Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I've inserted their poc re:your.. 1 ..they did send 2 paploc's  3. neither the agreement nor default is mentioned in their 2.        
    • Hi Guys, i read a fair few threads and saw a lot of similar templates being used. i liked this one below and although i could elaborate on certain things (they ignored my CCA and sent 2 PAPs etc etc) , am i right in that at this stage keep it short? If thats the case i cant see what i need to add/change about this one   1)   the defendant entered into a consumer credit act 1974 regulated agreements vanquis under account reference xxxxxxx 2)   The defendant failed to maintain the required payment, arrears began to accrue 3)   The agreement was later assigned to the claimant on 29 September 2017 and notice given to the defendant 4)   Despite repeated requests for payment, the sum of 2247.91 remains due outstanding And the claimant claims a)The said sum of £2247.91 b)The interest pursuant to S 69 county courts act 1984 at the rate of 8% per annum from the date of issue, accruing at a daily rate of £xxxx, but limited to one year,  being £xxxx c)Costs   Defence:   The Defendant contends that the particulars of claim vague and are generic in nature. The Defendant accordingly sets out its case below and relies on CPR r 16.5 (3) in relation to any particular allegation to which a specific response has not been made.   1. The Claimant has not complied with paragraph 3 of the PAPDC ( Pre Action Protocol) Failed to serve a letter of claim pre claim pursuant to PAPDC changes of the 1st October 2017.It is respectfully requested that the court take this into consideration pursuant to 7.1 PAPDC.   2. The Claimant claims £2247.91 is owed under a regulated consumer credit account under reference xxxxxxx. I do not recall the precise details or agreement and have sought verification from the claimant and the claimants solicitor by way of a CPR 31.14 and section 78 request who are yet to fully comply.   3. Paragraph 2 is denied. I am unable to recall the precise details of the alleged agreement or any default notice served in breach of any defaulted payments. 4. Paragraph 3 is denied.The Defendant contends that no notice of assignment pursuant to s.136 of the Law of Property Act & s.82 A of the CCA1974 has ever been served by the Claimant as alleged or at all.   5. It is therefore denied with regards to the Defendant owing any monies to the Claimant, the Claimant has failed to provide any evidence of assignment/balance/breach requested by CPR 31. 14, therefore the Claimant is put to strict proof to:   (a) show how the Defendant has entered into an agreement; and (b) show and evidence any cause of action and service of a Default Notice or termination notice; and © show how the Defendant has reached the amount claimed for; and (d) show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim;   6. After receiving this claim I requested by way of a CPR 31.14 request and a section 78 request for copies of any documents referred to within the Claimants' particulars to establish what the claim is for. To date they have failed to comply to my CPR 31.14 request and also my section 78 request and remain in default with regards to this request.   7. As per Civil Procedure Rule 16.5(4), it is expected that the Claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed.   8. On the alternative, as the Claimant is an assignee of a debt, it is denied that the Claimant has the right to lay a claim due to contraventions of Section 136 of the Law of Property Act and Section 82A of the consumer credit Act 1974.   9. By reasons of the facts and matters set out above, it is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief.  
    • i understand. Just be aware I am prepared to take some risks 😉
    • Thanks Tnook,   Bear with us while we discuss this behind the scenes - we want you to win just as much as you do but we want to find the right balance between maximising your claim without risking too much in court fees, and in possible court costs awarded to the defendant bank.
    • Tell your son and think on this. He can pay the £160  and have no further worries from them. If he read POFA  Scedule 4 he would find out that if he went to Court and lost which is unlikely on two counts at least [1] they don't do Court and 2] they know they would lose in Court] the most he would be liable to pay them is £100 or whatever the amount on the sign says. He is not liable for the admin charges as that only applies to the driver-perhaps.If he kept his nerve, he would find out that he does not owe them a penny and that applies to the driver as well. But we do need to see the signage at the entrance to the car park and around the car park as well as any T&Cs on the payment meter if there is one. He alone has to work out whether it is worth taking a few photographs to help avoid paying a single penny to these crooks as well as receiving letters threatening him with Court , bailiffs  etc trying to scare him into paying money he does not owe. They know they cannot take him to Court. They know he does not owe them a penny. But they are hoping he does not know so he pays them. If he does decide to pay, tell him to wait as eventually as a last throw of the dice they play Mister Nice Guy and offer a reduction. Great. Whatever he pays them it will be far more than he owes as their original PCN is worthless. Read other threads where our members have been ticketed for not having a permit. [We know so little about the situation that we do not know if he has a permit and forgot to display it. ]
  • Our picks

kouri123

Found points on my licence i knew nothing about.

Recommended Posts

Brief description ,

I went away on holiday in October 2019

came back to the letter attached.

States that I was speeding in December 2018 

(I was actually out of the country on the date too).

 

It says that I may not have received original correspondence, so they are sending the SJPN again for me to fill in.

 

I filled the form in explaining that I was out of the country at the time and had no idea of this offence until October 2019.

I could not hand on heart say who was driving at the time as it could have been 3 or 4 family members who had access to the car and when asking them they also said they were not sure who if any of them it would have been.

 

a month has gone since sending this form back

have had no response from the court.

 

Whilst in work I was requested to do a DAVIS check on my licence and then it came up with me being given 6 points back in April and failing to name the driver.

 

This now means I have given my insurance company mis leading information saying I have no points ,

my other big problem is that even though the police said they sent the courts the information and I have been found guilty of the offence in my absence I have had no communication from the courts saying I was being given points or fined (which I would imagine I would be).

 

The car in question was registered to me at my current address, there is no confusion of moving addresses in this time.

 

I have heard stories of bailiffs turning up regarding matters like this and have a good credit history I don't want destroyed.

 

Do I need to get a solicitor involved in this and if I win the case can I claim the costs back ???

 

 

police letter.pdf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm a bit confused.

 

You say your licence shows six points from April (2019?) for the offence of failing to identify the driver.  But the letter from the police dated 7 October 2019 is offering you the chance to plead again via SJPN?  What offence does that letter relate to?  I'm assuming it was the failure to identify as it's far too late to try to prosecute for the speeding, but you've already received the six points for failing to identify ie been convicted in your absence.

 

When did you first learn that you'd been convicted?  From that date you have 21 (I think) days to do a "Statutory Declaration" stating that you did not know of the proceedings against you.  You need to swear this declaration on oath either in court or at a solicitors.  The effect of the declaration is to cancel your conviction and then they'll (probably) start proceedings against you again for failure to identify.  AIUI the court has discretion to accept a declaration after 21 days, but they don't have to.

 

It's possible that you were not involved in the original speeding offence, but if they sent you a s.172 request you needed to respond either identifying the driver or explaining why you are not involved.  Do you know why you didn't receive a 172 request to name the driver?  Have you a history of mail not being delivered to you?

 

Also, do you know why the police think you may not have received the original documentation?  Have you been in contact with them and told them this?

 

It all seems a bit strange to me.

 

I think you need to wait for the poster Man in the Middle to read this thread as he's more knowledgeable than me in these matters.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The 1st I knew about any offence was in October 2019 and believe the letter from police was saying that they believe I did not receive the 1st one sent out.

 

I was not in the country on date of offence which was December 5th 2018, if I had received ANY communication regarding the offence at the time I would probably been able to narrow down who was driving.

 

i have had no other communication of this offence other than this letter saying I should either lead guilty or send the forms to the court pleading not guilty which. Have about 4 weeks ago but had no reply.

 

The latest SJPN sent on 07/10/2019 states as charges on it

1) speeding

2)fail to give information relating to the identification of the driver.

 

It states I have 21 days to plead guilty or not guilty to these charges.

 

I have sent back within that time frame saying not guilty and explained this letter is 1st time I have known of this offence.

 

I still am waiting for a response, but will ring them today and update on here

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, there's no explanation why the first you heard of this was October this year.  Your V5C is uptodate with the correct address and there've been no changes of address etc?  (NB - changing your licence's address does not change the V5C address).

 

1.  I think you've done the right thing by pleading not guilty to both offences (but see next paragraph).  It'll then drop out of the SJPN process and go to court.  On the day at court, you seek out the traffic offence prosecutor and offer to plead guilty to the speeding if (and only if) they drop the failure to identify charge.  (The failure to identify is a more serious charge than the speeding).

 

AIUI, that is what usually happens.  Two complicating factors for you are (a) if you know you couldn't have been driving for the original speeding offence, you may well be committing a more serious criminal offence by pleading guilty to it.  You really need to be able to identify the driver from last December.  (b) there might be an issue around whether the speeding charge has been brought against you in time.  But as their October letter is asking you to plead in respect of it, I assume it must(?) have been.

 

2.  I do not understand why on earth the police have written to you at all.  According to your driving licence you've already been convicted of failing to identify and been given six points.  Have you not received any notification of a fine or had the bailiffs chasing you?  Having been convicted, I'm surprised the police should be so compassionate as to give you a second chance.  Why do they think you've not received original documentation?  Who has told them?

 

What would worry me is if the original conviction still stands and your window for doing a statutory declaration (21 days) is dwindling, or has dwindled, away....

 

You could try 'phoning the police and ask whether the original conviction still stands, and if it does, why are they asking you to plead again if you've already been convicted?  I can't see that you lose anything by doing that, but others may advise differently.

 

It all seems very odd to me.  You may be well advised to speak to a solicitor.  I'll see if I can get some other posters to respond as well.

 

***  Are you sure that the conviction and points already on your licence relate to the same offence the police are now asking you to plead on?  Could they be different?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Like Manxman, I find this very mysterious.

 

First of all, let’s work on the assumption that only one allegation of speeding is involved.

 

If that was on 5th December, let’s say that a Notice of Intended Prosecution (NIP) and an accompanying request to name the driver (a “S172 notice) was sent within a week, say by 12th.

 

This would have been deemed served on you on Friday 14th.

You would have until January 11th to respond.

If you didn’t it is about right that court action would be initiated some time in March

(most areas send a reminder and they usually give the Registered Keeper another couple of weeks to respond).

 

So it seems quite likely that the conviction you have seen on your licence stems from that allegation and that it was heard in court in April.

 

As far as the police are concerned that matter is done and dusted.

 

You failed to respond to their request,

they prosecuted you for that failure and you were convicted and sentenced.

 

I imagine you owe the court £881.

That would be a fine of £660 (1.5 weeks’ net income based on a default figure of £440pw), £66 “Victim Surcharge” and £85 prosecution costs.

 

I’m surprised no attempt has been made to recover that sum from you.

 

But now it gets puzzling.

It seems that somebody has prompted the police to write to you.

 

I’ve no idea why that should be and I think you would be well advised to find out why they have sent the 7th October letter to you.

 

But it gets worse.

It now seems, from what you say, that they are prosecuting you again for an offence for which you have already been convicted and sentenced!

 

Is that correct, or are the SJ papers you have been sent simply a copy of those which you did not receive for the April hearing?

 

If indeed they do intend prosecuting you again you should tread carefully.

 

As Manxman suggests, you may have been able to do a “deal” to get the S172 charge dropped in return for pleading guilty to speeding. But you cannot do that as you are sure you were not the driver.

 

I think you need to find out:

(1) Why did they send you the 7th October letter? What makes them believe you were not in receipt of the earlier paperwork?

 

(2) Why are they apparently prosecuting you again for an offence for which you have already been convicted and sentenced (if indeed that is what they are doing)?

 

There is quite a bit of correspondence which takes place between being detected allegedly speeding and a court case.

 

It seems very odd that you received none of this but you did get the 7th October letter.

 

If you do engage a solicitor it will cost you a tidy sum and you are unlikely to be awarded all of your costs (you may not be awarded any at all, depending on the outcome).

 

I would make those enquiries as a matter of urgency before anything else.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^^^  What Man in the middle says.

 

A further complication re any possible "plea bargain" is that it must be too late now to name the driver from last December because it'll be too late to prosecute them*. 

 

That means that the only prospect they have of a conviction is to prosecute you for the failure to identify - the speeding is dead in the water.

 

  I believe your only defence would be to prove that you never received the NIP/request to name the driver, but it is extremely difficult to get courts to accept this defence otherwise everybody would use it. 

 

The police will have evidence that the NIP/request was sent out on such and such a date and it is legally presumed to have been delivered two days later, unless you can prove otherwise.

 

MITM hasn't mentioned a statutory declaration, but I presume he thinks you need to find out if the April conviction still stands first.  But don't forget about it - you may need it.

 

*They only have six months from the date of the offence to initiate proceedings against the nominated driver

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Insurance

 

Just realised this has not been addressed.

 

Presumably you didn't know about the conviction when you renewed so answered honestly no points etc?

 

Check T&Cs to see what you have to tell them.  May not be clear cut.  You need to find out if the original conviction stands.  Can you contact the court that convicted you and ask?  If you contact the police about the October letter, ask them.

 

Insurance can be tricky.  (Don't want to scare you but there's a post on Money Saving Expert where somebody failed to declare points and had their insurance voided).  You need to get this right.  I would post on the insurance board.  Say you've already posted here about the conviction, and that you only want advice about what to tell your insurer.  Point out you've got a conviction and points on your licence that you didn't know about when renewing, and you're not sure if the conviction still stands anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Too late to edit my previous post, but the problem you have is that the conviction and points are still showing against your licence.  Or I presume they still are.  You need to get this resolved one way or another before your insurer becomes aware of them.  Don't have any accidents before you do!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes there is a way to have your earlier conviction made void. But it would be a good idea to find out the answer to the two questions I posed in my earlier post.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi all

          I spoke to the courts earlier today

 

they advised me that the points placed on my licence were removed in October 2019, and that a court date is set for November 26th.

 

Guess what ???

I had not been given that info either.

 

The courts were very helpful and explained to me that everything had been sent to my previous address (which I have not lived in or owned for 5 years)

 

The car in question was registered in March 2016 and I have owned since new and has never been registered to my old address.

I have proof of this down to the point of not taxing the car March 2017 as the car was zero tax I did not realise I still had to go online and tax it, the summons for that was sent to my current home address. 

 

it is very strange that the police directed everything to my previous address.

 

i then contacted the police on the number given by the courts and was told to forward proof I was out of country at time of offence for them to look at, the police officer was very understanding and quite helpful giving the information.

 

I have to e mail her tomorrow and will give an update when I know more as this previous address thing is really confusing !!!

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That sounds promising.

 

If I were you I'd check my licence online to confirm that the points and conviction have disappeared.  That's re your insurance.

 

Keep an eye on the court date of 26 November.  If they accept you were out of the country you should be ok for the speeding, but you may still be open to a failure to identify prosecution - it depends why you didn't receive the original NIP.

 

You may be contacted by the police to say both charges have been dropped and that the earlier convictions have been cancelled.  I'd want this in writing.  Keep chasing them, but if you don't hear any more, I'd make sure I was at court on the 26th.  You don't want to be in convicted in your absence again because of some admin. cockup.  Make sure the failure to identify is dropped.

 

Make sure you have copies of all correspondence and a note of 'phone calls just in case your insurers have any queries about this - it's a very unusual situation.  (Whether you should be informing them about all this, I simply don't know.  You've been convicted but didn't know about it, and now it appears to have been erased.  I'm a very cautious belt and braces guy, so I'd ask on the insurance board what you should do.  Tell your insurers everything or keep quiet about it?  Getting it wrong could be expensive).

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it's worth double checking the addresses on the car's registration document, and on driving licence.  Just in case there's some reason which mail might not have reached you.   Have you been sent any copies of prior correspondence, and if so was the name and address all in order?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is what I have received after sending proof I was out of the country at time of speeding offence

 

I still have no idea why they sent to my previous address when the car had never been registered there .

Also I had a fine on the car at my current address when the car was one year old as I had forgotten to tax it

(zero tax so didn't realize i still had to go on line and tax)

 

nv let.pdf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Which "matter" is "being withdrawn"?  What's the "next hearing"?

 

I suppose it clearly says you don't need to do any thing, but about what?

 

I suppose I'm just nit-picking, but without knowing what preceded that email it's not very clear (to me) or informative.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 the letter means that all the pontificating you have heard from Maximouse and co. was just a figment, all they wanted was the proof you provided.

 

An easy task made difficult.

 

Answer. Just send proof you were out of the country END


DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES TO COLD CALLERS PROMISING TO WRITE OFF YOUR DEBTS

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES FOR COSTLY TELEPHONE CONSULTATIONS WITH SO CALLED "EXPERTS" THEY INVARIABLY ARE NOTHING OF THE SORT

BEWARE OF QUICK FIX DEBT SOLUTIONS, IF IT LOOKS LIKE IT IS TO GOOD TO BE TRUE IT INVARIABLY IS

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Dodgeball said:

Answer. Just send proof you were out of the country END

 

Yes, a great pity you did not come forth with that pearl of wisdom a little earlier. Still better late than never.

 

The "pontificating" you mention was not a figment. It was perfectly sound advice based on what was known.

 

Of course proving the OP was out of the country does not absolve his responsibilities under S172 if he is the Registered Keeper.

 

His contention that his earlier letter stated he was speeding is almost certainly incorrect.

 

The police do not know who was driving so cannot accuse anybody of speeding. What it probably said was that his vehicle was detected speeding and it falls to him to name the driver. Being out of the country does not excuse that responsibility.

 

There's lots of unknowns in this, not the least of which being how his earlier conviction was set aside as only a court can set aside a conviction.

 

Clearly something out of the ordinary has occurred but that's water under the bridge.

 

However to give the impression that being out of the country is a perfectly reasonable and routine defence to a S172 charge is, not unusually for you, totally misleading.

 

Of course every case turns on its own merits but if you contend that your advice is sound  you may care to look up the case of Whiteside vs DPP (2011).

 

Mr Whiteside was in a similar position to the OP, being out of the country when a S172 notice was served on him.

 

He contended that he could not be guilty of failing to respond to the notice as he had not seen it. The High Court ruled against him. Part of their ruling said this:

 

"The offence created by section 172(3) does not require knowledge on the defendant’s part that he is under an obligation to provide the specified information; ".

 

But I suppose that's just a "figment" as well. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dodgeball, we don't want to derail this thread with a discussion on trolling so I've removed some posts.

 

If you suspect troll activity, then please let the site team know and we'll investigate.


Illegitimi non carborundum

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

An NIP and a request to name the driver are two different notices . 

 

The time period for the new hearing, would be six months from the prosecution receiving the evidence in the initial case

 

The burden of proof would be on the op but only on balance of probability.


DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES TO COLD CALLERS PROMISING TO WRITE OFF YOUR DEBTS

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES FOR COSTLY TELEPHONE CONSULTATIONS WITH SO CALLED "EXPERTS" THEY INVARIABLY ARE NOTHING OF THE SORT

BEWARE OF QUICK FIX DEBT SOLUTIONS, IF IT LOOKS LIKE IT IS TO GOOD TO BE TRUE IT INVARIABLY IS

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

42 minutes ago, Dodgeball said:

The time period for the new hearing, would be six months from the prosecution receiving the evidence in the initial case

 

The  S172 offence would have been committed 28 days after the S172 request was served on the recipient. The six month time limit to begin proceedings begins from that date. If an SD was to be performed to set aside (or "void" if you prefer) an earlier conviction there is no time limit on any new hearing to bring the matter again as proceedings would have already begun. There is no time limit on how long the proceedings must take to conclude.

 

However, all academic because for a reason we are not aware of, proceedings were discontinued. The most puzzling thing is that the police, in the first letter that the OP posted, stated "It has recently been identified that you may not have received the original documentation". Quite how or why they identified that is a mystery but I guess we'll never find out and it doesn't matter anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

he  S172 offence would have been committed 28 days after the S172 request was served on the recipient. The six month time limit to begin proceedings begins from that date.

 

AHA, so that would be when the prosecution would be notified. 

.

A successful SD does not remove the original COA or enforcement date details  The action start date is at this point.

 

If it is "relevant enough to say, then its relevant enough to be corrected.

 

I agree regarding the original letter, quite odd.


DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES TO COLD CALLERS PROMISING TO WRITE OFF YOUR DEBTS

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES FOR COSTLY TELEPHONE CONSULTATIONS WITH SO CALLED "EXPERTS" THEY INVARIABLY ARE NOTHING OF THE SORT

BEWARE OF QUICK FIX DEBT SOLUTIONS, IF IT LOOKS LIKE IT IS TO GOOD TO BE TRUE IT INVARIABLY IS

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I did think you were going to challenge the burden of proof point.


DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES TO COLD CALLERS PROMISING TO WRITE OFF YOUR DEBTS

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES FOR COSTLY TELEPHONE CONSULTATIONS WITH SO CALLED "EXPERTS" THEY INVARIABLY ARE NOTHING OF THE SORT

BEWARE OF QUICK FIX DEBT SOLUTIONS, IF IT LOOKS LIKE IT IS TO GOOD TO BE TRUE IT INVARIABLY IS

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, Dodgeball said:

I did think you were going to challenge the burden of proof point.

 

Not at all. If the defendant presents a statutory defence to an offence for which he would otherwise be convicted then the burden rests on him to prove that defence. Anything that the defendant has to prove is always to the lower level "on the balance of probabilities".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

:) indeed

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES TO COLD CALLERS PROMISING TO WRITE OFF YOUR DEBTS

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES FOR COSTLY TELEPHONE CONSULTATIONS WITH SO CALLED "EXPERTS" THEY INVARIABLY ARE NOTHING OF THE SORT

BEWARE OF QUICK FIX DEBT SOLUTIONS, IF IT LOOKS LIKE IT IS TO GOOD TO BE TRUE IT INVARIABLY IS

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...