Right, their NTK MUST contain certain information and phrases to create a keeper liability under the POFA and VCS dont even try and get this right so they can only claim from the driver at the time
now they are assuming that the defendant as the keeper is likely to be the driver but they are not allowed to make that assumption and it calls into question their right to access the keeper details because if they new the identity fo the driver they wouldnt need to look up the keeper details on the DVLA database.
However, this is a different battle but as they dotn know the identity of the driver and if they are relying on keeper laibility then (1) the amount of money they can ask for is limited to the amount on the NTK- no add ons) and (2) they have faild to show a cause for action against the defendant without showing strict proof of the identity of the driver at the time ( they waffle on about probability and irrelevant case law that has been rejected before every time it is challenged)
the point to drive home is that without the adhereence to EVERY part of the POFA and their trade association rules then they cant claim from anyone
as for their WS being a pack of lies.
i would advice against saying they are lying, just say it is factually incorrect as you cant prove intent despite the fact that they peddle the same lies in every claim they make so they know it isnt true.
judges in small claims courts have a lot of powers to maange their work and dispose of things hwo they see fit so by all menas ask for their WS to be chucked out if the person writing it doesnt attend but dont be surprised if it isnt, the judge wont want a rerun because VCS have appealed that they werent given a fair crack of the whip so it may be allowed to test the arguments (and then torm to shreds by the judges commentary if you are lucky) and see how you perform.
what they dotn want is for a decent claim to be beaten by a crappy defence on just a technicality which wouldnt exist of the matter had been dealt with "on the papers".
We advise against having a paper hearing because their lies dont get tested so dont be upset if you ahve to address things even in the absence of anyone from the other side ( I have had that, having to sell my side without anyone from CEL being present just to make sure justice was done- the judge explained a little about the law around some of the points I had made and told me what else I could have raised before he dismissed the claim on a number of points)
Thanks I'll add that. If you get a chance can you go point 2 and give me a hand with the POFA stuff. I've read up on it but I'm struggling to understand. I'm not sure how to make my point. To my mind I was never explicitly asked to name the driver and never declined to name them.
as they work for VCS then yes, ANY employee would be in the same position. If they workd for a firm of solicitors then they would have to have some involvement in the case before they are allowed to sign things off and attend.
A paralegal working for a solicitor for hire who pitched up on the day would have no right of audience.
just an update, I received a letter from Equifinance, all they have sent is an arrears statement from November2019 - Feb2020
No sign of the returned SAR and no acknowledgement of it.
They have until 5th March.
I haven’t had any contact with them since the payment of £3000, so I don’t know why they have sent an arrears statement.
Shocking pictures reveal ‘disgusting’ conditions inside Hermes depot where workers ‘feel like slaves’. Read more at https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/419726-shocking-pictures-reveal-%E2%80%98disgusting%E2%80%99-conditions-inside-hermes-depot-where-workers-%E2%80%98feel-like-slaves%E2%80%99/
Euro Car Parks issued this ticket to the police in Devon and Cornwall. Read more at https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/419522-can-anyone-identify-the-parking-company-which-issued-this-ticket-to-the-police-in-devon-and-cornwall/