Excel/BW Claimform - PCN dated 2011 Ebbw Vale, The Walk **CASE DISMISSED**

[Cutty Sark]

Had the same letter as you off bwlegal.

Submitting my outline defense this weekend.

 

(Jcbkabs)

Edited April 7, 2017 by Cutty Sark

[jcbkabs]

Had another letter to day telling me their client intends to continue

[Cutty Sark]

Did you get the documents requested back from them?

 

I'm quite looking forward to my day in court.

 

After all what have I got to lose?

 

In my case I cant find anywhere that says the registered keeper has to disclose who was driving no matter how many irrelevant legal cases they try to bamboozle me with.

[jcbkabs]

No not had any thing back and if they try and giving it to me at the court I'll refuse

[ericsbrother]

OK you can write to the court and ask that the claim be struck out under CPR 16.4 for failing to show a cause for action by way of "Strict Proof" that the defendant was driving at the time as there is no keeper liability.

 

Also, that Excel have no locus standi as the proper claimant would be VCS, a different company.

 

A request for the same as a CPR 31.14 request has gone unanswered so Excel have not only failed to show a cause for action but are abusing the civil procedure process.

 

Send this to either the court allocated or to the Northampton business centre address with your claim ref.

 

There are several scenarios of what may happen next so astrike out wont be automatic,

I had a similar thing and the claimants were ordered to attend a case management hearing and they had their claim summarily dismissed when they failed to show they were the lawful claimant.

[jcbkabs]

Can I submit a CPR16.4 online as not got much free time at moment wife's depression is back and she's been amited to hospital so she's my priority at present

[Cutty Sark]

Defense to be submitted:

 

I was not the driver on the date and time of the alleged event therefore no contract of any kind was undertaken by me.

This alleged event was prior to the Protection of Freedom Act so no keeper liability is possible or admitted.

 

What do you think?

I'm still waiting for Excel to provide bw legal with the info requested in my CPR request or so they said in their last letter to me.

[jcbkabs]

I had the same the a letter saying that their client intend to continue with the claim. I think it's a form of bullying and edging on fraud as they haven even proved the driver and they try to claim of the keeper even knowing that the keeper isn't the driver.

[dx100uk]

yes said this already

they are learning from the tactics of the likes of restons on consumer credit cases

threaten intimidate and divide.

 

 

ignore.

[dx100uk]

might have been better to state you are the registered keeper and not mention the word driver at all in that defence

[Cutty Sark]

Dx100k

 

Ok cheers.

I will delete the first line and just use the single next line:

 

I was the registered keeper but this alleged event was prior to the Protection of Freedom act so no keeper liability is possible or admitted.

 

Thanks

Edited April 9, 2017 by Cutty Sark

[dx100uk]

just check EB has not posted anything else in his posts here.

 

 

dx

[ericsbrother]

read through all the posts again.

 

Everything you need is here

but you need to decide what way to approach the matter.

 

As ther driver is deceased you can name them and as there is no keeper liability they are stuffed.

 

You can't pick words from one place and mix them with words from another.

That is why you screwed up the demand for strict proof and other statements,

the words mean something and you haven't taken the time to do your homework and read beyond your own thread.

 

You have a brilliant defence but if you angle it or don't bother submitting it properly you will destroy your own case without excel having to do any work themselves.

 

Now, write out what you want to say and we will edit it for you

but please read about things before you put words down so it is clear to us that on the day you know what you are on about rather than just repeating what you have read somewhere that isnt applicable

 

.It isnt that difficult but it is necessary

Edited April 10, 2017 by honeybee13
Paras.

[Cutty Sark]

Hello EB,

Loads of confusion here.

Jcbkabs has input some comments in this thread which are pertinent to his case which is in the same carpark but separate from mine.

I havent made any demands for strict proof of anything.

 

My simple entry of defence was as follows:

I was the registered keeper but the alleged event was prior to the Protection of Freedom Act so no keeper liability is possible or admitted.

 

I had to submit an outline defence by 4 pm today on the 10th or I would have received an automatic judgement against me.

 

It is my intention to fully explore this defence and explain the circumstances in the next stage where I have to submit a witness statement and supporting documents.

My outline defence made no mention of the driver as I was advised.

I have read other threads and this advise is common throughout as it will be up to the claimant to prove I was the driver. This will be impossible as I was not.

I hope this has cleared up the misunderstanding.

 

My next move I believe will be to write to the court and ask for the case to struck out as bwlegal/Excel have failed to comply with my CPR request made on the 23rd March.

I calculate the date to do this wil be tomorrow 11.4.17 as this allows for the 14 days quoted plus 5 days allowance for postal delays.

 

Thanks again for your time and patience.

Edited April 10, 2017 by Cutty Sark

[ericsbrother]

Yep, go for it.

 

As advised on many threads dont be surprised if you hear nothing from this because it may just get added to the case file and not get read until the day before the hearing

 

but having it down in writing will force the mater to be considered at the beginning of the hearing and it will certainly get up the nose of the judge that a solicitor issuing tens of thousands of these claims disobey the rules every time and then claims it is just a slip up

[Cutty Sark]

EB,

Letter written to Northampton court but holding onto it till you advise.

 

The car park owner currently is ESS-GEE Investments Ltd but they only registered the property with the Land Registry on 23/06/2016

I found this out by researching the owner of the car park as VCS was quoted but I think they are another EXCEL

type organization.

 

I am wondering who EXCEL are claiming on behalf of or with permission from who? For all I know the company that owned the car park back in 2011 is wound up.

I say this because I researched some of the Directors and other staff listed via Companies House website and found these people are listed in several other property holding companies some of which no longer exist.

 

To my way of thinking this further weakens EXCEL's claim but until they comply with the CPR request I cant possibly know who owned the car park in 2011 (unless I do some more research).

Interestingly, ESS-GEE list several people who have resigned plus the following people in position: a company secretary, a director, a property director and a CAMERA OPERATOR. He is also holding the same position in other property holding companies by the look of it.

 

Anyhow, I will send the strike out request to Northampton Court with the current land holders name and dig further when the time comes unless you advise otherwise.

 

Thank you.

Edited April 13, 2017 by Cutty Sark
for clarity.

[Cutty Sark]

Update 13.4.17

 

Letter received today from Northampton Court confirming receipt of my defence statement:

 

A copy is being served on the claimant.

They may contact me direct to attempt to resolve any dispute.

If the dispute cannot be resolved informally the claimant will inform the court that he wishes to proceed.

The court will then inform you (me) of what will happen.

Where he wishes to proceed the claimant must contact the court within 28 days after receiving a copy of your defence.

After that period has elapsed the claim will be stayed.

The only action the claimant can then take will be to apply to a judge for an order lifting the stay.

 

Content added to thead for information, especially anyone researching their own situation.

[ericsbrother]

let it run and keep all your other research handy. They know this is dead in the water but they may brazen it out until the last moment and then discontinue. Expect a few more begging letters in the interim.

[Cutty Sark]

Update 03/05/2017

 

Letter received from Northampton court:

 

Notice of Proposed Allocation to the Small Claims Court.

 

No to Mediation?

Copy to BWL without disclosure of my personal e-mail and telephone no?

 

These seem to be correct responses to the N180 form.

 

Is there an easy way to find a local court to input on the form as I don't want to travel all the way up to Northampton if I were to leave it blank?

 

I have to file the N180 with the court by 15 May 2017

 

Many thanks for the ongoing assistance.

[DragonFly1967]

It should be automatically allocated to your local civil justice centre, but to make doubly sure, Google your local/nearest one (or another one that is convenient for you) and pop that on the form.

[jcbkabs]

Not had anything since and no reply to my cpr31.14 request still

[dx100uk]

good that's just what you want.

 

 

dx

[ericsbrother]

you can request a court near to your place of work or another court if you have access problems at your local one.

Other than that it automatically gets sent to the defendants local court.

 

that forces Excel/BW to shell out money to attend but in reality they pay a gun for hire to show up instead.

 

Costs are limited

this normally means they are making a loss on the deal before they have said a word.

Sometimes the firm sends a paralegal along so it is worth challenging their right of audience.

 

You will need to read up on this and take a copy of the law along with you

but someone who isnt a solicitor cant speak unless their client is present.

 

A paralegalworking for a local firm falls foul of this regulation and BW/Gladdys often get caught out by being cheapskates.

 

When you do get notice of the allocation you can fire off a strike out request and a request for your costs as well.

 

This request will have nothing to do with land ownership and VCS could well have had a legitimate contract with the previous landowners

 

but you are not being sued by either of them and that is the point

[Cutty Sark]

Update 06/05/2017

 

Letter received today from BWLegal:

 

we enclose by way of service upon you a copy of the Directions Questionaire.

A copy has been filed at court.

 

On the reverse are instructions on how to pay 'my account' which I regard as totall tosh as I do not recognise my having an account with them.

I thought the court served the N180 on me anyhow not these people but that's a minor point.

 

They have ticked the box agreeing to mediation.

They have agreed the small claims track is appropriate

Entered No to asking the court's permission to use the written evidence of an expert

Entered TBC (To Be Confirmed?) for the 'how many witnesses, including yourself will give evidence at the hearing' question

And No for including a fee.

 

They have signed the document with a stamped 'BW Legal in both boxes within the document.

 

This is a description of how this claim is progressing for information.

Hopefully it will be of use to anyone researching their own situation.

Edited May 6, 2017 by Cutty Sark

[dx100uk]

willy waving technique to unsettle defendants that they've learn off lowells that they use on moneyclaims like credit card debts they've bought.

 

 

until yo get yours from the court its meaningless and you do nothing.