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
    • Kenni66
    • By Kenni66 15th Jun 17, 1:52 AM
    • 12Posts
    • 2Thanks
    Kenni66
    They sent me a claim form for £322.02!
    • #1
    • 15th Jun 17, 1:52 AM
    They sent me a claim form for £322.02! 15th Jun 17 at 1:52 AM
    As keeper of the vehicle, i got a PCN from Civil Enforcement Ltd for overstaying at a car park outside a casino. Anyway long story short. they sent me a PCN which i ignored because they spelt my surname wrong by 1 letter. After months of letters they sent me it started to annoy me, so I told the casino about it and sent the a copy of the letter to them by email. 2 months passed and I haven't received anymore so I thought the casino had sorted it out. This morning I received a claim form from county court but civil enforcement ltd. what do I do now? Even on the claim form they still mispell my surname.

    I know I need to register at moneyclaim to reply to them, but do I register using my correct spelling name or the mispell name they used?
    Last edited by Kenni66; 09-07-2017 at 8:06 PM.
Page 1
    • IamEmanresu
    • By IamEmanresu 15th Jun 17, 6:34 AM
    • 1,704 Posts
    • 3,102 Thanks
    IamEmanresu
    • #2
    • 15th Jun 17, 6:34 AM
    • #2
    • 15th Jun 17, 6:34 AM
    but do I register using my correct spelling name
    Your name. The misspelling may have come from the DVLA Keeper registration so check that and amend if needed.

    Once the Acknowledgement of Service has come through then do a defence.

    Background: Claims take 30 weeks to get to the hearing stage. 30 weeks from now is Xmas when they know people will fold which is why the parking companies time this surge in claims to particular periods in the year.
    Life's for living, get on with it rather than worrying about these. If they hassle, counter claim.

    Send them that costs schedule though, 24 hours before the hearing, and file it with the court. Take with you evidence that you have sent the costs schedule to them and when.
    LoC
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 15th Jun 17, 9:46 PM
    • 51,537 Posts
    • 65,144 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    • #3
    • 15th Jun 17, 9:46 PM
    • #3
    • 15th Jun 17, 9:46 PM
    Yawn, do we think CEL do this on purpose so numpties might ignore claims, or write like a victim and say 'you've spelt my name wrong' and not actually defend? I wouldn't put that past CEL.

    http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.php?t=5665142

    Same as your case. Happily, every time a CEL claim is well defended they discontinue or the case is stayed due to their inaction, so why are we repeating this on every thread every day? Just use the forum as intended and search it.

    The answer is here, on every CEL defence thread. Easy to copy from.
    Last edited by Coupon-mad; 15-06-2017 at 9:50 PM.
    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.

    • Kenni66
    • By Kenni66 16th Jun 17, 2:25 AM
    • 12 Posts
    • 2 Thanks
    Kenni66
    • #4
    • 16th Jun 17, 2:25 AM
    • #4
    • 16th Jun 17, 2:25 AM
    Do i say that they spelt my name wrong so technically its not address to me as defense?
    • The Deep
    • By The Deep 16th Jun 17, 7:52 AM
    • 7,379 Posts
    • 6,423 Thanks
    The Deep
    • #5
    • 16th Jun 17, 7:52 AM
    • #5
    • 16th Jun 17, 7:52 AM
    £322 sounds rather excessive for one alleged overstay. Do they not know that there are limits for the amount they can claim? In any case, why has not the casino sorted this out.

    CEL seems to be sailing pretty close to the wind court-wise, when is a judge going to do them some serious damage?
    Last edited by The Deep; 16-06-2017 at 8:22 AM.
    You never know how far you can go until you go too far.
    • Umkomaas
    • By Umkomaas 16th Jun 17, 7:58 AM
    • 15,542 Posts
    • 24,257 Thanks
    Umkomaas
    • #6
    • 16th Jun 17, 7:58 AM
    • #6
    • 16th Jun 17, 7:58 AM
    Do i say that they spelt my name wrong so technically its not address to me as defense?
    Originally posted by Kenni66
    Forget that, as Emanresu says it's likely your DVLA details are 'wrong' by one letter. It is no showstopper in a defence (please note correct spelling - especially as you are so concerned about a letter being incorrect! ).

    This needs a full and proper defence. Please read current CEL threads that are presently littering the first page of this forum.
    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.
    • Kenni66
    • By Kenni66 6th Jul 17, 7:13 PM
    • 12 Posts
    • 2 Thanks
    Kenni66
    • #7
    • 6th Jul 17, 7:13 PM
    • #7
    • 6th Jul 17, 7:13 PM
    I have checked and the name on my V5 is in fact spelt wrong and it has now been corrected. Reading some defenses, some has mention to use 3rd party wordings. In the event that both the driver and keeper are the same person, how should the defense be written. How should i search for this on MSE?
    Last edited by Kenni66; 06-07-2017 at 9:30 PM.
    • Quentin
    • By Quentin 6th Jul 17, 7:48 PM
    • 33,267 Posts
    • 17,200 Thanks
    Quentin
    • #8
    • 6th Jul 17, 7:48 PM
    • #8
    • 6th Jul 17, 7:48 PM
    Edit your post to remove details of who was driving. The ppcs monitor this forum and can use your posts against you
    • Kenni66
    • By Kenni66 6th Jul 17, 9:31 PM
    • 12 Posts
    • 2 Thanks
    Kenni66
    • #9
    • 6th Jul 17, 9:31 PM
    • #9
    • 6th Jul 17, 9:31 PM
    So how do 1 defense this?
    • Quentin
    • By Quentin 6th Jul 17, 9:36 PM
    • 33,267 Posts
    • 17,200 Thanks
    Quentin
    You need to edit #7 to remove details of who was driving.


    When submitting a defence the keeper should refer to the driver in the third person as in "the driver did this......"
    Last edited by Quentin; 06-07-2017 at 9:38 PM.
    • Quentin
    • By Quentin 6th Jul 17, 9:40 PM
    • 33,267 Posts
    • 17,200 Thanks
    Quentin
    So how do 1 defense this?
    Originally posted by Kenni66
    See #3 & #6
    • Umkomaas
    • By Umkomaas 6th Jul 17, 9:45 PM
    • 15,542 Posts
    • 24,257 Thanks
    Umkomaas
    So how do 1 defense this?
    Originally posted by Kenni66
    Via plenty of research on this forum, PePiPoo and The Parking Prankster's blog. Your starting point is the NEWBIES FAQ sticky, post #2 which outlines the whole process and with links to exemplar defences (note spelling, we are not a further state of the USA!).

    A search of the first 5-6 pages of forum thread lists will show you a number of very recent CEL cases, many of which are in various stages of developing their defence. Copy from those to start you off. I told you all of this in post #6 almost 3 weeks ago.

    Learn from the above, then post your first stab (doesn't need to be perfect) of a draft defence here for the (very limited number of) regulars with court knowledge to critique and fine tuning.

    EDIT:

    Just scanning back over the whole thread - have you acknowledged service of the court papers? If you have, you must be getting close to the deadline for submitting your defence. If you haven't acknowledged, I fear you're on your way to an automatic default judgment against you.

    Please confirm your status in the above regard.
    Last edited by Umkomaas; 06-07-2017 at 9:54 PM.
    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.
    • Kenni66
    • By Kenni66 7th Jul 17, 2:56 AM
    • 12 Posts
    • 2 Thanks
    Kenni66
    I have acknowledge. Just my english is not very good, takes me longer to read and understand some of the threads. Some i still dont understand after looking up dictionary.
    • Kenni66
    • By Kenni66 7th Jul 17, 10:45 PM
    • 12 Posts
    • 2 Thanks
    Kenni66
    After looking through some cel defenses, i dont quite find 1 that matches my case. The car was parked in a casino car park after midnight. The receptionist did not mention anything about entering car reg for parking. Previous visit to the casino did not have this problem or got ncp. Car overstayed the 3 hour period but did not mention how long it was overstayed. No visual evidence were shown by the CEL. Do i challenge that the casino did not notify that car reg need to be given in order to stay over the 3 hour limit?
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 7th Jul 17, 11:21 PM
    • 51,537 Posts
    • 65,144 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    Make sure your signage point mentions that the signs (if any) were believed to be illegible and unlit, which breaches the BPA Code of Practice and makes any 'contract' argument impossible for the claimant to prove.

    Re your case, yes, start your appeal by saying this:

    *****************************




    IN THE COUNTY COURT AT (name of your local court)
    Claim No.: [INSERT claim number]

    Between

    Civil Enforcement Ltd (Claimant)

    -and-


    [YOUR NAME] (Defendant)


    _____________________

    DEFENCE STATEMENT
    _____________________


    I am the Defendant and I am unrepresented with no experience of Court procedures. If I do not set out documents in the way that the Claimant may do, I trust the Court will excuse my inexperience, and the difficulties I have faced in understanding the court process, having sought assistance to prepare a response, English not being my native language.

    I assert that I am not liable to the Claimant for the sum claimed, or any amount at all, for the following reasons:

    1.1 The Claim relates to an alleged debt arising from the vehicle having been parked at [INSERT CASINO NAME, PLACE] on [INSERT date shown on the claim particulars].

    1.2 The Claimant is arguing that the driver was bound by unknown terms creating a contractual charge, yet this £100 was not a term known or agreed at the point of parking, nor when the driver was inside the Casino.

    1.3 The Receptionist did not mention anything about entering a VRN for parking, and in previous visits to the Casino, parking was free. It seems completely reasonable for Casino patrons used to the free parking and familiar with the terms of the site, not to have any need or expectation (suddenly on one occasion) to seek out terms that were not clearly drawn to their attention.

    2.1 It is trite law that a contractual term cannot be relied upon that is only communicated after conclusion of a contract, as that is too late to be incorporated into the prior agreed terms.

    2.2 Denning LJ in Thornton v Shoe Lane Parking [1971] held that the courts should not hold any man bound by such a condition unless it was ''drawn to his attention in the most explicit way'' (the 'Red Hand Rule').

    2.3 Olley v Marlborough Court Hotel [1949] 1 KB 532 is on all fours with my case and is binding case law supporting the contention that any other terms come 'too late' if they are only known about afterwards. The case stands for the proposition that a representation made by one party cannot become a term of a contract if only known after the agreement was made.

    2.4 A 'parking charge' can only be binding where that charge was agreed/the bargain made, at the time the contract was formed. Denning LJ held that a clause a consumer can only learn about after the contract was allegedly formed was too late to be incorporated into the contract: ''The first question is whether that notice formed part of the contract. ... The hotel company no doubt hope that the guest will be held bound by them, but...the ticket comes too late...''

    3.1. Given that free patron parking was supplied without reference to any such risk or obligation, and the driver was a patron of the Casino, there is no cause of action.

    3.2 Indeed the Casino would not wish to see patrons penalised and a complaint was made to them. However, unlike the 'commercial justification' scenario in ParkingEye Ltd v Beavis [2015] UKSC 67, this Claimant is known for proceeding with claims regardless of the express wishes of their landowner clients.

    3.3 Notably, it is in the public domain that the Co-op, and other beleaguered clients of this operator, have seen hundreds of their staff and customers hit with 'revenge claims' from Civil Enforcement, when parking contracts have been ended due to this operator's aggressive actions.

    3.4 There can be no 'legitimate interest' excuse painted in this case; this is an attempt to catch out Casino patrons with unlit signs and inadequate instructions to Casino staff.


    (then continue with the rest of a CEL template defence)
    Last edited by Coupon-mad; 07-07-2017 at 11:24 PM.
    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.

    • Kenni66
    • By Kenni66 8th Jul 17, 2:27 AM
    • 12 Posts
    • 2 Thanks
    Kenni66
    Thx coupon-mad, i will look up the rest of the thread to the cel defense and draft here before sending.
    • Kenni66
    • By Kenni66 9th Jul 17, 3:00 AM
    • 12 Posts
    • 2 Thanks
    Kenni66
    My defence statement to continue from the draft above:

    4. The Claim Form issued on the xxxxxx 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”.

    5. 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.

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

    5,2 This is a speculative serial litigant, issuing a large number of identical 'draft particulars'. The badly mail-merged documents contain very little information.

    5.3 The Schedule of information is sparse of detailed information.

    5.4 The Claim form Particulars were extremely sparse and divulged no cause of action nor sufficient detail, and were posted to a non-existent address. The Defendant has no idea what the claim is about - why the charge arose, what the alleged contract was, nor who they are claiming against; nothing that could be considered a fair exchange of information. The Claim form Particulars did not contain any evidence of contravention or photographs.

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

    5.6 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

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

    6. 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 £323 for outstanding debt and damages.

    7. 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

    8. 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.

    9. 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.
    9.1 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.
    9.2 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.
    9.3 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.
    9.4 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.

    10. 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.

    11. 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.

    12. 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:

    12.1 failed to disclose any cause of action in the incorrectly filed Claim Form issued on xxxxxx

    12.2 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.


    [My name]

    [date]


    I have just realised that my 28 calendar day deadline is on Monday. Or does it mean 28 working days?
    • Quentin
    • By Quentin 9th Jul 17, 9:31 AM
    • 33,267 Posts
    • 17,200 Thanks
    Quentin
    It means 28 calendar days


    (Your OP still needs editing to remove details of who was driving)
    • Kenni66
    • By Kenni66 9th Jul 17, 12:29 PM
    • 12 Posts
    • 2 Thanks
    Kenni66
    Sorry what does op mean? When they need time its working days, when they give you time they use calendar day. Talk about fair
    • Quentin
    • By Quentin 9th Jul 17, 12:36 PM
    • 33,267 Posts
    • 17,200 Thanks
    Quentin
    OP means either original post (which is where you need to edit) or original poster (which is you)


    Never use "I". Refer to "the driver" or "the keeper"
    Last edited by Quentin; 09-07-2017 at 12:39 PM.
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

125Posts Today

2,345Users online

Martin's Twitter