PePiPoo Helping the motorist get justice Support health workers

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

UK CPM, lay representation refused
bobbione
post Wed, 16 Jan 2019 - 20:05
Post #1


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 61
Joined: 16 Jan 2019
Member No.: 101,949



In court today. Defendant has very poor English. I attended having helped get paperwork together. He had permit to park had straddled bays too small for modern cars to fit in.

We had Jopson and Bull prepared as sign was prohibitive not terms of parking. Further included line 'terms only apply to those parking without permission'

Arrive an hour early. No show by UKCPM go in and judge refuses my request to represent. I am a notified witness in the respons to claim and our counter claim.

Judge asks defendant to speak and he answers questions. I ask to.submit my evidence. Judge instructs defendant to ask me questions!! I offered the cases referred to in my statement. Said no contract without consideration. All waved away as introducing arguments not facts.

As for right to appeal. Refused. Have form from court asking circuit judge to consider an appeal.

The defendant not even a tenant. Used permit to come and take kids (nephew (preschool) and niece (infant)) to medical appointments.

We had their WS 24/12/18 , his xmas day. He couldn't get help from until 4/1/19. Needed to send his WS by 2/1/19 which absent any proof of use of land or sign as 2016 we had responded in time but by the 6/1/ had a fuller defence statement which was posted to court and emailed to Gladstone.

If I have screwed it up by not following practise direction I'd rather know now before going on with appeal.

The defendant does not undestand written english beyond the most simple english.

This mess came about as he was in a hire car via insurance claim so multiple notices to keeper unt.hire company nails him for an administrative charge tgat he understood to be 'having paid the ticket'

Right old mess
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
4 Pages V  « < 2 3 4  
Start new topic
Replies (60 - 73)
Advertisement
post Wed, 16 Jan 2019 - 20:05
Post #


Advertise here!









Go to the top of the page
 
Quote Post
bobbione
post Tue, 29 Jan 2019 - 19:51
Post #61


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 61
Joined: 16 Jan 2019
Member No.: 101,949



Please read the thread .

Reasons for refusal were given - form 16b (McKenzie friend not the same as lay representation)nothing to do with witness status of lay representative. I had to prompt judge I was witness on counter claim. I had taken pictures of bays and measured There to make a statement to the same under oath if necessary. Cover our rear so to speak if they turned up (no notice of non attendance as is required) to challenge that a typical visitor with permit would find it IMPOSSIBLE to park inside a bay. In the preparing we did not have signage in time for the Bull and Jopson and were scrabbling to get in once we did. Submitted revised statement 14 days before trial and skeleton 45mins before hearing. Skeleton wa ...s ohh god just read the thread ....

If the court understood the rules fully then the hearing could have progressed CPR Part 27 and 32. That is the problem with the cuts. There used to be court clerk to help with machinery/processes of a hearing.

Anyway

- litigant in person is also a witness at a hearing
- witness is questioned about statement or their expertise. To have that questioned by both parties . Tailoring evidence edging toward perjury.

This post has been edited by bobbione: Tue, 29 Jan 2019 - 19:57
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
cabbyman
post Tue, 29 Jan 2019 - 20:00
Post #62


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 6,898
Joined: 15 Dec 2007
From: South of John O'Groats, north of Cape Town.
Member No.: 16,066



Popcorn time! 🍿


--------------------
Cabbyman 11 PPCs 0
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
southpaw82
post Tue, 29 Jan 2019 - 20:17
Post #63


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 33,610
Joined: 2 Apr 2008
From: Not in the UK
Member No.: 18,483



QUOTE (bobbione @ Tue, 29 Jan 2019 - 19:51) *
Please read the thread .

Reasons for refusal were given - form 16b (McKenzie friend not the same as lay representation)nothing to do with witness status of lay representative. I had to prompt judge I was witness on counter claim. I had taken pictures of bays and measured There to make a statement to the same under oath if necessary. Cover our rear so to speak if they turned up (no notice of non attendance as is required) to challenge that a typical visitor with permit would find it IMPOSSIBLE to park inside a bay. In the preparing we did not have signage in time for the Bull and Jopson and were scrabbling to get in once we did. Submitted revised statement 14 days before trial and skeleton 45mins before hearing. Skeleton wa ...s ohh god just read the thread ....

If the court understood the rules fully then the hearing could have progressed CPR Part 27 and 32. That is the problem with the cuts. There used to be court clerk to help with machinery/processes of a hearing.

Anyway

- litigant in person is also a witness at a hearing
- witness is questioned about statement or their expertise. To have that questioned by both parties . Tailoring evidence edging toward perjury.

I have read the thread, you just don’t appear to understand what I said. What you post is mostly gibberish, I’m surprised that anyone is still trying to help you.


--------------------
Moderator

Any comments made do not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon. No lawyer/client relationship should be assumed nor should any duty of care be owed.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
bobbione
post Tue, 29 Jan 2019 - 20:25
Post #64


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 61
Joined: 16 Jan 2019
Member No.: 101,949



Lay representative Order 1999 is solid (CPRules are inferior to the order in Law (in lay terms The Order is signed by Parliament The CPR PART 27 a variation signed by a Deputy District Judge (in this hearing))

if not then

Then what about this procedural fault?


27.9

(1) If a party who does not attend a final hearing–

(a) has given written notice to the court and the other party at least 7 days before the hearing date that he will not attend;

(b) has served on the other party at least 7 days before the hearing date any other documents which he has filed with the court; and

© has, in his written notice, requested the court to decide the claim in his absence and has confirmed his compliance with paragraphs (a) and (b) above,

the court will take into account that party’s statement of case and any other documents he has filed and served when it decides the claim.

(2) If a claimant does not –

(a) attend the hearing; and

(b) give the notice referred to in paragraph (1),

the court may strike out(GL) the claim.


minimum = statement should have been refused (it will take into into account if compliant with paragraph (1)
(given it's other failings (READ ABOVE)
claim should be stuck out

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
southpaw82
post Tue, 29 Jan 2019 - 20:38
Post #65


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 33,610
Joined: 2 Apr 2008
From: Not in the UK
Member No.: 18,483



QUOTE (bobbione @ Tue, 29 Jan 2019 - 20:25) *
Lay representative Order 1999 is solid (CPRules are inferior to the order in Law (in lay terms The Order is signed by Parliament The CPR PART 27 a variation signed by a Deputy District Judge (in this hearing))


The Lay Representatives (Rights of Audience) Order 1999 is subordinate legislation made under the provisions of the Courts and Legal Services Act 1990. The CPR is subordinate legislation made under the provisions of the Civil Procedure Act 1997. Neither is inferior to the other.

You seem to have misinterpreted “may” as “must” where you interpret r 27.9.


--------------------
Moderator

Any comments made do not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon. No lawyer/client relationship should be assumed nor should any duty of care be owed.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
bobbione
post Tue, 29 Jan 2019 - 21:03
Post #66


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 61
Joined: 16 Jan 2019
Member No.: 101,949



Only Parliament can vary The Lay Representatives Order. Judges under powers/Law of the Civil procedures may vary directions within that order as and only as the rules set out.

Therefore the powers/Law of The LR Order are superior in a small claims court and only a small claims court.

I fully understand 27.9 and my emphasis of should follows (READ ABOVE (this whole read in regard the failings of the claimant at the claim, within the witness statement and others)

that the claim be set aside.

Anyway the witness statement should not have been allowed.

I figure i am prepared as I can be given the timeline for submission.

So like the smart Billy Goat Gruff's I am going to cross the bridge.

No doubt (this post) will be going over the heads of some here.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
southpaw82
post Tue, 29 Jan 2019 - 21:13
Post #67


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 33,610
Joined: 2 Apr 2008
From: Not in the UK
Member No.: 18,483



QUOTE (bobbione @ Tue, 29 Jan 2019 - 21:03) *
Only Parliament can vary The Lay Representatives Order.


Well, no. The power to make Orders such as the 1999 Order is vested in the Lord Chancellor, who needs the concurrence of the Lord Chief Justice. Any Order made by him under s 11 of the Courts and Legal Services Act 1990 doesn’t require the consent of Parliament (it’s already given in the 1990 Act); such an Order can be annulled by Parliament (see s 120) but that’s a different thing to saying that only Parliament can vary it.

QUOTE
I fully understand 27.9


Maybe you do, maybe you don’t. I’m not convinced.

QUOTE
that the claim be set aside.


I’m not sure a claim can be set aside.

QUOTE
Anyway the witness statement should not have been allowed.


Perhaps, perhaps not. That’s a matter for the judge.

QUOTE
No doubt (this post) will be going over the heads of some here.

That’s probably got a lot to do with your apparent inability to write coherent English.


--------------------
Moderator

Any comments made do not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon. No lawyer/client relationship should be assumed nor should any duty of care be owed.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
nosferatu1001
post Wed, 30 Jan 2019 - 08:31
Post #68


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 28,687
Joined: 27 Nov 2007
Member No.: 15,642



Bobbione - before dismissing Southpaws help so lightly, I HIGHLY recommend you review their posts on other threads.
They are one of the more qualified people here to opine on this topic, and really do know what they are talking about. THey are not an amateur at this.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Ollyfrog
post Wed, 30 Jan 2019 - 10:52
Post #69


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 419
Joined: 22 Oct 2018
Member No.: 100,530



The coherent English point that Southpaw makes is also very valid.

I'm sure you're very clever and can pick up on lots of legal points, probably can converse well and make yourself understood in oral English, but to be honest, your written English is very hard to follow most of the time.

I appreciate that you are trying to help someone and I applaud that, but I would suggest (as an attempt to be helpful and not criticise!) that you enlist the help of somebody who is a native English speaker. Explain to them what you are trying to say and have them write it up for you. Once we can understand what you are trying to say then people can advise and give you pointers more easily.

Bear in mind that if a judge can't clearly understand a point that you're trying to make on paper they're under no obligation to consider it. They can't second guess what you *may* have meant by something, it has to be clear and unambiguous. As it stands it's in danger of just being rejected within minutes or seconds even.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
nosferatu1001
post Wed, 30 Jan 2019 - 11:49
Post #70


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 28,687
Joined: 27 Nov 2007
Member No.: 15,642



And, as pointed out, I doubt a hearing on papers will be sufficient for the substantive points around the need for a lay rep
But expect to be asked why the person did not arrange for an interpretor - a point you havent even bothered to answer.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
bobbione
post Wed, 8 May 2019 - 19:24
Post #71


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 61
Joined: 16 Jan 2019
Member No.: 101,949



Good news

Appeal allowed Article 6 human rights likely denied.

Lay Representatives Order is an Affirmative Statutory Instrument making it constitutional right to be represented and as right of audience in the small claims court.

Onto the request for a hearing on papers.


Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
bobbione
post Wed, 15 May 2019 - 16:02
Post #72


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 61
Joined: 16 Jan 2019
Member No.: 101,949



Update

PPC not contesting appeal. Optioned for re-trial.

How to have CCJ removed from register?

Anyway of appeal hearing court time used to assist with further directions for retrial?

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
bobbione
post Wed, 15 May 2019 - 18:24
Post #73


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 61
Joined: 16 Jan 2019
Member No.: 101,949



CPR 52.18 to vary the notice?

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
bobbione
post Fri, 14 Jun 2019 - 16:08
Post #74


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 61
Joined: 16 Jan 2019
Member No.: 101,949



Finally

Order set aside .

Money paid to date, as per the order, refunded by the PPC.

Next

costs, damages, counterclaim, retrial, challenge .....
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

4 Pages V  « < 2 3 4
Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 



Advertisement

Advertise here!

RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: Thursday, 28th March 2024 - 19:18
Pepipoo uses cookies. You can find details of the cookies we use here along with links to information on how to manage them.
Please click the button to accept our cookies and hide this message. We’ll also assume that you’re happy to accept them if you continue to use the site.
IPS Driver Error

IPS Driver Error

There appears to be an error with the database.
You can try to refresh the page by clicking here