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
    • bluemoon247
    • By bluemoon247 14th Jun 17, 3:21 PM
    • 6Posts
    • 2Thanks
    bluemoon247
    County Court Claim Form CEL
    • #1
    • 14th Jun 17, 3:21 PM
    County Court Claim Form CEL 14th Jun 17 at 3:21 PM
    CEL have sent a County Court Claim form to me for Parking in a car park.

    I want to know how to appeal this. They had no signage which showed the stores opening hours, which is mentioned in their terms "30 Minutes whilst the store is open".

    I never replied to any letters or appealed it sooner, as I didn't think it was an issue or enforceable and they stop writing to me.

    They have signed the CCBC Claim Form as Civil Enforcement Limited.
Page 1
    • Quentin
    • By Quentin 14th Jun 17, 3:24 PM
    • 32,078 Posts
    • 16,156 Thanks
    Quentin
    • #2
    • 14th Jun 17, 3:24 PM
    • #2
    • 14th Jun 17, 3:24 PM
    Read up in the newbies faq thread near the top of the forum (you are politely asked to read it before starting a new thread) on the court process and how to deal with a court claim.


    You can post up your defence here for comments
    • waamo
    • By waamo 14th Jun 17, 3:32 PM
    • 1,711 Posts
    • 2,024 Thanks
    waamo
    • #3
    • 14th Jun 17, 3:32 PM
    • #3
    • 14th Jun 17, 3:32 PM
    You don't "appeal" this. You have to submit a defence to the court.

    There is a post at the top of this forum that advises Newbies to read it. It's one of the sticky threads. It contains a comprehensive guide to beating these tickets.

    You will need to read it several times but it's worth it.
    This space for hire.
    • bluemoon247
    • By bluemoon247 14th Jun 17, 4:49 PM
    • 6 Posts
    • 2 Thanks
    bluemoon247
    • #4
    • 14th Jun 17, 4:49 PM
    CEL Defence
    • #4
    • 14th Jun 17, 4:49 PM
    So, I've drafted a Defence up by copying a similar letter.

    dropbox.com/s/rdzk2aq0y4045sa/Letter%20to%20CCBC%20-%20Redacted.pdf?dl=0

    Theres a couple of paragraphs in red that I am not sure whether it's suitable?
    • waamo
    • By waamo 14th Jun 17, 4:55 PM
    • 1,711 Posts
    • 2,024 Thanks
    waamo
    • #5
    • 14th Jun 17, 4:55 PM
    • #5
    • 14th Jun 17, 4:55 PM
    Have you acknowledged the claim yet?
    This space for hire.
    • bluemoon247
    • By bluemoon247 14th Jun 17, 4:56 PM
    • 6 Posts
    • 2 Thanks
    bluemoon247
    • #6
    • 14th Jun 17, 4:56 PM
    CEL Defence
    • #6
    • 14th Jun 17, 4:56 PM
    No. Should I logon MCOL and do it?
    • Umkomaas
    • By Umkomaas 14th Jun 17, 4:57 PM
    • 13,586 Posts
    • 21,302 Thanks
    Umkomaas
    • #7
    • 14th Jun 17, 4:57 PM
    • #7
    • 14th Jun 17, 4:57 PM
    No. Should I logon MCOL and do it?
    Originally posted by bluemoon247
    This is your immediate priority, the earlier you acknowledge, the more time you 'buy' to produce your defence.
    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, 4:58 PM
    • 1,711 Posts
    • 2,024 Thanks
    waamo
    • #8
    • 14th Jun 17, 4:58 PM
    • #8
    • 14th Jun 17, 4:58 PM
    Yes. Follow the instructions in the Newbies thread to maximise your time before you need to submit your defence. Give people a chance to look over what you've done.
    This space for hire.
    • bluemoon247
    • By bluemoon247 14th Jun 17, 5:07 PM
    • 6 Posts
    • 2 Thanks
    bluemoon247
    • #9
    • 14th Jun 17, 5:07 PM
    • #9
    • 14th Jun 17, 5:07 PM
    I have Made an AOS online.

    Thanks for all advice.

    Much appreciated
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 14th Jun 17, 10:36 PM
    • 48,126 Posts
    • 61,562 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    https://www.dropbox.com/s/rdzk2aq0y4045sa/Letter%20to%20CCBC%20-%20Redacted.pdf?dl=0

    I'm not keen on cluttering a defence by re-stating the other side's case.

    On a skim-read, looks like this is what YOU are saying and I reckon this isn't a good start to any defence:

    3. Further based upon the scant and deficient details contained in the Particulars of Claim and correspondence, it appears to be the Claimant's case that:
    a. There was a contract formed by the Defendant and the Claimant on 25/09/2016.
    b. There was an agreement to pay a sum or parking charge
    c. That there were Terms and Conditions prominently displayed around the site
    d. That in addition to the parking charge there was an agreement to pay additional and unspecified additional sums.
    e. The Claimant company fully complied with their obligations within the International Parking Community Code of Practice of which they were member at the time.
    And CEL are not in the IPC...so you have not copied a CEL defence. You need to read CEL defences if you want this stopped.

    And that defence talks about who was driving. Not good, seeing as the normal stance in a CEL defence is to defend as keeper, pointing out you are not liable in law.

    I'd start again. Search the forum for 'CEL defence no keeper liability' or 'CEL claim stayed'.
    Last edited by Coupon-mad; 14-06-2017 at 10:44 PM.
    PRIVATE PCN in England/Wales? DON'T PAY BUT DO NOT IGNORE IT

    Click on the trail, top of this page: Home>>Forums>Household & Travel>Motoring>Parking Tickets, Fines & Parking - read the 'NEWBIES' FAQS thread!
    DON'T read old advice to ignore, unless in Scotland/NI.

    • waamo
    • By waamo 14th Jun 17, 10:44 PM
    • 1,711 Posts
    • 2,024 Thanks
    waamo
    The good news is that if cel see a decent defence they run away and drop the case like a hot potato.
    This space for hire.
    • bluemoon247
    • By bluemoon247 15th Jun 17, 11:06 PM
    • 6 Posts
    • 2 Thanks
    bluemoon247
    Hi, I just copied change all to mine. What do you think?


    In the County Court Business Centre
    Between:
    Civil Enforcement Limited
    V
    DEFENDANT

    I, DEFENDANT, deny I am liable to the Claimant for the entirety of the claim for each of the following reasons:

    1. The Claim Form issued on the 12 Jun 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 “Civil Enforcement Limited”.

    2. This Claimant has not complied with pre-court protocol. And as an example as to why this prevents a full defence being filed at this time, a parking charge can be for trespass, breach of contract or a contractual charge. All these are treated differently in law and require a different defence. The wording of any contract will naturally be a key element in this matter, and a copy of the alleged contract has never been provided to the Defendant.

    (a) There was no compliant ‘Letter before County Court Claim’, under the Practice Direction.

    (b) This is a speculative serial litigant, issuing a large number of identical 'draft particulars'. The badly mail-merged documents contain very little information.

    (c) The Schedule of information is sparse of detailed information.

    (d) 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. The Claim form Particulars did not contain any evidence of contravention or photographs.

    e) The Defence therefore asks the Court to strike out the claim as having no reasonable prospect of success as currently drafted.

    f) Alternatively, the Defendant asks that the Claimant is required to file Particulars which comply with Practice Directions and include at least the following information;

    i. Whether the matter is being brought for trespass, breach of contract or a contractual charge, and an explanation as to the exact nature of the charge

    ii. A copy of any contract it is alleged was in place (e.g. copies of signage)

    iii. How any contract was concluded (if by performance, then copies of signage maps in place at the time)

    iv. Whether keeper liability is being claimed, and if so copies of any Notice to Driver / Notice to Keeper

    v. Whether the Claimant is acting as Agent or Principal, together with a list of documents they will rely on in this matter

    vi. If charges over and above the initial charge are being claimed, the basis on which this is being claimed

    vii. If Interest charges are being claimed, the basis on which this is being claimed

    g) Once these Particulars have been filed, the Defendant asks for reasonable time to file another defence.

    3. The Claimant failed to meet the Notice to Keeper obligations of 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.

    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) 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 £324.29 for outstanding debt and damages.

    4. The Claimant has added unrecoverable sums to the original parking charge. It is believed that the employee who drew up the paperwork is remunerated and the particulars of claim are templates, so it is simply not credible that £50 'legal representative’s (or even admin) costs' were incurred

    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. In the absence of any proof of adequate signage that contractually bound the Defendant then there can have been no contract and the Claimant has no case.
    a) The Claimant is put to strict proof that at the time of the alleged event they had both advertisement consent and the permission from the site owner to display the signs.
    b) In the absence of strict proof I submit that the Claimant was committing an offence by displaying their signs and therefore no contract could have been entered into between the driver and the Claimant.
    c) Inadequate signs incapable of binding the driver - this distinguishes this case from the Beavis case:
    (i) 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.
    (ii) Non existent ANPR 'data use' signage - breach of ICO rules and the BPA Code of Practice.
    (iii) 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.
    (iv) 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.
    (v) The signs are believed to have no mention of any debt collection additional charge, which cannot form part of any alleged contract.
    d) BPA CoP breaches - this distinguishes this case from the Beavis case:
    (i) the signs were not compliant in terms of the font size, lighting or positioning.
    (ii) the sum pursued exceeds £100.
    (iii) there is / was no compliant landowner contract.

    7. 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.

    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.

    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 12 June 2017

    (b) Sent a template, well-known to be generic cut and paste 'Particulars' of claim relying on irrelevant case law (Beavis) which ignores the fact that this Claimant cannot hold registered keepers liable in law, due to their own choice of non-POFA documentation.

    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 confirm that the above facts and statements are true to the best of my knowledge and recollection.

    Signed
    Date
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 15th Jun 17, 11:20 PM
    • 48,126 Posts
    • 61,562 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    Yup, that'll do the job! Nice one.
    PRIVATE PCN in England/Wales? DON'T PAY BUT DO NOT IGNORE IT

    Click on the trail, top of this page: Home>>Forums>Household & Travel>Motoring>Parking Tickets, Fines & Parking - read the 'NEWBIES' FAQS thread!
    DON'T read old advice to ignore, unless in Scotland/NI.

    • bluemoon247
    • By bluemoon247 15th Jun 17, 11:52 PM
    • 6 Posts
    • 2 Thanks
    bluemoon247
    Cel
    Great. Thanks.

    I'll email and post it tomorrow.
    • Carz88
    • By Carz88 16th Jun 17, 9:53 PM
    • 6 Posts
    • 1 Thanks
    Carz88
    Cel
    Sorry I don't mean to jump on the band wagon and I know there's a million threads to this...

    I'm in a similar situation. I reversed into a parking permit area to turn around on request on a site foreman as there wasn't any spaces left for me. (Usually register number plate in concierge). Then left. I received the parking ticket. Contested to be told tough. I know have the claim form threw.

    So if I acknowledge the claim the send my defence through the post... basically using what's above. Should I be okay? And where do I email this letter to?

    Help you be massively appreciated
    Thank you
    • Umkomaas
    • By Umkomaas 16th Jun 17, 10:04 PM
    • 13,586 Posts
    • 21,302 Thanks
    Umkomaas
    1. Read the NEWBIES FAQ sticky, post #1

    2. Send off the blue text initial appeal as per the indicated timescale

    3. It will be rejected, get POPLA code with rejection

    4. Appeal to POPLA (with forum help)

    5. Win appeal

    6. Case is stone dead

    7. Any more clarification after thoroughly reading the sticky come back on a new thread of your own please. Forum rule - one case, one thread - saves confusion (and potentially costly mistakes) all round.
    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 16th Jun 17, 10:29 PM
    • 48,126 Posts
    • 61,562 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    Sorry I don't mean to jump on the band wagon and I know there's a million threads to this...

    I'm in a similar situation. I reversed into a parking permit area to turn around on request on a site foreman as there wasn't any spaces left for me. (Usually register number plate in concierge). Then left. I received the parking ticket. Contested to be told tough. I know have the claim form threw.

    So if I acknowledge the claim the send my defence through the post... basically using what's above. Should I be okay? And where do I email this letter to?

    Help you be massively appreciated
    Thank you
    Originally posted by Carz88
    Threw? Where did you throw it?

    You can just copy any CEL defence on here from 2017 and adapt it to suit.
    PRIVATE PCN in England/Wales? DON'T PAY BUT DO NOT IGNORE IT

    Click on the trail, top of this page: Home>>Forums>Household & Travel>Motoring>Parking Tickets, Fines & Parking - read the 'NEWBIES' FAQS thread!
    DON'T read old advice to ignore, unless in Scotland/NI.

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

4,107Posts Today

4,357Users online

Martin's Twitter
  • Byebye! I'm about to stop work & twitter, to instead spend glorious time with Mrs & mini MSE. Wishing u a lovely summer. See u in 10 days.

  • WARNING Did you start Uni in or after 2012? The interest's rising to 6.1%; yet it doesnt work like you think. See https://t.co/IQ8f0Vyetu RT

  • RT @JanaBeee: @MartinSLewis Boris is the anomaly (coffee), the others are versions of normal (beer). Lots of same candidates = vote share d?

  • Follow Martin