Just an update was supposed to be in court today, however I requested that the case be transferred to my local court, and yesterday I got notice that the case has been transferred and my local court will be hearing the case.

DN may have been sent out but not received one though, same as no termination notice only, notice of transfer has been received and that was from Cabot goimg to start on WS tomorrow

Just looked at credit file and shows Cabot defaulted it in Nov22 , there is no information from original creditor. Just got date through for application hearing 31/8/23

Thank you DX although there is a DN included in the pack I have been through every bit of paper i have had from Newday and there is not a DN among it so not received one. I keep all records since I had to defend my fist case back in 2009 many thanks Lets

@dx100uk would you know if the DN in the bundle is valid although cant say me seen one for this cheers lets

ok thank you Andy, just trying now to work out a witness statement ...also looking for ideas through the site

hi Andy not had any dates or any thing yet from the court , which i must add is not my local court

Sorry for the delay finally managed to get everything scanned, edited and converted to pdf and here it is. thank you for looking cheers Lets n244.pdf

willl do that tomorrow once dig printer out thank you

@albouk I have just received a pack from MC going same route as yours what was in your WS that kicked them to touch ..please can you share many thanks Lets

@BankFodder Many thanks for reopening the post ..i thought i actually commented on friday ..must of forgot to press the send button. on Friday I received a bundle of papers saying that they are a witness statement (120+ pages) in amongst the papers is also a copy of a default notice ( i thought they couldnt be reproduced). Anyway the stay had been lifted and the case is being transfered to my local court, they dont know Geography as they are requesting it goes to portsmouth ...thats not my local court. they are also looking to go for summary judgement any ideas....I will have a look around see what other advise is out there on here too many thanks lets

Hi Michael Yes that is the case in the blue badge book it says you must...so far i cannot find a law that confirms that. for a contravention 30 - parked for longer than permitted ticket to be issue the CEO must log in the vehicle in question at least twice, if a time clock is displayed they still need to log the vehicle in, in order to register that vehicle on that specific street. .In My case the street i was parked in, has 30min LW .no return within 1hr (council allows unlimited parking with blue badge, Clock is not required) then we have disable bays limited to 4 hours no return in 4 hours again for a ceo to know for sure time has exceeded they need to log the vehicle in. on top of that for not displaying a time clock it carries the max penalty of £70 again this itself is excessive. i display my clock on DYL/SYL when i park if i cant find any other space to park.

Hi All I do not know if other council controlled parking schemes do this but ours on the I.O.W do and that is log in vehicles that are parked in free limited waiting bays for example some of our Disabled bays on the Island are 2 hours or 4 hours or no limit after 6pm . however to prove a vehicle has overstayed in these bays, they have to be logged in on the CEOs handset. thus negating the need for a time clock. today I parked in a Disabled Bay (max stay 4hrs ) and i displayed my badge. went to 3 shops got a coffee and went back to the car. to find a PCN not for displaying a time clock, if the CEO is doing their job correctly then the car should have been logged in for the 4 hours and therefore not requiring me to display the time clock any thoughts peeps , by the way i am appealing just wanting to see if there is any other bits of info i can use in my appeal many thanks lets

yep that's who i meant , Mortimer Clark, yep filled on time and court acknowledgement received, the defense i used was the one attached. letters where sent requesting information and only Mortimer responded saying they do not have the information and that they will put action on hold. Particulars of claim 1. By an agreement between Newday re Fluid & the Defendant on or around 05/08/2019 the (Agreement) Newday Re Fluid Agreed to issue the Defendant with a Credit Card. 2.the Defendant failed to make the minimum payments due. 3. The Agreement was terminated following the service of a Default Notice 4. The Agreement was Assigned to the Claimant, THE CLAIMANT THEREFOR CLAIMS 1. 1995.16 2.COSTS defence 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 Defendant contends that the particulars of claim are vague and generic in nature. The Defendant accordingly sets out its case below and relies on CPR 16.5 (3) in relation to any particular allegation to which a specific response has not been made. 3. Paragraph 1 is noted. I have in the past had financial dealings with New Day in which I can’t recall the precise details of any agreement and have therefore sought clarification by way of a CPR 31.14 and section 78 request via signed for delivery which the claimant has failed to comply with. 4. Paragraphs 2 & 3 are noted. Although I do not recall receiving a Default Notice /Termination Notice pursuant to sec 87 (1) the Consumer Credit Act 1974. 5. Paragraph 4 is denied. The defendant contends that no notice of assignment pursuant to s136 Law of Property Act and s82 a of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 has ever been served by the Claimant as alleged. It is therefore not accepted with regards to the Defendant owing any monies to the Claimant and the Claimant is put to strict proof to: a) Show how the Defendant has entered into an agreement and; b) Show how the Defendant has reached the amount claimed for and; c) Show the nature of the breach and evidence by way of a Default Notice pursuant to s87.1 CCA 1974. d) Show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim. As per Civil Procedure Rule 16.5 it is expected that the Claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed. 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.

Put the defence in on time and then had a letter from Moorcroft Mortimer saying that they dont have the paperwork and seek to obtain it from the creditor, in the meantime they will put everything on hold .....