by LFI however I couldn't find any planning details for the address in question. I have added to the WS as well as the evidence package the search query directly from the Councils public records. Added Alaska101's case law that was mentioned. Edited relevant bits but it's more or less the same in principle. Thoughts? Cheers again for taking the time to help me, I'm defo gonna make good on my earlier promise of a donation if I can get through this. The forum has been a god send. wit draft 2 redacted.pdf
  7. @brassnecked the evidence that they have submitted (in the attached pdf) shows the new contract with First Port active as of 28/9/15. @FTMDave I haven't seen a deadline mentioned anywhere in the paperwork I've received over the past year or so, though I suspect the same as you from what I've read about it. Typically 2 weeks is the cut off, the wording in the last letter from the court was "within a reasonable timeframe". In terms of a a drafted witness statement I have one outlined, but wasn't sure if I needed to respond to any of the stuff in theirs so was waiting for some feedback on their witness statement from some experts here before I post a 1st draft to be looked at. Sorry for double post, it won't let me edit my previous comment. I've attached a 1st draft copy of my WS, admittedly I'm not the best at articulating things which is why I'm here looking for help. I don't really know what legal bits to include to help my case. I've omitted the evidence package as it would take a really long time to remove all identifiable information but it's all outlined as to exactly what I intend to use to prove some innocence. Is there anything I need to remove from that, or can I build from there? I don't really know what case law applies and like @FTMDave my brain is currently fried and its now half 5 in the morning. I've been reading other witness statements and a few of them pursue the angle of defending as the keeper given that the driver wasn't identified. Is that something I should consider? This thing has been weighing on me for over a year now and I just want to be done with it. Also i'm not really sure how this phone hearing is meant to go, I've not received anything that tells me what number to call or what to do on the day. The only bit of information I was given was the date and the time and an email address to submit my phone number to at least 1 day before the hearing. ws draft.pdf
  8. Thanks @brassnecked I also just spoke to my cousin on the phone about the property management company. Apparently they did change in September 2015, but signs from the previous company regarding parking are still up to this day. No mention of first port anywhere on the notice board inside the building. He didn't move in until September 2019 (he rents) nowhere in the tenancy agreement does it mention parking restrictions at all. So when I went to visit I took it on good faith that Cambray were still in charge given the signage. He didn't know any different either as it's not mentioned in the tenancy agreement. I feel like I've been very reasonable in my assessment to park there, as any logical person would have done given the circumstances. But facing all of this now I feel like I'm going to lose because I got this detail wrong about who was in charge of the land at the time. confidence has taken a huge hit.
  9. Update: I received their evidence pack and witness statement in the post today. It was dated 21/10/21 but I guess there was some sort of delay as I received a lot of post today. It has been scanned, redacted and attached (will have to attach part 2 in the next post due to size limitations). So looks like I'm heading to court on the 23rd Nov (BT conference not in person). What's my response here? My cousin says that "Cambray Property Management" were the ones in charge at the time, and their defence refers to "First Port". In fact the sign in the lobby regarding parking rules was from Cambray Property management, nowhere is First Port mentioned. I have also learned that link parking is no longer in charge of parking enforcement due to issues, however I believe that's probably irrelevant as they were in charge at the time. My only pieces of evidence are: 1. The note in the lobby saying genuine visitors are allowed to park on site. 2. I can get a google maps image of the set of bays marked "V", presumably for "Visitor". 3. I can use the pictures that they took of my car in a bay marked "V". 4. I have the tenancy agreement which makes no mention of parking whatsoever at all (though my cousin does have a permit for his own car). There's quite a bit of legalese that I don't understand in their response particularly the case law. Any help would be much appreciated so I can hopefully post this off tomorrow at some point. Thanks Part 2 of pdf attached here Claimants WS.pdf
  10. UPDATE: Received a letter from the court and a hearing has been set for late November via telephone (it's a shame because I was hoping to get a court experience). The claimant has still yet to file a court fee and has until late October to do so. So it looks like I'll see you guys nearer the date provided they go ahead and pay the fee! Thanks for all your help up to this point.
  11. So there is no need to respond, even to their request of evidence I intend to rely on at this stage?
  12. Update: Since my last post I've received a letter from the court indicating my case has been allocated and is awaiting a date from the judge. today I received a letter from BW Legal saying if I pay within 21 days they'll drop the case. I'm assuming that this is just final scare tactic before court? On the letter they state their clients position refuting my defence with the wording "PARKING IN THIS AREA IS PERMITTED FOR: VEHICLE DISPLAYING A VALID PARKING PERMIT AND PARKED IN THE CORRECT ALLOCATED BAY. " They go on to mention some case law (Vehicle Control Services Limited v Alfred Charles Crutchley [2017]). They also go on to say "if you intend to rely on any evidence which would provide you an unfettered right to park in the Car Park outside of the terms and conditions, please provide evidence of the same within 14 days of the date of this letter". Am I obliged to provide that information before getting a court date? The rest of the letter is pictures of my car and copies of the ticket, NTK and my website appeal. It should also be noted that on some of the pictures it appears as though it's just an image file that hasn't loaded properly and in its place it just has "IMG_xxxxxx.jpeg". Attached is a censored copy of the letter. Is this something I just ignore or do I need to respond? Cheers parking_compressed .pdf
  13. UPDATE: So I received a letter from the court acknowledging the defence, it wasn't particularly noteworthy just a boiler plate so didn't make a post about it. Today however I've received a letter dated 01/01/21 from the court and they appear to have allocated it to the small claims track. They have attached form N180 (Directions questionnaire) which needs to be sent back before 18/02/21. Along with this they have sent out some paperwork regarding mediation. I'm guessing we are passed the stage of mediation considering I've already voiced my concerns to both the Claimant and their Solicitor which they have rejected so I should just mark that box as "no" right? It should also be noted that the 14 day period to return my CPR 31 request has also lapsed and I haven't received anything. So just looking for some clarification, at this stage just return the N180 ASAP and then wait again for something to show up? On the cover letter it has some notices I'll type them verbatim here. Take notice that: 1. This is now a defended claim. The defendant has filed a defence, a copy of which is enclosed. (side note no copy was enclosed of my defence) 2. It appears that this case is suitable for allocation to the small claims track. If you believe that this track is not the appropriate track for the claim, you must complete box C1 on the Small Claims Directions Questionnaire (Form N180) and explain why. 3. You must by 18 February 2021 complete the Small Claims Directions Questionnaire (Form N180) and file it with the court office: the County Court Business Centre, 4th Floor St Katherine's House, 21-27 St Katherine's Street, Northampton, NN1 2LH and serve copies on all other parties. For point number 3 does that mean I have to send a copy of this form to both Link Parking and BW legal or just BW legal? Does filing it with the court office just mean sending it back in the post or something else? Just asking for clarification as @dx100uksuggested I was making too many errors and I want to avoid doing that from now on as it's a serious legal matter. Cheers
  14. Spent some time reading through threads, is there a global thread that has a list of the acronyms used? I'm finding some of the language confusing.
  15. Ok, so I've submitted my brief defence and just been to the post office to send the CPR. Is the ball now in their court and I'm waiting for a reply via MCOL or is there something else I should be doing? Cheers
×
×
  • Create New...