On 29/03/2010 16:52, Paul Stevenson wrote:

"Adrian" wrote in message
...
"Paul Stevenson" gurgled happily, sounding
much like they were saying:

Why did he go to the court in Bristol when the incident happended in
London?

Because, as the text you quoted said...

claimed he did not
hear from SWT until a year later — after he had moved to Bristol

But the case had not moved to Bristol so the court there would not know
anything about it.

Perhaps there is a mechanism for declaring you have "received no
court correspondence" at a convenient location? Presumably the court
system has access to a phone or carrier pigeon or something.

A friend once got sent a fine for cycling without lights at a time he
could prove he was out the country. He was able to make some kind of
formal declaration that he knew nothing at all about it (it was
suspected that someone else had been stopped and had given his name).

And it isn't entirely unknown for people to say bailiffs have made
legally questionable claims.

Of course none of this means I'd take anything in the Standard at face
value....

--
Arthur Figgis Surrey, UK