Thanks Andy, I've been searching for ages and couldn't find anything to cover it.

Something I forgot about! The DN and termination they have provided are only dated - not signed. Does anyone know if that means anything?

Found your last couple of replies on Loopyloopys' thread very interesting Andy

Thanks Andy and everyone who has replied to me

Ok, this is a first stab at the witness statement. I have tried to answer most of the the sols claims.

Well no sign of a response to the AQ by the solicitors so the Court have now allocated an Allocation Hearing. This is the same date and time as the SJ. I am in the process of preparing witness statements.

I understand what you are saying and know this isn't going away. I truly hope I never fall into a similar situation, as I can see the effects it is having on my fil. We've sat down and gone through his finances to see if there is any way he could pay a higher amount, but at this moment in time there is no "room for maneuver". Thanks for taking the time to reply, I really do appreciate it

Thanks bazaar and Andy. It is indeed interesting reading. I am at the point now that I am content that at least we get a hearing in which I will present the statements showing there has been no default on the payment on their POC. Will be back soon, once I have put together the response to the SJ.

Checked with CC and Shoosmiths have not put in their AQ. They told me this will go before a DJ now. I don't know whether to wait a few weeks to see what happens with it or respond to the SJ - with a hearing due 18/8, I do have some time. Does anyone know if the result of the AQ can affect the SJ hearing? I had a feeling they wouldn't reply to the AQ as I think they are counting on the SJ.

Will do that and thanks for taking the time to help

Below is my father in laws Section I statement Below is the draft order Does it look ok? No they haven't submitted an AQ - which I am also thinking of adding into this as from reading on here they should have indicated it on their AQ not blatantly ignore protocol and steam roller judgement.

Thanks that really helped clarify it for me - I can see now its not a DN. I am going to put together a response to the AQ tonight and then look at the SJ over the weekend when I have more time. The hearing isn't until middle August to I have some time on this one. I'll post up if I am stuck. Thank you again for all your help on this.

Thanks Andy, I was going around in circles last night. The joke of it is, the payments are showing on the statements they provided however only from the current account they took them from. They have not provided any statement for the loan account showing any charges applied. The DN notice was invalid as it was at the higher payment and the CCC is for the lower agreed varied rate - however Shoosmiths are trying to get the judgement despite this being illegal. They have also now supplied a DN for an overdraft at the time - I noticed in the SJ request late last night - bet that is included in the claim. Does anyone know if they can add it in? I don't think so as they claiming default on home loan.

It was not a summons - it was a County Court claim form. I've been searching through my stuff but can't find it - it is going back to start of last year. As someone said, the first you hear about it is when you get issued with a Late Licensing Penalty - note the word penalty which is then dealt with by the County Court. Perhaps if this is still doubt, someone should ring the County Court to check - I can assure you it IS their jurisdiction. We looked into all this before going to Court

Thank you nehpets, I will post more when I have chance. At the moment I have other matters to solve.

Yes that bit has question mark if you look and further down it states County Court. Like I said, do some more reasearch as it is indeed County Court.

They have supplied everything apart for the loan account statements which should fully particulariseshow they came to the sum claimed. I could ask for this, but as they issued a DN in 2007 on the higher amount they have not issued a fully compliant DN on the lower amount they are claiming was defaulted on. I was wondering if I could just ask for the case to be struck out or stayed? Anyone know if this is ok?

Both of the other cases give excellent advice on responding to the SJ. However, I have until middle of August for that and have to reply to the AQ tomorrow. With my father in laws case there has been no default in payment as stated on the POC. Does anyone know how I put together the AQ information on section I on the N150 for this? I've been on here for hours and just going around in circles. Grateful for help please. I will be noting on the response that the solicitors have applied for SJ without responding to AQ - very sly.

Thank you Andyorch I didn't have much time in my lunch hour to find anything. I will look at these to see what options my father in law has.

Sorry but it is a civil offence, as I've tried to explain on here and is dealt with at County Court. I was issued with a Late Licensing Penalty under Section 7A of VERA and it was an £80 fine reduced to £40 if paid within XX days.

Entirely wrong legislation. Late Licensing Penalties are sent using Section 7A of VERA. Penalty is £80 reduced to £40 for early payment. You are mixing up your legislation.

I have replied on the other thread to back up what I am saying. This is not a VED offence this is entirely different and a civil offence. Do some searches on the internet under Continuous Registration and County Court and you will see that it is a County Court summons that is issued not one by a Magistrates Court. There is even a hansard response on there somewhere which confirms that the DVLA have issued County Court action on these cases resulting in CCJs. Its not a case of being parked unlicensed its an entirely different matter. Do some research before telling me I am spouting rubbish.

Look I am not here to argue with anyone, my case was beginning of last year after numerous letters between myself and them. What I am saying is that when you will go to Court it will be the County Court not a Magistrates and it could go against you or maybe not. Search under Continuous Registration and County Court and you will find a whole ream of information which explains that as this is a debt then it is pursued at County Court. Sorry but I am 100% correct on this having been there and know of others who have too in defending this fine. The Role of Continuous Registration Enforcement Centres The above link explains that the DVLA are taking Court action and its through the County Court. Also there are previous links on here where other people have been taken to County Court: http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/dvla/117426-dvla-continuous-registration.html My father is now sadly deceased and I have been on the forum for advice on a debt issue. I thought I would help a little to put some of the details right in relation to Courts and that it isn't always simple to win against them. However the decision to go down that route rests with the individual.

DJ asked for amended defence and as a result we have received an AQ, N150 form last week from local County Court to be in by Wednesday. Today we have received papers from Solicitors and Court of a notice of hearing as Solicitors applied for Summary Judgement on 30 June and hearing middle August. How does this work? They are trying to get judgement when the DJ ruled amended defence and allocation to local County Court to hear this. Where do I go from here please?

Yes they do sit in Magistrates Courts however the fine of of £40/£80 is a DEBT and a civil offence - it is not for having an untaxed vehicle on the public highway. When you fail to pay you get a County Court claim not a summons issued by a Magistrates Court. Originally the DVLA were issuing County Court claims via Northampton County Court bulk centre and if needed issuing manual claims via local County Courts. You should check your facts before rubbishing my comments - I am 100% correct in this as I have been there and done it and know plenty of others who have too.