Recent Posts

Pages: 1 ... 5 6 [7] 8 9 10
61
Post up the PCN - this sounds like a council issued notice?
62
Private parking tickets / Re: PCN from 'Civil Enforcement Ltd'
« Last post by Mustek on Today at 09:07:04 am »
@badrav Your MCOL password is left unredacted in page 2. Please redact it or otherwise someone else could file a response on your behalf.
63
The deadline to respond is 14 days after 5 days after the date on the form, after that the claimant can apply for a judgment in default against you.
If you haven’t already got this, submit the acknowledgment of service immediately.

See https://www.lpc-law.co.uk/news/change-to-the-rules-on-entering-default-judgments/, for example:
Quote
Change to the Rules on Entering Default Judgments
14/02/2020
The Civil Procedure (Amendment) Rules 2020 (Statutory Instrument 2020 No. 82 (L. 6) come into force on 6 April 2020.

Amongst the changes which they bring, there is a shift in the approach to the timing of when a judgment in default may be entered under Part 12. CPR 12.3 will be amended to include the phrase, ‘at the date that judgment is entered’ in three key places.

The effect of this change is that an Acknowledgment of Service or Defence which is filed late but before the court enters judgment (that is, after the deadlines set out within CPR 15.4) will preclude the entering of a judgment in default. It de-emphasises the date on which judgment was requested by the Claimant.

This means that if there is a delay between the date on which a request for judgment is made and the date on which judgment is entered, during which either an Acknowledgment of Service or a Defence is filed, then judgment in default may not properly be entered against the Defendant.

Whilst this will not place any additional burden on the Claimant or their representatives, it does mean that the court will look to the date on which the Acknowledgment of Service or Defence was filed, in order to ascertain whether the default judgment was regularly entered or not. It stands to reason that judgments will be set aside on mandatory grounds under CPR 13.2 if it transpires that the response to the claim preceded the entry of judgment.

As a consequence of this change, Claimants will to some degree be at the mercy of the administrative efficiency of the court and the speed of the response time to requests for judgment.

The amended regime is of note to a wide range of practitioners, namely those who routinely issue claims using Part 7 and which are not susceptible to CPR 12.2, that are frequently with no response.
64
I managed to get one of them refunded definately better than nothing so always worth a try!
65
Sorry the website I was using to send attachments stopped working so figuring out another way.

Stupid me for beleving a wealthy family I went to work for. Awful road diversion so was an hour late, asked about off road parking they said it wss fine or they had a garage they could clear. Every road was residential so had to park, I assumed as they had a permit I could use it if I proved I was working. This is Kensington when I got home apparentlty they dont issue visitor permits. Why? How do you park there then.

Anyway to fight my way out?
66
Should I ignore the letter and let it go to court, or should I fill out the part where it says i want to contest this matter. I wont end up paying more of a fine if I end up ignoring the letter will I?
67
As others have said, drag this process out as much as possible.


Is there any chance that the vehicle is subject to a finance agreement? I ask because if that were true, the 'owner' would be a finance company - that would mess them up!


I'd defiantly appeal as this will give you further access to the POPLA appeal process which will further consume a period of time.

Also, personal experience tells me that POPLA are unlikely to agree with the operators statement regarding 'reasonable assumption' with regard to keeper liability - the fact is, there is no legal mechanism which can move liability from the owner to the keeper. If liability could be shifted from party to party so easily then there would be no need for the processes set out in PoFA. The fact that PoFA exists clearly demonstrates that the law requires something greater than 'reasonable assumption' when moving liability to the keeper. The operator's claim of reasonable assumption is being made out of necessity rather than any proven legal process. VCS v Edward also confirms the legal position of reasonable assumption with regard to keeper liability.
68
You obviously submitted a strong appeal - this is evidenced by their failure to engage with any points raised.

You now have a choice - I personally recommend going down the IAS route as it shows that you are willing to engage / resolve the issue.

Could you post the content of your original appeal?
70
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1nXr7GgXtEfglXh0D5-BqimFoC8Ly5krB/view?usp=share_link

Please let me if you can access the PDF file through the above link

Regards,
Ashraf

Yes - very clear - BUT

it shows yr namr & address long enough to read before the overlying redaction appears. You may wish to actually cover the name & address with a small piece of paper qmd then rescan or photo before re-uploading.
Pages: 1 ... 5 6 [7] 8 9 10