IMPORTANT: Please make sure your posts do not contain any personally identifiable information (both your own and that of others). When uploading images, please take care that you have redacted all personal information including QR codes, number plates and reference numbers.

CEL Defense for overstay @ Gym Car Park

2

Comments

  • Redx
    Redx Posts: 38,084
    First Anniversary Name Dropper First Post Photogenic
    Forumite
    Rjones wrote: »
    Had a look at the stickied newbies post but could not find what to do next.

    Coupon-Mad, is the next stage to print our my defense and post it to them if I'm not meant to be submitting it through the MCOL?

    Many thanks

    check post #2 of that thread and especially READ the bargepole links

    if you have not read the basic information provided by bargepole you really are hamstrung
  • Rjones
    Rjones Posts: 13 Forumite
    Thanks ^

    I've read above and it seems to make more sense now, and also the newbies post (incredibly helpful!)

    Another question I have in relation to this, or specifically the first sentence regarding "I am the keeper of vehicle xxxxxxxx"
    At this point in time, or more accurately since May of last year, I no longer own the car and have sold it on, do I need to take any amendments to my defence?

    Claim Number
    Between:
    Civil Enforcement Limited v
    Defence Statement

    I am MR EXAMPLE the defendant in this matter and registered keeper of vehicle XX99ZZZ I currently reside at 4 FAKE STREET, FAKE COUNTY..

    The Claim Form issued on the 22 February 2017 by Civil Enforcement Limited was not correctly filed under The Practice Direction as it was not signed by a legal person but signed by “The Legal Team”.

    I deny I am liable for the entirety of the claim for each and every one of the following reasons:

    1/ This case can be distinguished from ParkingEye v Beavis [2015] UKSC 67 (the Beavis case) which was dependent upon an undenied contract, formed by unusually prominent signage forming a clear offer and which turned on unique facts regarding the location and the interests of the landowner. Strict compliance with the BPA Code of Practice (CoP) was paramount and Mr Beavis was the driver who saw the signs and entered into a contract to pay £85 after exceeding a licence to park free. None of this applies in this material case.

    2/ This Claimant has not complied with pre-court protocol:
    (a)There was no compliant ‘Letter before County Court Claim’, under the Practice Direction, despite the Defendant's requests for this and further information.
    (b) This is a speculative serial litigant, issuing a large number of identical 'draft particulars'. The badly mail-merged documents contain very little information. The covering letter merely contains a supposed PCN number with no contravention nor photographs.
    (c) The Claim form Particulars were extremely sparse and divulged no cause of action nor sufficient detail. The Defendant has no idea what the claim is about - why the charge arose, what the alleged contract was; nothing that could be considered a fair exchange of information.!

    3/ I put the Claimant to strict proof that it issued a compliant notice under Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012. Absent such a notice served within 14 days of the parking event and with fully compliant statutory wording, this Claimant is unable to hold me liable under the strict ‘keeper liability’ provisions.!
    Henry Greenslade, lead adjudicator of POPLA in 2015 and an eminent barrister and parking law expert stated that “However keeper information is obtained, there is no ‘reasonable presumption’ in law that the registered keeper of a vehicle is the driver. Operators should never suggest anything of the sort.”!

    4/ Inadequate signs incapable of binding the driver - this distinguishes this case from the Beavis case:
    (a) Sporadic and illegible (charge not prominent nor large lettering) of site/entrance signage - breach of the POFA 2012 Schedule 4 and the BPA Code of Practice and no contract formed to pay any clearly stated sum.
    (b) Non existent ANPR 'data use' signage - breach of ICO rules and the BPA Code of Practice.
    (c) It is believed the signage was not lit and any terms were not transparent or legible; this is an unfair contract, not agreed by the driver and contrary to the Consumer Rights Act 2015 in requiring a huge inflated sum as 'compensation' from by an authorised party using the premises as intended.
    (d) No promise was made by the driver that could constitute consideration because there was no offer known nor accepted. No consideration flowed from the Claimant.

    5/ BPA CoP breaches - this distinguishes this case from the Beavis case:
    (a) the signs were not compliant in terms of the font size, lighting or positioning.
    (b) the sum pursued exceeds £100.
    (c) there is/was no compliant landowner contract.

    6/ No standing - this distinguishes this case from the Beavis case:
    It is believed Civil Enforcement do not hold a legitimate contract at this car park. As an agent, the Claimant has no legal right to bring such a claim in their name which should be in the name of the landowner.

    7/ No legitimate interest - this distinguishes this case from the Beavis case:


    8/ The Beavis case confirmed the fact that, if it is a matter of trespass (not breach of any contract), a parking firm has no standing as a non-landowner to pursue even nominal damages.

    9/ The charge is an unenforceable penalty based upon a lack of commercial justification. The Beavis case confirmed that the penalty rule is certainly engaged in any case of a private parking charge and was only disengaged due to the unique circumstances of that case, which do not resemble this claim.

    10/ The claimant has added unrecoverable sums to the original parking charge.

    The Defendant denies any liability whatsoever to the Claimant in any matter and asks the Court to note that the Claimant has:
    (a) failed to disclose any cause of action in the incorrectly filed Claim Form issued on 21 February 2017
    (b) failed to respond to a letter from the Defendant dated *** requesting further information and details of the claim

    The vague Particulars of Claim disclose no clear cause of action. The court is invited to strike out the claim of its own volition as having no merit and no reasonable prospects of success.

    I believe the facts contained in this Defence Statement are true.

    Signed



    Date
  • Coupon-mad
    Coupon-mad Posts: 130,639
    Name Dropper First Post Photogenic First Anniversary
    Forumite
    At this point in time, or more accurately since May of last year, I no longer own the car and have sold it on, do I need to take any amendments to my defence?
    Nope.
    I am MR EXAMPLE the defendant in this matter and registered keeper of vehicle XX99ZZZ I currently reside at 4 FAKE STREET, FAKE COUNTY..
    On pepipoo, Southpaw is keen to get people to remove that. No need for that flowery introduction because your headings already say who you are, and you are signing it.
    PRIVATE 'PCN'? DON'T PAY BUT DON'T IGNORE IT (except N.Ireland).
    CLICK at the top of this/any page where it says:
    Forum Home»Motoring»Parking Tickets Fines & Parking - read the NEWBIES THREAD
  • Rjones
    Rjones Posts: 13 Forumite
    Thanks Coupon-mad,

    I've made those changes and printed my letter to post, should I expect to receive anything after this?
  • Redx
    Redx Posts: 38,084
    First Anniversary Name Dropper First Post Photogenic
    Forumite
    Rjones wrote: »
    Thanks Coupon-mad,

    I've made those changes and printed my letter to post, should I expect to receive anything after this?

    all explained by bargepole in the posts you say you have read (linked from post #2 of the NEWBIES sticky thread)
  • Marktheshark
    Marktheshark Posts: 5,841
    First Post Combo Breaker First Anniversary
    Forumite
    What is the counter claim fee these days ?
    This sounds like the gym have the power to cancel the penalty but refuse to do so.
    I do Contracts, all day every day.
  • Lamilad
    Lamilad Posts: 1,412
    First Anniversary Photogenic Name Dropper First Post
    Forumite
    Rjones wrote: »
    I've made those changes and printed my letter to post

    Don't waste money on paper, ink, envelopes, stamps, or time faffing around at the post office.

    use email as advised by CM
    Coupon-mad wrote: »
    Yes or email it to the CCBC at Northampton with the claim number and 'defence' (NOT defense') in the subject line.
    Rjones wrote: »
    Thanks Coupon-mad,
    should I expect to receive anything after this?
    The newbies thread explains the process step by step. If they continue the next thing you'll get is the directions questionnaire (DQ)
  • Fruitcake
    Fruitcake Posts: 58,155
    Name Dropper Photogenic First Anniversary First Post
    Forumite
    Have you cancelled your gym membership yet, explaining why it has now become too expensive?

    Have you left negative feedback about the gym on social media explaining that the parking there is run by scammers and the gym won't help genuine customers?
    I married my cousin. I had to...
    I don't have a sister. :D
    All my screwdrivers are cordless.
    "You're Safety Is My Primary Concern Dear" - Laks
  • Half_way
    Half_way Posts: 7,029
    First Anniversary Name Dropper First Post
    Forumite
    Rjones wrote: »
    Visited them on Saturday and they told me that they can cancel it up to a certain point, but after a long period they aren't able to do anything else - showing them my paperwork they said they weren't able to help any further.

    So far, I have submitted the "Acknowledgement of claim" online, and also got my defense written up.
    Had a look at the stickied newbies post but could not find what to do next.

    Coupon-Mad, is the next stage to print our my defense and post it to them if I'm not meant to be submitting it through the MCOL?

    Many thanks
    #

    The Gym has spouted the usual crap that PPCs tell them to, and you have taken it hook line and sinker.
    you have been fobbed off, conned, tricked and lied to and you have rolled over and accepted this
    Without the support of the principal, CEL can not pursue this in court.
    It does not matter what it says in any contract./agreement between the Gym and CEL regarding cancellation, without support from the principal the parking company has no authority to purse this matter.
    the Gym can withdraw this authority right up to the hearing I believe that a representative from the gym can also withdraw this authority right up to the point of judgement.

    try something like this
    Re parking charge notice__________ issued by Civil Enforcement Limited
    We ______________ name of Gym, do not support our agents, Civil Enforcement Limited pursuing the issue of a parking_ charge notice issued to _____________ in respect of a vehicle registration __________ through the court system and wasting valuable court time and public money on an issue that can easily be resolved out of court ____________ (name) was a customer of ours, using the gym for the duration of the parking event.
    We therefore ask that this unreasonable action by our agents against one of our vauled customers is struck out ( cancelled) with immediate effect

    Signed Name ( of gym employee/representative)_____________

    date___________________

    If they refuse to cancel, or agree to that, then look into a counter claim.
    Also take a good look at any terms and conditions regarding your gym membership, do as Fruitcake mentions.
    and also look into a counter claim against the Gym as a result of their agents actions.
    keep an accurate log of how much time you are spending on this, plus any other costs, you may be able to then use that in a claim against the gym for expenses / costs as you will have a hard figure and evidence.
    Plus if you get some money out of the rotten system, then it may make it a little easier, and worth while for all of us who give up our time freely to respond and help those victims of the PPC world, such as yourself.
    From the Plain Language Commission:

    "The BPA has surely become one of the most socially dangerous organisations in the UK"
  • Hi Rjones, your claim and mine seem very similar however you do say in your defence "10 (b) failed to respond to a letter from the Defendant dated *** requesting further information and details of the claim.
    If you don't mind my asking what did you ask?
This discussion has been closed.
Meet your Ambassadors

Categories

  • All Categories
  • 342.5K Banking & Borrowing
  • 249.9K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
  • 449.4K Spending & Discounts
  • 234.6K Work, Benefits & Business
  • 607.1K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
  • 172.8K Life & Family
  • 247.4K Travel & Transport
  • 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
  • 15.8K Discuss & Feedback
  • 15.1K Coronavirus Support Boards