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
    • s1290
    • By s1290 14th Jun 17, 12:52 PM
    • 14Posts
    • 5Thanks
    s1290
    CEL Court Claim, but I was out of the country when the car was parked'
    • #1
    • 14th Jun 17, 12:52 PM
    CEL Court Claim, but I was out of the country when the car was parked' 14th Jun 17 at 12:52 PM
    Hi There,

    I have just received a Claim Form from Northampton county court the claim is for £325.33 for parking in a sainsburys (apparently) the company claiming is civil enforcement ltd , I was on holiday during this time with proof in passport stamps, tickets etc and was not aware my car was used during this time i have had no previous correspondence for a ticket.

    I have aknowledged the claim and ticked the defend box via the online system, I dont have a clue what to do next or where i stand here.
    Last edited by s1290; 14-06-2017 at 4:16 PM. Reason: Title change
Page 1
    • Umkomaas
    • By Umkomaas 14th Jun 17, 1:59 PM
    • 15,432 Posts
    • 24,135 Thanks
    Umkomaas
    • #2
    • 14th Jun 17, 1:59 PM
    • #2
    • 14th Jun 17, 1:59 PM
    Please read the NEWBIES FAQ sticky, post #2 which walks you through the small claims court process.

    You need to change the header for this thread, as 'Sck' is a bit meaningless. How about:
    'CEL Court Claim, but I was out of the country when the car was parked'
    Click on the 'Edit' button of your first post, then further click the 'Go Advanced' button to change the header.
    We cannot provide you with a silver bullet to get you out of this. You have to be in for the long run, and need to involve yourself in research and work for you to get rid of this. It is not simple. We will help, but can't do it for you.

    Give a man a fish, and you feed him for a day; show him how to catch fish, and you feed him for a lifetime.
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 14th Jun 17, 10:22 PM
    • 51,473 Posts
    • 65,062 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    • #3
    • 14th Jun 17, 10:22 PM
    • #3
    • 14th Jun 17, 10:22 PM
    Copy any other CEL defence from April/May. Search & read a few, show us your draft first.

    CEL always fold. Always, for over a year.
    PRIVATE PCN? DON'T PAY BUT DO NOT IGNORE IT TWO Clicks needed for advice:
    Top of the page: Home>>Forums>Household & Travel>Motoring>Parking Tickets, Fines & Parking - read the 'NEWBIES' FAQS thread!
    Advice to ignore is WRONG, unless in Scotland/NI.

    • Umkomaas
    • By Umkomaas 14th Jun 17, 10:27 PM
    • 15,432 Posts
    • 24,135 Thanks
    Umkomaas
    • #4
    • 14th Jun 17, 10:27 PM
    • #4
    • 14th Jun 17, 10:27 PM
    Written by PePiPoo's highly respected regular 'Gan', the following describes the process CEL go through to inflate their claim, who else they involve, and how to beat them at their game.

    The standard process is :

    CEL sends an LBA
    If no payment, it doesn't issue a claim as it should but sends the account to ZZPS as an excuse to inflate the claim with charges that it's never paid

    ZZPS adds £60 and sends two letters in its own name plus one from Wright Hassall Solicitor that adds another £36

    Wright Hassall sends two letters - Final Notice and Formal Letter of Claim
    If no payment, it sends the account back to CEL

    CEL may or may not issue a claim
    If it issues a claim it will be for £236 plus a fake £50 Legal representative charge
    The additional detailed particulars of claim will have a fake Ashley Cohen signature

    If the claim is defended, pointing out the fake charges and signatures, CEL won't reply
    After four weeks the court will stay the claim so that CEL will have to pay to revive it
    The Defendant never hears from CEL again.

    I've written over 120 CEL defences and none of the claims has gone any further.
    We cannot provide you with a silver bullet to get you out of this. You have to be in for the long run, and need to involve yourself in research and work for you to get rid of this. It is not simple. We will help, but can't do it for you.

    Give a man a fish, and you feed him for a day; show him how to catch fish, and you feed him for a lifetime.
    • waamo
    • By waamo 14th Jun 17, 10:31 PM
    • 2,092 Posts
    • 2,498 Thanks
    waamo
    • #5
    • 14th Jun 17, 10:31 PM
    • #5
    • 14th Jun 17, 10:31 PM
    Whatever you do please don't think that ignoring it will make it go away. You must enter a defence. They will fold but you need to do a little work.
    This space for hire.
    • s1290
    • By s1290 15th Jun 17, 10:03 AM
    • 14 Posts
    • 5 Thanks
    s1290
    • #6
    • 15th Jun 17, 10:03 AM
    UMkomaas -Signature field
    • #6
    • 15th Jun 17, 10:03 AM
    Hi umkomaas the signature field is signed by civil enforcement limited this is the only letter i have received.
    • s1290
    • By s1290 15th Jun 17, 10:07 AM
    • 14 Posts
    • 5 Thanks
    s1290
    • #7
    • 15th Jun 17, 10:07 AM
    Waamo -Progress
    • #7
    • 15th Jun 17, 10:07 AM
    Hi waamo I have since yesterday - Aknowledged the claim and ticked i will defend and has gone through , who do i send the defence to ? Do i fill it online in the defend section , Do i send this to the courts or produce this as a letter or email them direct.
    Im very new to this sorry for the silly questions.
    • Quentin
    • By Quentin 15th Jun 17, 10:15 AM
    • 33,227 Posts
    • 17,175 Thanks
    Quentin
    • #8
    • 15th Jun 17, 10:15 AM
    • #8
    • 15th Jun 17, 10:15 AM
    You can do it online.

    See the newbies FAQ thread for a link to a guide to dealing with a money claim, lots of advice and links to other sources of information
    • Umkomaas
    • By Umkomaas 15th Jun 17, 10:21 AM
    • 15,432 Posts
    • 24,135 Thanks
    Umkomaas
    • #9
    • 15th Jun 17, 10:21 AM
    • #9
    • 15th Jun 17, 10:21 AM
    Hi waamo I have since yesterday - Aknowledged the claim and ticked i will defend and has gone through , who do i send the defence to ? Do i fill it online in the defend section , Do i send this to the courts or produce this as a letter or email them direct.
    Im very new to this sorry for the silly questions.
    Originally posted by s1290
    All the 'process' questions are answered in the NEWBIES FAQ sticky, post #2, most of it written by forum small claims court expert bargepole. It's best you study this section of the sticky because there will be a number of key processes you'll need to undertake, and in a particular order.

    You need to post up a draft of your defence here for expert eyes to look it over and give you the green light and the confidence to submit it. No need to start with a clean sheet of paper. Just do a forum search on 'CEL defence' or 'Civil Enforcement defence' and copy and paste from a recent one (2017), make sure it makes sense in respect of your case and then post it up here for critique.

    There will be a number of deadlines set by the court for you to complete certain actions - it is imperative you work within those deadlines and submit documents to timescale.

    Now you have acknowledged service (if you did that within 14 days of the 'Issue Date' on your court papers), you have a further 14 days to submit your defence. So in fact, including 5 days they allow for you to receive the initial court papers, you have a total of 33 days. So count those, starting with the 'Issue Date'.
    We cannot provide you with a silver bullet to get you out of this. You have to be in for the long run, and need to involve yourself in research and work for you to get rid of this. It is not simple. We will help, but can't do it for you.

    Give a man a fish, and you feed him for a day; show him how to catch fish, and you feed him for a lifetime.
    • hoohoo
    • By hoohoo 15th Jun 17, 12:11 PM
    • 1,675 Posts
    • 3,108 Thanks
    hoohoo
    CEL do not use keeper liability so one defence point will be

    1. The notice to keeper that CEL issues is not compliant with the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012, sch 4 and therefore there is no keeper liability. Only the driver is liable.

    2. I was not the driver for the event. I could not be as I was out of the country at the time. I will provide proof of this in my evidence and witness statement.

    3. There is therefore no cause of action against me
    Dedicated to driving up standards in parking
    • Umkomaas
    • By Umkomaas 15th Jun 17, 12:23 PM
    • 15,432 Posts
    • 24,135 Thanks
    Umkomaas
    @OP - Great advice from hoohoo who is a regular, knowledgable and trusted contributor on this forum and PePiPoo.
    We cannot provide you with a silver bullet to get you out of this. You have to be in for the long run, and need to involve yourself in research and work for you to get rid of this. It is not simple. We will help, but can't do it for you.

    Give a man a fish, and you feed him for a day; show him how to catch fish, and you feed him for a lifetime.
    • s1290
    • By s1290 15th Jun 17, 12:40 PM
    • 14 Posts
    • 5 Thanks
    s1290
    Wow
    You guys are just quality,seriously thank you will shortly send over my draft.
    • s1290
    • By s1290 15th Jun 17, 12:46 PM
    • 14 Posts
    • 5 Thanks
    s1290
    In the County Court Business Centre
    Claim Number *****
    Between:
    Civil Enforcement Limited v ******
    Defence Statement


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

    The Claim Form issued on the 21 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 "Claimant's Legal Representative"”.

    1).The notice to keeper that CEL issues are not compliant with the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012, sch 4 and therefore there is no keeper liability. Only the driver is liable.

    a). I was not the driver for the event. I could not be as I was out of the country at the time. I will provide proof of this in my evidence and witness statement.

    b). There is therefore no cause of action against me

    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) The claimant has not 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.

    4) There can be no 'presumption' by the claimant that the keeper was the driver. 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.”

    Schedule 4 also states that the only sum a keeper can be pursued for (if Schedule 4 is fully complied with, which it was not, and if there was a 'relevant obligation' and relevant contract' fairly and adequately communicated, which there was not as there was no clear, transparent information about how to obtain a permit either inside or outside the site) is the sum on the Notice to Keeper. They cannot pluck another sum from thin air and bolt that on as well when neither the signs, nor the NTK, nor the permit information mentioned a possible £250.33 for outstanding debt and damages.

    5) 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.

    6) 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.

    7) 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.

    8) 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.

    9) No legitimate interest - this distinguishes this case from the Beavis case:
    It is well known that this Claimant files serial claims regarding sites where they have lost the contract, known as 'revenge claims' and the defendant submits that this is one such case. This is not a legitimate reason to pursue a charge out of proportion with any loss or damages the true landowner could pursue.

    10) 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.

    11) The charge is an unenforceable penalty based upon a lack of commercial justification. The Beavis case confirms that the penalty rule is still 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.

    12) The claimant has added unrecoverable sums to the original parking charge. If Mr Cohen is an employee then the Defendant suggests he is remunerated and the particulars of claim dated 21st February 2017 are templates, so it is not credible that £50 legal costs were incurred. I deny the Claimant is entitled to any interest whatsoever.

    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 21st February 2017

    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:


    Hi guys also,
    Do i need to change the mr cohen to my name ?
    should i put the full amount including court fees etc or just the £250.33 which is next to outstanding debt and damages.
    Civil Enforcement Limited v ****** - Do i enter my name here ?

    Please let me know if i should remove any paragraphs or unnecessary defence info before i send off serious massive thank you to you guys quality stuff.
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 15th Jun 17, 11:04 PM
    • 51,473 Posts
    • 65,062 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    Do i need to change the mr cohen to my name ?
    Well, no...clearly that's talking about a CEL employee who signs some old trash for them:

    12) The claimant has added unrecoverable sums to the original parking charge. If Mr Cohen is an employee then the Defendant suggests he is remunerated and the particulars of claim dated 21st February 2017 are templates, so it is not credible that £50 legal costs were incurred. I deny the Claimant is entitled to any interest whatsoever.
    And surely you have not got PoC dated February...you can't just copy stuff verbatim!
    PRIVATE PCN? DON'T PAY BUT DO NOT IGNORE IT TWO Clicks needed for advice:
    Top of the page: Home>>Forums>Household & Travel>Motoring>Parking Tickets, Fines & Parking - read the 'NEWBIES' FAQS thread!
    Advice to ignore is WRONG, unless in Scotland/NI.

    • s1290
    • By s1290 16th Jun 17, 12:19 PM
    • 14 Posts
    • 5 Thanks
    s1290
    Of course not Coupon-Mad thanks for the response, I didn't want to enter the exact dates on here in case of them monitoring this , with all dates and names corrected do you think this is a sufficient defence ?
    • s1290
    • By s1290 16th Jun 17, 12:36 PM
    • 14 Posts
    • 5 Thanks
    s1290
    Draft complete
    Hi Umkomaas

    I feel the defence below would be sufficient, based on covering my main concern at the beginning 1) a,b,c - if you experts agree or wish i should amend, I will finalise and send off immediately and hope to get a response.

    I found this based on a similar case and the Claim was stayed.
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 16th Jun 17, 8:21 PM
    • 51,473 Posts
    • 65,062 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    But did you even get sent separate Particulars of claim? I am only concerned because that's not one of the more recent CEL defences (post Easter) and reads like you've copied it verbatim.
    PRIVATE PCN? DON'T PAY BUT DO NOT IGNORE IT TWO Clicks needed for advice:
    Top of the page: Home>>Forums>Household & Travel>Motoring>Parking Tickets, Fines & Parking - read the 'NEWBIES' FAQS thread!
    Advice to ignore is WRONG, unless in Scotland/NI.

    • s1290
    • By s1290 18th Jun 17, 1:50 PM
    • 14 Posts
    • 5 Thanks
    s1290
    coupon mad
    I havent received anything previous to the claim form atall , So i am struggling to find a defence for something that occurred when I wasnt even here , If this is a old one I shall search for a newer more recent defence I am generally steuggling on what i need to defend when ,I have no previous correspondence to work with.
    Last edited by s1290; 18-06-2017 at 2:00 PM.
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 18th Jun 17, 2:08 PM
    • 51,473 Posts
    • 65,062 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    Back on page one - not here on your thread page - use 'search this forum' (not the whole of MSE, NOT the box top right - NOPE) and in the little box put in CEL defence (ALWAYS change the search to ''show posts'' not show threads), then just pick out the ones since March/April and any of them will be relevant. They are not much different from the one you showed but the one you found talks about Mr Cohen and stuff that you haven't had. It just isn't right.

    I havent received anything previous to the claim form at all
    The detailed Particulars of Claim (PoC) come after the claim, or they used to, when CEL did it like that. So you can't talk about someone called Mr Cohen signing a document you never got. Hence why you need to find a newer example that doesn't go on about Mr Cohen or separate PoC.
    PRIVATE PCN? DON'T PAY BUT DO NOT IGNORE IT TWO Clicks needed for advice:
    Top of the page: Home>>Forums>Household & Travel>Motoring>Parking Tickets, Fines & Parking - read the 'NEWBIES' FAQS thread!
    Advice to ignore is WRONG, unless in Scotland/NI.

    • Redx
    • By Redx 18th Jun 17, 2:15 PM
    • 16,487 Posts
    • 20,647 Thanks
    Redx
    using the above search advice the carz88 thread would seem a good starting point and is a june 2017 thread , as would the puredestiny thread too

    its not hard if you do what CM says above , using the forum drop down search box and those search words , which I just did and it yielded good results in less than 2 minutes of work

    there are many other recent examples over the last 2 months due to the rash of greedy court claims from CEL

    if you read what GAN wrote he says he has written over 120 defences for members on pepipoo and not one proceeded to court
    Last edited by Redx; 18-06-2017 at 2:21 PM.
    Newbies !!
    Private Parking ticket? check the 2 sticky threads by coupon-mad and crabman in the Parking Tickets, Fines & Parking Board forum for the latest advice or maybe try pepipoo or C.A.G. or legal beagles forums if you need legal advice as well because this parking forum is not about debt collectors or legal matters per se
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

477Posts Today

4,527Users online

Martin's Twitter