Your browser isn't supported
It looks like you're using an old web browser. To get the most out of the site and to ensure guides display correctly, we suggest upgrading your browser now. Download the latest:

Welcome to the MSE Forums

We're home to a fantastic community of MoneySavers but anyone can post. Please exercise caution & report spam, illegal, offensive or libellous posts/messages: click "report" or email forumteam@.

Search
  • FIRST POST
    • stevecot1983
    • By stevecot1983 15th May 17, 10:05 AM
    • 24Posts
    • 10Thanks
    stevecot1983
    Civil Enforcement Ltd CCJ's
    • #1
    • 15th May 17, 10:05 AM
    Civil Enforcement Ltd CCJ's 15th May 17 at 10:05 AM
    Hi All

    I have read numerous post over the weekend here and on other forums and I have now completely confused/don't know what path to take.

    On Friday a prospective employer told me I had two CCJ's outstanding against my name, which I was completely unaware of - they were issued to a previous address, they do not appear on any of my credit files (according to Credit Expert its because the address hasn't been linked to my name but I can see it on the linked addresses part)

    After checking with Trust Online, and calling the courts (most unhelpful to begin with) I have found out these relate to Civil Enforcement Ltd.

    I have never received any correspondence from CEL or anyone acting on their behalf, after some googling I have found out this is a parking firm

    Timeline:
    Moved out of previous address in September 2012
    Updated my licence and log book October 2012 (no longer have to log book but my licence is dated October 2012 and was sent at the same time as my log book)
    Entered on the Electoral Register at current address November 2012
    CCJ's were issued in June and August 2015

    I lived in the property for about a year and in that time I had two vehicles registered there one which was sold in March 2012 the other I part exchanged in October 2013. The second was the one I had when moving to my current property in 2012.

    I believe I can try and get these set aside but after researching over the weekend I am feeling very out of my depth with all of this.

    How can I get the court paper work and particulars of the claim?
    I've tried contacting CEL on the telephone but I just get a voicemail, so how can I find out what vehicle this relates to, copies of the invoices/letters they sent etc?

    Because of the work I do the most important thing to me is having these removed from any records.

    Any help will be appreciated and apologies for posting yet another thread on this subject.
    Thanks
    Last edited by stevecot1983; 15-05-2017 at 11:14 AM. Reason: Change of details
Page 3
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 13th Jun 17, 8:20 PM
    • 51,582 Posts
    • 65,205 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    Call it a non-POFA case, from now on. Not 'pre-POFA'.

    can I request from the DVLA the details of when they updated the address on my log book? I no longer own the vehicle. I'm convinced it was pre October 2012.
    Yes you can ask the DVLA to tell you that.
    • stevecot1983
    • By stevecot1983 13th Jul 17, 10:11 PM
    • 24 Posts
    • 10 Thanks
    stevecot1983
    Well tomorrow is case number 1, caught me by surprise got the date through the post last week! Must admit am getting a little nervous now. Been reviewing my witness statement etc.

    Any last minute advice on anything?
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 13th Jul 17, 10:24 PM
    • 51,582 Posts
    • 65,205 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    You mean the first set aside application?

    Re-read saggi's thread, and see what his/her Judge said about the reasons for kicking out CEL's claim and granted back a refund of the £255. Try to show that has happened here too.

    And tell the Judge you have another one and can he/she possibly strike that one out too because the facts are essentially the same, the claim equally baseless and you are over £500 out of pocket due to a rogue ex-clamper firm using an old address to pursue a keeper when they cannot hold keepers liable.

    At the very least they abused the court process by filing two claims which has made you have this headache twice and 2 x fees, should have only filed one claim if they thought you owed them money (but you don't, a keeper can't be held liable without the applicable law being followed).

    See if you can get 2 birds killed with one stone, if you don't ask you won't get. See if the September date can be vacated if the Judge thinks you are right and the claims should both be kicked out, as a waste of the court's time. Ask for your costs, definitely, why should you lose out?

    Take a payslip/proof of wages to claim your costs for attending the hearing. Get there nice and early to pass any security checks and to feel calm & not rushed in. Take a book in case you are kept waiting.
    Last edited by Coupon-mad; 13-07-2017 at 10:28 PM.
    • stevecot1983
    • By stevecot1983 13th Jul 17, 10:33 PM
    • 24 Posts
    • 10 Thanks
    stevecot1983
    Yes sorry the first set aside hearing.

    I will re-read saggis thread.

    Good idea I will ask the judge tomorrow if he could - I didnt think of it that way!

    I have included a letter from my work stating my day rate and I have asked for my days wages back as part of my application along with the £255 fee.

    Thanks Coupon-Mad
    • stevecot1983
    • By stevecot1983 14th Jul 17, 1:29 PM
    • 24 Posts
    • 10 Thanks
    stevecot1983
    So I had the set aside hearing this morning, the Judge ordered the original default judgement be set aside on the grounds that I had moved out of the address the original claim was sent to 3 years before the claim was issued and therefore could not defend myself and that I had a strong defense for the claim. She did point out that in recent years there had been a number of high profile cases and that there was not a question over the right of the PPC's to issue tickets on behalf of landowners. She has ordered that I supply the court and the claimant with the defense within 14 days. No costs were I would have to claim these separately.
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 14th Jul 17, 1:56 PM
    • 51,582 Posts
    • 65,205 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    OK, good so far, so crack on with that defence next!

    And if they discontinue (which I think they might) be ready to slap in an immediate claim for those costs, an example was written by the legally-qualified LoadsofChildren123 and is linked in the NEWBIES thread post #2.

    In fact refer to your costs in your defence and state that's what you will do, if they discontinue.

    Would she not vacate or merge the September one, and expects you to go through that all over again?
    • stevecot1983
    • By stevecot1983 25th Jul 17, 10:48 PM
    • 24 Posts
    • 10 Thanks
    stevecot1983
    Hi All

    I am about to send of my defence statement for the claim that was recently set aside, please would you mind checking it through for me?

    In the County Court at
    Claim Number: B
    BETWEEN:

    Civil Enforcement Ltd (Claimant)
    vs
    (Defendant)

    __________________________________________________ _________________________
    Statement of Defence


    I am and I am the Defendant in this matter and I deny liability for the entirety of the claim.

    1. This case can be distinguished from ParkingEye v Beavis [2015] UKSC 67 (the Beavis case) which was dependent upon an un-denied 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 license to park free. None of this applies in this material case.

    2. The information contained within the claim form and witness statement is sparse of information giving only:

    a. The Defendant’s details, who was the registered keeper and not identified as the driver at the alleged time.
    b. The Vehicle Registration Number (VRN)
    c. The date and time of the alleged incident.
    d. Car park name and location.
    e. Outstanding amount and break down of costs.

    It does not detail
    a. Proof or confirmation of the driver at the time of the alleged incident.
    b. Proof of the vehicle entering and leaving the car park at the alleged times.
    c. Proof that the vehicle was actually parked for the alleged duration, only the arrival and departure time totalling 3 hours and 11 minutes.
    d. The vehicle make, model or colour.
    e. The details of any contract the Defendant is alleged to have entered into with the Claimant.

    3. I understand that the Claimant is a Parking Company which seeks to claim for “Parking Charge Notices” which the Claimant believes are due as a result of an alleged breach of contract for parking by a motorist.

    4. If the Claimant has obtained details of the vehicle for which the Defendant is the Registered Keeper, and used those details to make a claim for a “Parking Charge Notice”, I thus dispute the claim in its entirety as I do not know the wording of the contract nor do I know the means by which the contract was alleged to come into force.

    5. I further believe any such Parking Charge Notice does not conform to or was issued prior to the enactment of Protection of the Freedom Act 2012 Schedule 4 and thus the Register Keeper of the vehicle cannot be held liable for any unpaid charges.

    6. Furthermore, given the time delay of between the alleged breach of contract and the date of this Claim it is unreasonable to expect the Defendant to have a record of who was driving the vehicle at the time of the offence.

    7. On this basis I believe that the Claimant has not provided any reasonable cause of action and thus the claim should be dismissed in its entirety.
    Statement of Truth:
    I believe that the facts stated in this Defence Statement are true.
    Full Name:

    Dated 25/7/2017
    Signed……………………………………….
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 25th Jul 17, 10:55 PM
    • 51,582 Posts
    • 65,205 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    I couldn't see that you had mentioned the other case in September again (I would take every opportunity to mention the abuse of process of a parking firm issuing a 'queue' of separate claims about the same matter, which is an abuse of the court process.

    LoadsofChildren123 may have a suggestion because your defence looks a bit generic. I would add something along the lines that it is not believed that this Claimant provides adequate notice on signage, of the parking charge and no evidence has been provided as to the signs and terms on site on the material date.
    • stevecot1983
    • By stevecot1983 25th Jul 17, 11:04 PM
    • 24 Posts
    • 10 Thanks
    stevecot1983
    Thanks again coupon-mad i will make reference to the September case as well.

    I must say I have struggled a bit as the only paper work I have on this is a claim form a poor witness statement and a letter from Coop stating CEL had the right to issue tickets. I have not had any paper work from CEL with regards to this, there is no NTK or anything of that nature attached to the claim form so although I whole heartedly believe what you and other forum members are saying that the forms dont comply to POFA I cant say hand on heart they dont as I have never seen them (if that makes sense). I have found on Google maps the signs that were in the car park in May 2012 and I suppose I could make reference to them and the fact that one of the entrances is missing a sign.
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 25th Jul 17, 11:42 PM
    • 51,582 Posts
    • 65,205 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    I cant say hand on heart they dont
    Yes, you can say it is your 'honest belief' they don't, and put the claimant to strict proof of their full POFASchedule 4 compliance, along with their evidence as to who was driving and how the terms were brought plainly and transparently to the attention of the driver.

    You can say it is in the public domain as fact (with images of their NTKs from the same time as the parking event) that CEL have never used POFA compliant notices and as such, cannot hold a registered keeper liable - moreover, they cancel charges and discontinue claims, when registered keepers appeal or defend, on that basis. Therefore the Claimant had no basis to hold you liable and the claim should be struck out and your fees and expenses refunded

    Did you read saggi's thread?
Welcome to our new Forum!

Our aim is to save you money quickly and easily. We hope you like it!

Forum Team Contact us

Live Stats

693Posts Today

6,093Users online

Martin's Twitter
  • RT @TfLTravelAlerts: Oxford Circus and Bond Street stations now both reopened and all trains are stopping normally.

  • RT @metpoliceuk: We have not located any trace of suspects, evidence of shots fired or casualties. Officers still on scene. If you are in a?

  • My hopes and prayers are that this turns out to be nothing. Stay safe.

  • Follow Martin