NCP/BW PCN PAPLOC now claimform - New Gatwick Drop Off Zone - I thought I had paid for both visits? ***Claim Dismissed***

[FTMDave]

Yes, it would be ridiculous for your parents to actually travel to the hearing from another country.

 

However, three short written WSs to me seem a good idea.  They can be included as exhibits in your main WS.

 

Yes, put 1 in E3.

 

 

[MoaningCrusader]

I am going to put the following in D1 - Suitability for determination without hearing

 

This hearing is in regards to the issuing of a speculative charge for parking on private land with significant factual dispute and complexity that requires oral evidence and advocacy.

 

How's that sound?

 

 

[dx100uk]

Urm..

is there really worth here in using 2 statements backing up the 'look i paid' claim, at the expense of a paperwork only hearing? I doubt it pers.

 

It screams of im lying and i need backup.

its not really a very important point anyway.

 

Dx

 

 

[brassnecked]

Just say on the papers unacceptable as you wish to challenge their Claim in person.

[MoaningCrusader]

Dx100 I will be evidencing the facts that their payment system was not working correctly at the time of my visits.

 

1. I attempted to pay on 15th Oct within 24hrs of picking my parents up. As per their signage.

2. I also then attempted to pay for the return drop off when leaving my parents back on 18th Oct.

3. I called NCP on 20th Oct as I was concerned that no receipt or money had been taken for either visit. In that call the representative told me that he could see I had paid for my last visit, but he was unable to go more than 3days back on his system to check the other payment (dubious). Despite me being told that the visit on 18th Oct was paid for, no money ever came out of my account, nor a receipt received by email. 

4. If payment was not taken from my account for both visits on 14th & 18th October. Why have I only received one PCN? Should they still maintain that I made a payment on the 18th, I can show relevant bank statements to prove nothing was.

 

So I will evidence the failure of payment being taken by their system by producing my bank statement, the phone call to rectify the matter on the 20th Oct by itemised call records from my phone provider and my attempt to pay online for the visit their PCN is relevant to with simple signed witness statements from those who were present with me when I did it on my phone. I cannot witness this in any other way, as far as I can see?

 

[MoaningCrusader]

Dx100. I just messaged you directly. But realised really what I asked you would be beneficial to other readers of this thread in the same position as myself to know.

 

Can I clarify - are you advising that I do not include a signatured copy of the N180 to BWLegal? As well as omitting my mobile & email address. Only supply these details in the N180 going back to the CCBC in Northampton.

 

If yes, could you explain why my signature needs to be left out in your view? When the form states it must be signed.

 

Happy to send an unsigned one, but just wanted to make sure this doesn't give them something to latch onto and use against me.

 

 

[AndyOrch]

I personally cant see a problem in signing the N180 in this type of claim ...there is no credit agreement involved....so your signature is of no use.

 

Andy 

 

 

 

.

[MoaningCrusader]

Thanks Andy. That's what I thought. They have my sig on several other letters I have sent and their data team have my email from my SAR case. But I will leave it off the N180 anyway, as they should have no need for that or my mobile.

 

I have sent the CCBC one off already, as that's potentially the most crucial one to arrive on time. I have FPoP for that.

 

I will do the same for BWLegal later today.

 

 

[FTMDave]

I think dx means to sign the copy to the court, but not sign the fleecers' copy (so they can't get up to any forgery with your signature).

[AndyOrch]

What could they possibly achieve with a forged signature in this type of claim FTM ?  It is a legal requirement to sign the N180/181 on both copies  but we only recommend not signing the claimants copy when there is a credit agreement involved which in this type of claim there isn't ?

[MoaningCrusader]

Hi FTMDave

 

They already have my signature on other letters that I have sent to them, including my response to their initial LoC.

 

Hence why I asked dx100 what was to be achieved by not providing my signature where it clearly states I must?

 

 

[dx100uk]

The n180 info is generic to all claimform threads, of which as andyorch points out, are mostly credit claims, which are better not signed on their copy 

 

Might create an additional one for PPC claims.

 

As for routinely signing things back to the fleecers or their dogs , like a snotty letter, you should simply PC type your name. IMHO. They are not court related.

 

Dx

[MoaningCrusader]

Fair point dx100

[MoaningCrusader]

I posted the 2nd copy to BWLegal yesterday by 3pm and got free proof of postage.

 

I came home to the N180 from BWLegal arriving by post. Their form appears to be different to mine... No section E? Also they are stating that '0' witnesses will attend the hearing to give evidence??

 

See attached pdf for your inspection. Comments welcome.

 

 

BWL:NCPN180.pdf

[AndyOrch]

Possibly just a page missing

[MoaningCrusader]

But if you compare my form to theirs... Their section D1 onwards, is my section E1 onwards. My section D1 is whether I want a paper judgement or hearing and why??

 

Different forms, not a page missing?? Any ideas?

[FTMDave]

You can download the form as it should be here  https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/form-n180-directions-questionnaire-small-claims-track

 

[AndyOrch]

Yes yours is the updated one to incorporate paper hearing....theirs is the old one.

[MoaningCrusader]

Thanks guys.

 

So I assume it means nothing that they've used an old form.

 

No doubt one they have it generically filled in by 'Rohan' who probably doesn't exist, for easy sending.

 

Still intrigued as to how they plan to defend themselves when they are sending 0 people to do so?

 

 

[dx100uk]

they always make that mistake, they think it means OTHER witnesses not their rep.

 

dx

 

[AndyOrch]

Just to clarify they will have counsel or other representation ....witness does not apply to claimants/Solicitor.

[FTMDave]

Please post the documents you got in reply to the SAR on this thread when you get a minute.

[MoaningCrusader]

Hi Peeps.

 

Sorry I didn't get this up yesterday. I never actually got a chance.

 

I have created a PDF file of what was sent minus all the usual info we are all used to on their PCNs, the photo evidence with my VRN on it and my response letter they have kept on file to their LoC. This is all here on this thread already

 

I have the same for my two other PCNs that are on a different thread. Do I need to load up the PCNs that I have already loaded up. Or just SAR report at the beginnning. I will load them up to the relevant thread.

 

NCP-SAR07-10-22.pdf

Edited October 11, 2022 by MoaningCrusader

[MoaningCrusader]

FTMDave, 

 

Basically no mention of my phone call. So we are good there to proceed as solely keeper of the vehicle.

 

Is there anything in the fact that on all the PCNs they have clearly requested my Keeper details from DVLA well after there 14day period?

NCP-SAR07-10-22redacted.pdf

[FTMDave]

My turn for the under-the-cosh-at-work line.  I knock off at 11pm UK time so promise to have a good look through everything then.