Backdoor CCJ OPS/DCB(L) 2017 Windscreen PCN - got set aside - awaiting hearing date- Outside lines - Vantage point , brighton ***Claim Dismissed***

[FTMDave]

I've had to remove two of the letters as your personal details were showing.  Please redact your details and repost.

 

You need to reply, and you need to give them your new address as they might well issue a county court claim at your old address which you would then lose as you wouldn't know about it!

 

Well done on hanging on to the ticket to show you paid.

 

Is there no way of getting your hands on photos to show the lack of marked bays?

Edited August 13, 2020 by FTMDave
Typo

[FTMDave]

When someone moves they really should inform anyone they're in legal dispute with of the new address, to avoid getting a backdoor CCJ.

 

Yes, we do have experience, this has happened to a lot of people over the years.

 

You can apply to a court to get the judgement set aside.  Even in normal times the hearing is painless, and due to COVID it'll just be a 15-minute phone call to a judge.  But the judge will need to hear evidence that (a) you never received the court papers and (b) that you have a realistic chance of defending the claim.  A set aside will cost you £255.

[FTMDave]

Yes, I can't remember a single case where a judge refused a set aside application.

 

I've just read through the thread and the photos you took are superb, and will be your ace in beating these crooks.

 

Just for clarity.  When you parked, you lived at Address A.  You then moved to Address B and informed the fleecers.  Later you moved to Address C but didn't tell OPS.  The court papers went to Address B.  Is this right?

 

 

[FTMDave]

I know it's possible to get a case set aside with the consent of the other party.  I've just done some reading up and I think the cost is £100, obviously better than £255.  But how on earth to get the fleecers, the enemy, to agree to this?  I'm just wondering if it's worth sending them something like -

 

 

Dear OPS,

 

Re: PCN no. XXXXX

 

please note that I have recently moved from XXXXX (Address B) to XXXXX (Address C).

 

The PCN is completely without merit and should never have been issued.  It is for "Failure to park within a marked bay".  There were no marked bays to park in!  I have taken numerous photos of the car park, one of which I enclose.

 

I understand that you have a CCJ by default against me for this matter, as the court papers were sent to my previous address.  I am going to apply to the court to have the CCJ set aside, afterwards I will vigorously defend the claim and apply for full costs. 

 

I suggest it would be mutually beneficial if court costs were reduced to a minimum and I therefore invite you to consent to have the CCJ set aside.  I look forward to receiving your reply within 14 days.  In the absence of a reply I will apply for set aside myself.

 

 

It'll probably get you nowhere but may be worth a try.  There are other regulars here who know a hell of a lot more than me about set asides, so see what they say.   

 

We are here to help, not to criticise, but as other motorists will read this thread, it is a bad idea to appeal as the fleecers never accept appeals, it is a bad idea to throw away the paperwork when you're in legal dispute, and it is a bad idea to move without informing parties you are in dispute with as you risk ending up with a backdoor CCJ like this.

[FTMDave]

dx, Andy, BN, do you think the drafted letter in post 26 is a good idea?

[FTMDave]

Thanks Andy.

[FTMDave]

OK, send the letter I suggested off then tomorrow.  You might as well get a free Certificate of Posting from the post office.

 

The idea is to show the fleecers that you intend to fight this, and there will be costs involved, so it's in their interests too to keep costs down.  I doubt they'll accept but you have nothing to lose.  Nothing ventured ...

 

Send a copy of one of the photos with your letter so they see their case is pants and you can prove it.

 

Whatever you do, do not pay the CCJ.  As dx wrote in post 23, if you pay it the CCJ will still be there on your credit file for six years.  

 

 

[FTMDave]

Have you had any reply from the fleecers?

[FTMDave]

OK, well done.  As explained in post 21, the hearing should only last a few minutes and you have a 99% chance of success.

 

Just make sure you prepare well.  Have (a) proof of you living at the three addresses, and (b) be able to answer when the judge asks how you intend to defend the claim (you paid, you didn't break the terms of the contract, they say you failed to park in a marked bay but there were no marked bays and you have the photos to prove it ... plus anything else you can think of).

 

Please let us know how the hearing goes.

[FTMDave]

Well done on the set aside.

 

However, what you have written in "Supporting Evidence" is wrong, wrong and wrong again - but certainly not fatal.

 

Can you please clarify who you sent it to and what was the purpose of the document.

 

Have you read other threads here?  I suspect not and that is the cause of these basic mistakes. 

[FTMDave]

LFI took the words out of my mouth.  Prepare properly and you can wipe the floor with OPS here.  But get it wrong and it'll be CCJ time again.  Will you please answer the questions and points raised from post 49 onwards.

[FTMDave]

The regulars here are always available to have a look at correspondence you propose to send or documentation you are about to file.  It would have been much better to have posted up your defence before sending it.

 

Caggers are also supposed to read threads similar to their own to educate themselves about the legal process and the best tactics to use.  If you had done so you would have seen the best defence is very short & generic.  Grossly simplifying

   - the Claimant files a brief Particulars of Claim

   - the Defendant files a brief defence (tactically if you file a long defence the fleecers will know what you are going to say and have months to make up lies to counter your defence.  For the same reason when you suggested a set aside by consent I said to send them one photo, not the whole shebang)

   - a fortnight before the court case both parties have to file a detailed Witness Statement.  That is the time to hit them with all your evidence, if possible after receiving theirs so you can rubbish it.

 

Please understand this is not a fine (BN's post 51).  Referring to "the fine" will just encourage the fleecers to pursue you thinking you don't know the law.

 

However, none of this is fatal.

 

Please post up anything the judge decided as dx says.

 

Also get yourself on MCOL and see the point your case is at.  Please do these things ASAP.

[FTMDave]

So?  Does the case show as defended on MCOL?

[FTMDave]

Sorry to hear about the unwell child.

 

The reason I've gone on & on about MCOL is because it's essential to find out if you case is defended, otherwise you'll end up with another CCJ.  Try again tomorrow.

 

Once that is settled, we can deal with the issue of the document you sent to the court as a defence.

Edited July 11, 2021 by FTMDave
Mix-up by me

[FTMDave]

That is very welcome news.

 

It doesn't really matter that your defence was different from what we would have suggested or that you used the word "fine".  The important thing is to get a defence filed.

 

Relax for the moment and see if the fleecers have the gonads for a rematch.

 

On 10/07/2021 at 23:54, Rmg2020 said:

And I didn't know there was still a chance of getting my money back for the set aside!

I doubt very much you can directly get your money back for the set aside.

 

What you can do, if you wish, after seeing the fleecers off, is sue them for misuse of your GDPR.  They knew full well right from the start that they had no right to process your data - how can you park in a marked bay when there aren't any marked bays?!! - and yet have misused your personal data in about the worst way possible.  That could be a way to hit them in the pocket and indirectly cover your set aside costs.  But concentrate on seeing off their rubbish claim first.

[FTMDave]

HB is right, don't reply. 

 

They were so anxious "to assist the court" a few weeks ago that they wouldn't accept a set aside by consent and are now pursuing a hopeless case, so stuff them.

[FTMDave]

As the directions state, Witness Statements to be exchanged no less than 14 days before the hearing.  Have a search, there are some cracking Witness Statements you can use on here as a basis for yours.

[FTMDave]

The court won't look badly on you negotiating, indeed the parties are encouraged to negotiate.  But beware you are dealing with liars and conmen who will try to trick you into paying, and obviously you must never admit in writing to actually being liable for their invoice.

 

However, if you go down the road you are suggesting, you will throw away any chance of them discontinuing the case as they will immediately see you as someone certain to pay.

 

dx is right, none of the WSs you've read were "professional", they were written by ordinary people who got these tickets and did a bit of research to fight back. 

 

If you are the sort of person tempted to give in, surely the time to give in was when they wanted £60, not now.

 

When I knock off work this evening I'll read through your thread from the start and try to point you in the direction of useful WSs.

[FTMDave]

Have a look at the WS in Alaska101's thread  https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/421775-vcs-spycar-pcn-paploc-now-claimform-no-stopping-east-midlands-airport/page/5/#comments  It should be at post 110 but if you can't find it there look at the posts immediately above/below.  The post starts "Thank you guys".  Look at the way Alaska101 has numbered the paragraphs and put a title for each legal argument.  You need to do something similar so all is clear for the judge.  Something like - 

 

Sequence of events - you parked, you paid, after you got a PCN, then threatening letters, you moved, you discovered you had a default CCJ, you got it set aside.

 

No locus standi - OPS are not the land owners, you believe they have no right to sue you (this section will have to be extremely generic at the moment and ready to be changed when they send their WS.  Or did they send one first time round?  If so, please upload it).

 

No keeper liability - they are suing the wrong person, they should be suing the driver, you are only the keeper of the car, they have not established keeper liability under Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (again, this will need to be changed when we get to see their WS).

 

No breach of contract - you paid, you did nothing wrong, you did not overstay the time you'd paid for.

 

Unreasonable conditions - their PCN is for not parking in a marked bay, but there are no marked bays to park in, indeed the car park resembles Brighton town tip, it's clear OPS have no interest in running the car park properly but just want to issue PCNs.

 

Planning Permission/Breach of Code of Practise - you do not believe they have PP for their signs, this is a criminal offence and makes it impossible for a contract to be entered into, it is also a breach of their Code of Practise where they promise to apply for all legal permissions (I'm assuming in the last 16 months you've looked up the PP element).

 

Double Recovery - here you can use nigh-on verbatim paragraphs 18, 20-26 of Alaska101's WS.

 

So flesh out the points I've made, when you have time, in your own words, as dx says no need for legalese, and post it up.  You did nothing wrong.  You don't owe these fleecers a penny.  No way should you be willing to negotiate a settlement with them.  They've already made you pay £255.  Concentrate on smashing them in this case first, then later on we can plan how to get your £255 back, but that is for later.

[FTMDave]

Their WS is cut & paste tripe, includes nothing that can harm your case, and seems to have been signed by a five-year-old with a crayon.

 

In (22 iv) and (22 v) they admit there were no marked bays!

 

dx has cast doubt on their carppy contract.

 

So include all this in your WS draft when you have time.

[FTMDave]

11 hours ago, Rmg2020 said:

i have left this WS very late

Yes, you have.  Why?

 

You've already been through the set aside battle, a lot of the legal arguments (not all) could easily have been prepared months ago and last Friday I tried to set out what you needed to prepare.

 

I have a full day of work tomorrow, no doubt you have too and the same goes for most of the regulars.  We can't magically be free to prepare a whole WS, an uncomplicated but by necessity quite long legal document.

 

As dx says, the courts will allow you some flexibility, but please get on with it.

[FTMDave]

I can look through the WS late this evening but not before.

[FTMDave]

I've just managed to have a quick read through your WS, and it's not bad at all.  You could send it off today after making the changes LFI suggests.  If you think an extra 24 hours' delay is OK, I can go through it with a fine tooth comb but late this evening and suggest improvements.  Please let us know what you decide.

[FTMDave]

So have you sent the WS off yet?

 

If not I'm free this evening to help improve it, as I'm sure are the other regulars.

[FTMDave]

Yes, of course you can refer to their WS.

 

In yours points 6-9 need to go completely.

 

It would be much better to put headings on your sections so the judge knows which legal points you are raising.  Put "Locus Standi" above your point 10.

 

Above 11 write a title "No breach of contract".

 

12 is irrelevant and can go.

 

Above 13 write "Double Recovery".

 

You need to create two new sections "Signage" and "No keeper liability" and insert the points LFI suggested.

 

Make these changes and you're good to go.

 

If you have time expand point 11 which is your ace.  There was no signage whatsoever to show you couldn't park there, there was no logical reason you couldn't park there (it wasn't for example a staff parking area or blocking an exit door) and it makes no logical sense for motorists to not be allowed to park in huge chunks of a pay car park.  Either the attendant made a mistake and won't admit it or OPS deliberately allow the car park to deteriorate to a worse state than Brighton town tip so they can entrap motorists and issue tickets.