UKCPM/Gladstones PCN Claimform - Reflections - Old Church rd Romford Esx RM7 0BD **STRUCK OUT**

[Reapstar]

Hey guys,

 

I got this response from the Court with relation to me requesting that the WS be struck from the files.

 

Good morningMr. xxxx,

 

With reference to the above matter and your email below,

I can confirm that the District Judge has noted the contents of the same and directed that the hearing is to remain listed and will proceed tomorrow.

 

Kind regards,

 

Ms A. Toogood (really???) haha

Listing Section

Romford County Court

 

This was in response to :

 

Dear Sir/Madam,

 

With reference to the above Claim number.

 

I write to humbly request that the Claim be struck out due to the following fair reasons:

 

I wrote to the Claimant on 16/06/2018 via CPR 31.14 requesting information. As of the 11^th of December 2018 I am yet to receive a response.

 

I have also contacted the court asking if the claimant had delivered their Witness Statement, which I was informed they have, but I have not received a copy of it either.

 

I kindly request that their Witness Statement be struck from the files and that the claim be dismissed without a hearing to save Court time.

 

Thank you kindly for your assistance with this matter.

 

Yours Faithfully,

 

 

I just have the feeling I will lose tomorrow and be proved to yet again that there is no Justice system.

The Judge is aware that the claimant has failed to follow the courts instructions yet he still believes that the case is worth hearing??

 

I am aware that all cases are based upon commerce/contract rules and that if there is no contract there can be no case.

 

If things don't go my way and I am pushed into a corner,

I will have to request the claimant produce a lawfully binding contract that evidences my consent to agree to the terms and conditions,

but this cannot ever be provided because I have signed no such document.

 

I'm sure in order for a lawfully binding contract to exist,

there must be a wet ink signature below the area where the terms and conditions are available to be read and considered.

There must also be equal consideration and I am yet to find none.

 

How do you think that will go down?

 

If the judge asks me if I was the driver I am going to have to respond with "Am I obliged to answer that question" if he says yes,

I will be obliged to ask another question as such "under what law and what authority".

 

He will then utter some nonsense and I will be forced to ask if the law is a law or statutory legislation,

because failure to differentiate between the two is gross negligence and equivalent to fraud.

I just feel that if I go down that route the Judge will want to eat me for dinner...

 

All of this is giving me high blood pressure and making me ill

Edited December 13, 2018 by dx100uk
format

[dx100uk]

where are you getting this freeman of the land 'wet ink' twaddle from...NOT HERE. drop it!!

 

 

for all you know he could be getting them in court for a personal roasting NOT YOU.

 

dx

[Reapstar]

A wet ink signature evidences the meeting of minds, an elementary and fundamental aspect of forming a lawfully binding Agreement.

There has to be an offer, consideration, acceptance/declination and/or a counter offer involved and then mutual agreement and signage before it becomes binding. This is just obvious surely?? It's not freeman on the land stuff, its Law.

There is a big difference between Lawful and Legal, this cannot be disputed otherwise there would just be the one word "lawful" but there isn't, there's two. Legal only pertains to the fictional world of commerce, which upon investigation becomes rather evidential. Especially when you start looking up what words mean in Legalese. But anyway that isn't the topic of conversation here

I will take your optimism as comforting, let's just hope this Judge is a good Human being!!

Thank you all kindly for all of your help guys, you are a good bunch of people.

[dx100uk]

FMoTl twaddle reapster…

 

what you want sight of is the land owners signing up THIS YEAR to the ongoing scheme operated by UKPCM started in xxxx

there have been a few cases here and on prankster whereby the the contract was signed in 2015 say, but there was not one for 2018 that proved continuation of the contract.

 

YOU entering into whatever and supposedly wet ink signing is rather mythically clutching at straws, which you don't need too.

start going down that route and you'll lose any credibility the judge gives you immediately..

[Reapstar]

Yeah, I thought as much

 

What do you mean by this :

 

what you want sight of is the land owners signing up THIS YEAR to the ongoing scheme operated by UKPCM started in xxxx ??

[dx100uk]

Who has signed ukpcm to manage the car parking...is this current for 2018...have these people the rights to do this on behalf of the land owners..99% of the time the chain is not complete..current..nor lawful

 

Basic questions which were your main focus from post 1

[shamrocker]

Don't try to be clever in front of the judge. Be humble and respectful, no matter what you're asked or told. Get your arguments straight in your head and simply convey them to the judge. Don't mention 'justice', 'legal', etc....just state concisely why the claimant does not have any grounds to claim against YOU as the KEEPER.

 

Things to consider...

 

- Was any contract created with the driver in the first instance? If not, there are no monies owed by anybody. The sign I saw in the Google Street View looked 'forbidding' to me - therefore, no contract is created with 'unauthorised' persons.

- Is signage adequate? No signage at the entrance should be a strong enough argument.

- Do they rely on POFA in pursuing you for the debt? If not, they have no claim against you, but will probably try to make out that you were the driver. One problem - you weren't!

- If they're relying on POFA and have stated this in their WS, are they compliant? If not, no claim!

- Have they got planning permission for the signs?

- Have they got a got authority to manage the land and request monies that arise in the course of that activity? If not, they cannot pursue you as the keeper, because POFA required them to have authority. They may try to make out rubbish about "I can offer to sell you Buckingham Palace....etc", but that might wash if you were the driver, but POFA requires them to have the authority of the landowner.

 

Those are just the main points that come to mind. There will be others, no doubt. They're likely to trip up on at least one point - albeit, they will attempt to blag it. This is why it's so important to read and read and then read some more on this stuff so the arguments become clear.

 

P.S. A contract does not need to be physically signed. If you read up on the main aspects of this whole private parking subject, you would know that the signage plays a big part in forming a contract with the driver.

[shamrocker]

Also, don't forget that, IF they rely on POFA, and IF they comply, they can only chase you for the charge on the signs plus court fees. That should be your worst case scenario.

 

Finally, just to agree with what DX said, my immediate feeling was that the judge is letting this go ahead because the writing is already on the wall. It would be easier for the court to just have you come along as scheduled and hopefully then dismiss the claim. Saves the potential extra admin and possibility of having to argue with the claimant.

[Reapstar]

Hey Shamrock,

 

Thanks for the input

 

When you say this :

- Do they rely on POFA in pursuing you for the debt? If not, they have no claim against you, but will probably try to make out that you were the driver. One problem - you weren't!

 

I will be speaking on her behalf because she isn't really able or confident enough to do this on her own... The judge will ask me if I was the driver... what do I say if this happens??

[shamrocker]

 

I will be speaking on her behalf because she isn't really able or confident enough to do this on her own... The judge will ask me if I was the driver... what do I say if this happens??

 

The judge may not ask you who was driving, but you never admit to being the driver. Personally, I would simply say that "Respectfully Sir/Madam - I'm not willing to disclose the identity of the driver. The burden of proof is on the claimant to provide evidence of the driver's identity in support of their claim. They should have done that, but have failed to do so."

[Reapstar]

I read some other guy had said something along those lines and lost the case :-/

[shamrocker]

It's ultimately your choice. Say "definitely wasn't me, sir" then. The fact remains that it is their burden to provide proof of who the driver was. In any case, it's only relevant if they are not relying on POFA to pursue the keeper.

 

Before you get to who was driving, you have the important matter of establishing whether a contract was actually formed with the driver. Only then, and assuming there is no reliance on POFA, does the identity of the driver become properly relevant.

[Gick]

Whether you were the driver at the time of the incident is totally irrelevant. It is the registered keeper who is being sued, not you. The threads that you refer to above are different because the defendant prevaricated as he WAS the driver as well as keeper.

 

You are over thinking this, the hearing will be in the nature of a 'business meeting' around a table. You are only assisting the keeper/defendant, you are not Perry Mason.

[Reapstar]

Hi guys,

 

The result is in for the win!!

 

Their guy was a no show which was expected, the Judge was a very nice Man and struck out the case due to my mum never receiving the Claimants Witness statement. He was talking about something to do with CPR 27.9, although I'm not too sure but all in all, only lasted around 5 minutes.

 

Thank you all kindly for your assistance with this matter as I would have been stuck without you!!

 

I will be making a donation shortly

 

I did however forget to ask the Judge for expenses, is there a way to secure these after the case?? Cheers guys!!

[dx100uk]

always gonna be that way - well done

now help others please

 

thread title updated

 

dx

[ericsbrother]

you can ask the judge to consider a claim for expenses for their unreasonable behaviour under CPR 27.14.2(g).

There is less of a chance asking after the event so get a claim in now. You ask for 5 hours Litigant in Person research costs at £19 per hour, travel to court and any stationery and postage costs.

If you lost money for being absent from work then you claim that as well. state that you were not asked about your costs by the judge and therefor you request that this be allowed for that reason.

Get that sent by email and fax as they go to different people at court