Brittania/BW Windscreen PCN Claimform - west Quay Retail Park Southampton SO15 1BA ***Claim Dismissed***

[Gick]

I believe that section 14 would read better if instead of '14.   It is contended that a thorough check through the windscreen and side windows took place and the ticket must have been seen.

It was  changed to 14.   It is contended that IF a thorough check through the windscreen and side windows took place, and the ticket must have been seen.

[commonsensehasdied]

@FTMDave I can't thank you enough for getting me to where I currently am. It's incredibly appreciated.

[brassnecked]

Looks good to go Gick's suggestion for 14 does read more clearly so I would amend that bit a really brilliant effort.

[commonsensehasdied]

ok - almost there I think.

3 questions;

1 Where do I sign and date the WS?

2 Does it matter If I use the photos with the registration plate and vehicle name blacked out?

3 Do I insert all email communication into the WS exhibits bundle to prove how often I've contacted them?

 

Thanks

WS redacted.pdf

[FTMDave]

The more I think about it, the more I think you should wait till early afternoon on Thursday.  The reasons are:

 

1.  In the seven years I've been on this site, I've never seen a judge punish a Litigant-in-Person for being only 24 hours late.

 

2.  If you wait, the fleecers' WS may turn up and you'll have the chance to demolish it.

 

3.  If it doesn't turn up, then you can point out to the court how the fleecers are defying court orders and request their evidence not be allowed.  Win win.

[FTMDave]

In (4.6) it's "in plain sight" not "in plain site".

 

Love the way you've calculated every attempt to talk sense into the thickos!

 

After your current (18) I would add another para just to sum up the section, as after all "De Minimis" is your ace.  Apologies for this knackering of the numbering - again!

 

19.  To sum up, it is contended that a valid ticket was always displayed.  Instead, had it fluttered down from the dashboard, it would have been clearly visible and such a breach would be "de minimis"".

 

The title of the section should be "De Minimis" not "De Minimus".

 

In (18) "taken place" not "took place".

 

The "Statement of Truth" shouldn't be numbered, not that it greatly matters.

 

You need to give each of your exhibits numbers, and when you refer to them in the WS refer to "exhibit 1", "exhibit 2", etc.

Edited December 7, 2022 by FTMDave
Typo

[FTMDave]

To answer your questions.

 

1.  You sign at the bottom after the Statement of Truth.

 

2.  Yes, it does.  It could then be any vehicle.  You need to show what happened on the day.

 

3.  You could, but I don't think it really matters.  Writing a lot to them doesn't make you in the right legally.  But mentioning how many times you've contacted them shows how willing you were to settle matters and shows them up as just pig-headed money-grabbers.

 

To avoid having to read through the whole thread, what's your e-mail situation with the fleecers?  I know most of the original contact was by e-mail.  Have you since told them to stop using e-mail to contact you?

[commonsensehasdied]

with regard to email contact, I changed that to hard copy only via post as soon as they started legal proceedings. 

[dx100uk]

what do you mean by changed?

 

dx

 

[FTMDave]

We take it no WS again from the fleecers today?

[commonsensehasdied]

Changed as in I wrote to them and instructed them that my email address was no longer to be used for communications, and that all further correspondence was to be by hard copy mail going forward. 
 

nope, nothing received from them today so far in the way of their WS. 

[FTMDave]

Good news.

 

That means you can send yours tomorrow without any real risk of being penalised.

 

Hopefully the fleecers' won't turn up tomorrow either, and so the paragraph about them defying court orders can stay in.

[commonsensehasdied]

@FTMDave how would I know if they've supplied the court with their WS in time, but only sent it to me so it arrives late with me?

[FTMDave]

No real way of knowing.

 

You could ring the court, but as it takes a while for the court to work through mails I doubt even they would know straight away.

 

In any case, 24 hours won't harm you.

[FTMDave]

Anything from the fleecers this morning?

[commonsensehasdied]

nope - nothing

[FTMDave]

Fine.  So you're good to go.

 

This afternoon e-mail your WS to the court.  The paragraph inviting the court to chuck out any WS from the fleecers due to lateness can stay in.  In the subject field write the claim number and the names of the two parties.  Obviously click "return receipt".

 

Send the fleecers theirs by 1st class post from the post office.  Get a free Certificate of Posting.

 

There may be a superb reason why the fleecers' WS is late ... but I'll keep schtum as it's always best to be pessimistic and plan too much than too little.

 

Should the fleecers send a WS truly late full of lies then there will still be the chance to counter it by sending a second short WS, called a Supplementary Witness Statement.  The court doesn't have to accept such a document, but probably would if the fleecers were massively late and defying court orders.

[brassnecked]

But don't sign the WS you post to the fleecers

[AndyOrch]

What use is a signature to the claimant in a parking claim?

[Nicky Boy]

Apparently the fleecers have been known in the past to "create" false documents with defendants signatures??!

[AndyOrch]

And how would that help their claim...what documents?

[commonsensehasdied]

@FTMDave that's it, it's gone to the court.

 

Again, I really cant thank you enough for your help, it's massively appreciated!

 

So, what happens next? I guess I just wait for a date and turn up with a sense of humour and willingness to talk common sense to a judge?

 

Thanks for the heads up on a Supplementary Witness Statement - I'll shout out when I need help with that if anything materialises.

 

I also added a strikethrough on my signature on the copy I've printed off for them - that's something I've known about for a long time

 

[Nicky Boy]

23 minutes ago, Andyorch said:

And how would that help their claim...what documents?

Not sure Andy, I just recall seeing something along these lines on another thread somewhere on the forum.

[AndyOrch]

Ims sure you have when a claim involves credit agreements', but not parking claims.

[FTMDave]

Something will happen in the next few days, after all the fleecers are supposed to be filing their WS.  Please let us know.