VCS CCTV PCN Claimform - no stopping - Access Road to Pontefract Race Course, WF8 4PR***Claim Struck Out***

[pinkabvelvet]

Hi Ericsbrother,

 

Ok I will continue to wait - i have had my N180 form and returned it to Northampton & VCS on 7th May (due date was 20th May).

My WS is pretty much sorted - I just need to tidy up all the exhibits etc. I won't print any copies off anything off just yet! I'll be using a heck of a lot of ink & paper so don't want to cut down any trees until I know for certain I have to.

[ericsbrother]

my local court has a 1 month backlog just to open and read correspondence so 6 months to get to the hearing is not unusual. Needless to say, VCS wont want to hurry this up and will hope that you suddenly start to have misgivings about not believing them when they told you the earth was flat

Edited June 3, 2019 by ericsbrother

[pinkabvelvet]

Ok thanks Ericsbrother - i’ll keep waiting. When I filled my form in I gave them my availability but hopefully my schedule doesn’t change.

I am sure this is yet another one of their tactics to wear me down in hopes that I pay up! 

[ericsbrother]

I have just got an email resposne thanking me for my emaila dn they will get abck to me. The email I sent was on the 15th April so that gives you an idea of how behind some courts are.

Yes, it all falls in their favour as they hope you start to get twitchy

[pinkabvelvet]

Hi ericsbrother - thank you  

I actually received a letter from Northampton BC today and they said the same thing as the information I found on the MCOL website. Waiting to hear from my local court now. Watch this space... 

[pinkabvelvet]

Hello everyone! 

 

Just received a letter this morning from my county court :

 

It is ordered that:

1. The particulars of claim are insufficient to establish a case of action against the defendant and are therefore struck out pursuant to part 3.4CPR.

 

 

 

[brassnecked]

Great stuff, perhaps the Courts are getting fed up of Parking Cowboy chancers and their dodgy RoboClaims., when a good defence is submitted that blows them out of the water One would hope so.

[pinkabvelvet]

Thank you

 I worked hard on the witness statement as well - but I am glad I don’t have to go the anymore rigmarole! 

[AndyOrch]

Well done pink...thread title updated.

 

Andy

[dx100uk]

cause of action surely.??

 

[pinkabvelvet]

Hi DX,

I copied it word for word - they must have been so keen to type my letter up and put and end to it that they didn’t bother to give it a second glance! 

[dx100uk]

The Claimant's claim is for the sum of £160 being monies due from the Defendant to the Claimant in respect of a charge notice (CN) for a contravention on 25/09/2018 at Access Road to Pontefract Race Course Phase 2. The CN relates to a Citroen xxx under the registration xxx.

 

The terms of the CN allowed the Defendant 28 days from the Issue Date to pay the CN, but the Defendant failed to do so.

 

Despite demand having been made the Defendant has failed to settle their outstanding liability.

 

The Claimant seeks recovery of the CN and interest under section 69 of the County Courts Act 1984 at the rate of 8% at the same rate up to the date of Judgement or earlier payment.

 

so this could be interesting times

 

the court are quite correct.

the POC doesnt actually say WHAT contravention you 'broke' to get the speculative invoice.

[ericsbrother]

great result for you and bloody hell, someone read the paperwork in advance.

as Dx syas they have cribbed Gladdys lazy roboclaim and failed to show a cause for action. someone has decided it has no liklihood of getting anywhere so they have put the poor thing out of its misery

[brassnecked]

Hopefully this is the start of the Courts chucking out claims without a cause to ground the claim, and using an  unspecified contravention as grounds.

[pinkabvelvet]

Good news to get on a Friday, nice way to start the weekend.

 

Thanks for all of your help, support & advice! 

[ericsbrother]

can you do us a favour?

Can you post up the claim reference so it reads like this.

 

VCS v Ms A  whatever County Court (name court) date of order and the claim ref number that will be something like 123AB456

We can then quote it as being persuasive without actually naming you.

 

It is important and although other claims have been chucked out for being vague etc yours gives a consise reason as to what is rubbish.

 

Judges see things differently and interpret things according th their experience but they all love a precedent as it gives consistency and makes it less likely they get challenged for a bad decision.

[brassnecked]

Thanks EB, that information is great if it can be applied as a case in someone else's defence. it makes the PPC's use of RoboClaim vague POC more difficult for them.  Any relavent Caselaw is persuasive.

 

[pinkabvelvet]

Sure EB

 

VCS v Miss A (did you want my surname?)

Initial Date of Issue from County Court Business Centre: 05/04/2019

Claim Ref No: XXXXXXX

Wakefield County Court

 

I have the name of the Judge who struck out the case too if you would like that also?

 

[brassnecked]

The judges name would be useful for sure

 

[ericsbrother]

yes please so we can see their rank, ie DDJ, DJ, HHJ etc

 

Your case will help Geocyper no end for starters

[pinkabvelvet]

VCS v Miss A 

Initial Date of Issue from County Court Business Centre: 05/04/2019

Claim Ref No: XXXXXXXX

Wakefield County Court

District Judge James 

 

[AndyOrch]

Claim number removed to protect your identity.

 

Claims in County Courts do not set precedent and this being struck out under CPR 3.4 hardly amounts to a judgment.

CPR 3.4 covers a wide range of reasons as to why the court struck out the statement of case it could be for not complying with directions...IE returning their DQ.

(a) that the statement of case discloses no reasonable grounds for bringing or defending the claim;

(b) that the statement of case is an abuse of the court’s process or is otherwise likely to obstruct the just disposal of the proceedings; or

(c) that there has been a failure to comply with a rule, practice direction or court order.

 

Andy

 

[ericsbrother]

it can be taken as being presuasive and in any case is now a public record so posting it here can do no harm and will help others.

If it was without merit or an abuse then identical claims may well be considered  likewise.