OBS PCN CCJ/Judgement - set aside now rehearing

[FTMDave]

17 hours ago, dx100uk said:

i do not believe the claimant had a valid and paid for contract covering the year of the offence with the land owner or their agents.

 

i do not believe the Claimant ANPR System had the relevant council planning permission to be used or erected on poles at the site.

 

i do not believe the Claimant signs at the site neither had the required council planning permission nor suitably conveyed the legal terms of any contract the driver at the time of parking could ever be able to agree to by reading them.

 

i claim the cost of my set aside fee from the claimant should i be successful.

 

 

 

Above the excellent paragraphs that dx has posted up, add

 

"I did not receive court papers and was therefore unable to defend the claim because from xxxxx to xxxxx I was away from my address due to the recent lockdown.  I was staying with my elderly mother at xxxxx".

[brassnecked]

Yes that covers the non receipt of Claimform adequately.

[Dizzy blonde]

Hi everyone. 

My N244 was transferred and the court have now replied, I have a telephone hearing in 12 days time.

I now have to liase with the other party (? DCB legal) to agree the key documents required by the judge and send them to the court 3 days before the hearing. I assume this will be all the demands OBS sent to me and the claim etc.

 

Has anyone been through this before and if so have you any idea how to proceed.

 

1. I assume I have the opportunity to make a statement, in which I have to ask the Judge for a SetAside in order to be able to defend the Claim and then state the reasons why I think a SetASide should be granted.

Is there anything else  in particular I need to say? 

 

2. Should I also mention that DCB Legal have actioned DCBL who have already increased the charge by £90.

Was this action illegal? 

An email from DCB Legal, states that the extra £90 was accrued when the debt was passed to DCBL. 

 

3. Can this now only go in two ways, either the judge allows the Set Aside or does not?

 Or can he dismiss the whole thing? 

 

4. If the judge grants a SetAside, what happens?

 

5. If the judge rules in their favour what will happen to the CCJ, is it removed?

 

I will be in dire straits unless the CCJ is removed.

 

I've been issued a new section 21 notice to vacate but cannot move house or get a bank account because of the CCJ.

Having it satisfied will not help at all.

 

Is there anything I can say to the judge to ensure the set aside is granted,

or the case is dismissed,

or that I be allowed to settle it in a way that removes the CCJ from my credit record?

 

Appreciate any assistance you can give me.
 

[brassnecked]

DCBL added the £90 after Judgment, and it was passed to them, they can't they could not have been acting as Bailiff or HCEO, so can add diddly squat to the judgment amount.  Wait for the others opinion, but I would mention the £90 addition at some point, just see what the other team members say.

[dx100uk]

can we see the order by the judge please 

particularly where it says ( or doesn't) you have to liaise with the other party?

have you both got to pit in bundles or is the judge asking for a joint bundle?

 

if the set aside is successful then the CCJ is gone .. it's one way or the another.

until/unless the claimant requests a subsequent hearing (if they choose too) it remain gone should your set aside be successful.

then if so the case is reheard as if you'd just received the Claimform.

 

 

[Dizzy blonde]

Hi. DX, I'm not at home and relying on a photo of the document which states:

Prior to the hearing the parties are expected to liase to agree the key documets required by the judge essential for that hearing. In default of agreement the parties may identify their own key documents but will need to justify the absence of agreement to the judge, who may make costs orders consqeuent upon the failure to agree.

 

[dx100uk]

On 07/07/2020 at 01:23, dx100uk said:

n244

.......

 

1."I did not receive court papers and was therefore unable to defend the claim because from xxxxx to xxxxx I was away from my address due to the recent lockdown.  I was staying with my elderly mother at xxxxx".

 

On 07/07/2020 at 01:23, dx100uk said:

 

2 i do not believe the Claimant ANPR System had the relevant council planning permission to be used or erected on poles at the site.

 

3. i do not believe the Claimant signs at the site neither had the required council planning permission nor suitably conveyed the legal terms of any contract the driver at the time of parking could ever be able to agree to by reading them.

 

4.i claim the cost of my set aside fee from the claimant should i be successful.

 

 

 

can i confirm the above 4 points were included in your N244

 

dx

 

[Dizzy blonde]

Hi DX

I'm almost certain I did, as I copied and pasted all of comments from this thread and was up until 3am trying to fit them all into the box on the online claim form. I do not have a copy of what I put as it was done online. 

 

Ten days ago I also received an email from OBS with the photo evidence, although obviously it does not show the other times the vehicle was in the carpark in between.

 

I have recent photos of the carpark, showing very poor signage in one half of the carpark and a bush in front of one entrance sign. I am also trying to locate the original pictures I took of the carpark shortly after receiving the pcn.

 

[AndyOrch]

Standard directions as per usual Notice of Allocations...but 3 days instead of 14 days......just interpreted differently by the OP 

 

File and serve statements and disclosures 3 days before the telephone hearing.

 

Did you not attach draft order to the N244 ? You really shouldn't be listing reasons for a set a side within the N244......its not court protocol.

 

Andy

[Dizzy blonde]

Hi.

In that case I probably did it wrong,

the N244 asked for 'evidence in support of the application' and I assumed I had to include all the points that were mentioned on here in the N244, as well as any other reasons why I thought I have a chance of defending a Set Aside if one is granted. 

 

If I've messed it up I've messed it up and need to move forward from here and give it the best shot for the £255 it's just cost, I also need to liaise with DCB Legal asap and then email the documents to the court next Wednesday, so your help would be much appreciated.

 

The court letter says I have to:

'liase with the other party to agree the key documents required by the judge essential to the case'

and I have no idea what this means?

 

Is there any particular documents I should be asking DCB Legal for when 'liaise' with them?

 

Do I have to send DCB Legal  a written statement?

 

Do I have to send them the photos of trees hiding their signs at the entrance etc.

Or do I just need to ask them to agree to show the court the original documents/Demands and letters OBS sent to me?

Is there any particular documents I should be asking DCB Legal for when 'liaise' with them?

 

Should I be asking them to provide proof of planning permission for the signs and permission from the landowner etc at the time?

 

In court:

Should I mention the 2 year time delay and accrued interest since the final demand and applying for a CCJ?

 

Should I be mentioning anything about DCB Legal instructing DCBL and the extra £90 they added to the total amount (for sending one letter)?  

 

If I lose this, and have to pay the CCJ, does that mean DCBL will then start chasing me for the £90 cost for their letter?

 

Thanks again

 

 

 

 

[dx100uk]

not sure why you did the n244 online, its better by paper..as andyorch pointed you too.

 

liaise means ask, well demand they produce things, else the judge doesn't have the full picture infront of them.

 

so things like.

 

points of note:

"D is liable as the driver or keeper" that part of POC is naughty 

sight of the signed and annual confirmed payment schedule of the contract with the landowner 

proof of planning permission from the relevant county council for the erection of ANPR CAmeras and Poles.

proof of planning permission for all OBS signed and poles 

proof of: you were not resident due to caring for you sick mother during Covid-19 Lockdown
 

you can demand these are produced by say 5  days before court hearing to you and the court by sending the claimants solicitor an email now.

that all you need to liaise over.

[Dizzy blonde]

Thanks DX, I'll request all of those points.

 

1.How does this liase thing work, do I have to tell DCB Legal everything I am going to mention in my statement, or do they have to request things from me? 

 

2.You said "D is liable as the driver or keeper" that part of POC is naughty",,,,   is that something I need to mention in my statement, and if so how?

 

3.Does anyone know the legality of DCB legal/OBS instructing bailiffs? Someone mentioned they can't add anything to the debt, if not, why were they instructed and moe to the point was this legal? Can I mention it?

 

Thanks 

 

 

 

 

[dx100uk]

1. no..thats not what the judge ordered.

2. should already be on your N244

3.doesn't matter..not an important part of the set aside process..

 

i really wished you'd not used the online form..or atleast copied what you put

you were advised to use the paper one.

we don't know what you put but can only guess.

 

you don't have to produce any exhibits as far as i'm aware, only OPC has 

simple send their sols a copy of the docs i've listed that you require to be in front of the judge.

thats as far as your liaison needs to go.

 

 

[Dizzy blonde]

Thanks again.

I did ask about the driver/keeper, but it wasn't made clear if it was a relevant point. So I'm not sure if I mentioned it. Am I not allowed to mentioom anything that was not in the N244? I thought the idea was not to say too much in that. Can I mention it in my statement?

 

Cheers

[dx100uk]

its only a basic N244 set aside hearing is it not?

so you only need ...

 

a: a reason to set aside the judgement - you were unaware of the claimform due to shielding under covid19 - you have evidence of this .

b: a basic defence for the original claimants poc. - well you didnt even see the poc - so i cant see the judge wanting to see or discuss anything really.

but the fact that they ,

probably have no planning permission for either cameras or signs or their poles

probably have no current signed and paid to date contract with the landowner

have intimated in their POC that as the keeper you MUST have been the driver, so the claim is valid...again all against the POFA rules..is quite laughable.

 

but and sorry ...i'll be brutally honest here DB, ....after 120 post and 2mts of being here...

to me you've not clicked yet upon how tenuous their position really is in the whole story

 

[Dizzy blonde]

I really appreciate your help and brutal honesty Dx.

 

Sadly I'm not that switched on and found dealing with this too stressful, so no, I haven't really grasped how tenuous their position is and am not looking forward to the hearing.

 

I don;t even know what POC means. 

A few comments last month on here also suggested my position was not very good either.

So I've been very uncertain about the whole thing.

 

I actually have no idea what a 'basic N244 SetAside hearing' is, nor of the procedure on the day.

Essentially, does the judge look at the first point, do I have a valid reason to SetAside, then makes that decision.

 

Then he will ask me if I have a defence, and at that point I will have to tell him that I think they don't or didn't have planning  permission etc?  

 

This is rocket science to me, I don't even know how no planning permission or a contract with the landowner etc is relevant? 

I will say because of your advice, but won't really be able to say anymore to the judge if he asks.

 

BTW.

the last 3 letters I received from OBS in 2018 all had the wrong dates for date of the offence and PCN, this made it all very confusing, and was the reason I ignored them,

 

as going on OBS past history of being sued by trading standards and admitting to missing out drivers 'others visits' to the site on the same day, I thought I was being scammed.

 

Can this be mentioned?

 

 

 

 

[dx100uk]

PoC - particulars of Claim..

 

Particulars of Claim:

1.The Defendant (D) is indebted to the Claimant (C) for a Parking Charge(s) issued to vehicle ( ) at St Johns Retail Park

 

2. The PCN details are 20/08/2015,

 

3. The PCN(s) was issued on private land owned or managed by C.

The vehicle was parked in breach of the Terms on C's signs (the Contract), thus incurring the PCN(s) .

 

4. The driver agreed to pay within 28 days but did not. D is liable as the driver or keeper. 

 

5.Despite requests, the PCN(s) is outstanding.

 

6.The Contract entitles C to damages.

 

7.AND THE CLAIMANT CLAIMS

1. £160 being the total of the PCN(s) and damages.

2. Interest at a rate of 8% per annum,  pursuant to s.69 of the county Courts Act 1984 from the date hereof at a daily rate of £0.04 until judgment or sooner payment.

3. Costs and court fees

 

.................

 

the important bit is:

 

4. The driver agreed to pay within 28 days but did not. D is liable as the driver or keeper. 

 

no the registered keeper is NOT responsible under POFA 2015

 

as for planning permission...

 

so someone, even you, can pick a piece of land and put up signs and cameras on poles to capture peoples cars entering and leaving and charge then for doing so because they didn't read your sign without gaining the correct legal planning permission from the relevant council to do so???

 

bit like thee infamous ericsbrother trouser example....

 

I will give a commonly used example.

A shop has a sign outside saying "50% off most items" and you go in, look around and choose a pair of trousers to try on.

You ask the price and are told that they are not in the sale and you dont buy them.

 

Now the sign is inviting you to consider something, it doesnt force you to buy the trousers and it doesnt force the shopkeeper to sell them for half price. It is simply an invite to get you to consider the offer and agree terms if you want something.

 

Now in the case of parking, as the parking co doesnt own the land they have no right to demand you dont enter, you have been invited there to consider terms. If you dont like them then no contract is formed and at worst you are a trespasser and that is nothing to do with the parking co.

 

The parking co now wishing to impose the terms you have rejected or not considered (didnt read the sign m'lud) is like the shopkeeper insisting that you now buy the trousers because you looked at them or pay him for his costs for heat and light etc.

 

Both are equally silly and unenforceable but with the parking co you will have to argue the point because they have sued you whereas the shopkeeper has better ways of making money, namely selling stuff rather than chiselling money out of non customers.

 

the business model of the paring co's is based entirely around abuse of the law rather than parking management.

[Dizzy blonde]

Many thanks again Dx for an interesting explanation and bedtime read. Do you think the judge would be amenable to my telling him Erics trouser story over the telephone, in order to argue the point :0) I guess I better thik of some other ways of explaining it so I can get that point across to the judge. 

[dx100uk]

i seriously doubt he will go anywhere near as deep as that,...

 

all you needed to have done with the N244 is prove the 2 basic requirements detailed above.

 

each you have done.

 

can't see it failing.

can't see the claimant requesting a further (start again) hearing either.

 

the judge has asked you both to liaise upon what documents need to be infront of him.

that simply means you tell the fleecers what they must cough up with.

you don't have to liaise further than that.

 

but in your statement make sure you outline that you have asked the claimant for them.

dx

 

 

[Dizzy blonde]

Thanks dx I'll start working on my statement tomorrow, I'll have to have it written down to stop me talking too much, including talking about Erics trousers. I will probably need some tips on how to do it as well as how to talk to the judge etc.

[dx100uk]

your statement only needs to be the barest of bare bullets points.

don't go into things you don't need too.

those are for IF the claimant requests a restart from day one as if you'd just received the claimform when you win the set aside.

 

your main point is you didn't have the chance to defend as you could not travel home due to the covid lockdown etc

lay that on thick and this will be a walk in park. no judge would dare ignore the implications of not abiding by the lockdown

IMHO the set aside is pretty much guaranteed.

 

don't forget to mention your recovery from the claimant of your N244 fee and that you approached them directly prior to issuing the N244 and they totally tried to fleece you by adding unlawful fake bailiff fees and requesting +£400 to set aside by mutual consent after you told them you were shielding.

 

 

[ericsbrother]

to add my view,

you get everything you can together now because if their case is seriously flawed the judge may well use their powers to settle the matter there and then.

 

Now OPS might squeal at this and there will have to be another hearing so if they or their solicitors contact you to agree what evidence should be put forward as a single bundle DO NOT AGREE TO IT unless it contains everything you want to raise at any point ( they wont want to include much as that will show the truth)

 

Yes, do make the point about the abuse of process regarding the demand you pay £90 to some other bandit that has nowt to do with the claim as well but make sure that you have pointed out the part of the POFA that entitles them to only claim what you were invoiced as the keeper rather than the added made up amounts for their extra time etc.

 

With regards to getting your fee back- not automatic at this stage but will depend on judges attitude to their behaviour after they started legal action so their LBA will be important in this respect.

 

You need to find any faults therein and raise them to show failure to follow protocols and unreasonable conduct ( along with the already mentioned fake fees and demand for £400 for set aside agreement) and you will be home and dry. Once they are £150 out of pocket they wont want to lose another costs order, so if they have tried hiding evidence from the judge by not submitting the full paperwork they may well skulk off rather than admit they are nothing more than liars and thieves.

 

So to recap, send your own paperwork to them and judge and dont agree to share a bundle unless you get to send it

[Dizzy blonde]

Thanks Eric, very glad to recieve your input.

 

I would really appreciate your and dx's advice re jargon and legal speak, re OBS lack of protocols and abuse of process etc to enable me to put everything you've all said, to the judge in a legal way, as I have no idea how to explain what protcols and processess OBS and their solicitors abused etc.

 

As you suggested I will include the Debt letter from DCBL and the Email from DCB Legal saying the extra £90 added to the claim by DCBL was money accrued since they actioned DCBL, showing they endorsed the extra amount being added to the Claim.

 

I. RE the POFA, Does that mean they are only allowed to claim a max of £I00 and not add 8% interest etc. 

 

2. They also waited 2 years after their final letter to apply for a CCJ to increace interest on the debt, is this unreasonable as I am aware they are allowed 6 years to apply for a CCJ.

 

3. They also confused this poor motorist and made me think it was a scam, by putting the wrong 'date of event' and the wrong 'date of Issue of  PCN' on the last 4 PCN letters they sent to me in 2008, this was more than a clerical error. How can I state this legally?

 

4. When you say send my own paperwork to DCB Legal, also does that mean I have to include my own statement and the letter from my mother proving I was there during lockdown? 

 

I'm not too concerned about getting my fee back, however I am concerned that whatever happens, the DCBL cronies may attempt to chase me for the extra £90 pounds (+interest) they have added/attempted to add to the Claim.

 

Thanks again

 

 

[brassnecked]

Less is definitely more here, follow DX's lead.

[dx100uk]

2 hours ago, Dizzy blonde said:

however I am concerned that whatever happens, the DCBL cronies may attempt to chase me for the extra £90 pounds (+interest) they have added/attempted to add to the Claim.

 

they can't, they were not operating as bailiffs as the letter on it's reverse says.

and couldn't have been as the claim is less than the required £600 total to Cross to the High Court....so HCEO's cannot ever be involved,