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
    • deshulina
    • By deshulina 7th Sep 17, 1:12 PM
    • 24Posts
    • 14Thanks
    deshulina
    PArking CCJ over 10 in a car park
    • #1
    • 7th Sep 17, 1:12 PM
    PArking CCJ over 10 in a car park 7th Sep 17 at 1:12 PM
    Good afternoon everyone,
    Thank you for stopping by to read my post.


    So this is how it all started , last Friday my partner and I decided to open a joint bank account an error occurred and the lady at the bank said that it was on my said. Confused by her statement I logged on to experian and was shocked on how my credit rating has gone down upon researching I found out i was issued a CCJ.


    I called the court and figured out it was Parking eye that had filled the CCJ against me. I rang them up and got to the bottom of the matter:


    On the 27th of January I parked at a car park in London, discovered I have no change and no debit card I left the car in the car park with the hazard lights on to find a place to get change from, however was reluctant so returned to the car park after 10 minutes and drove my car off.*

    Couple of days after I received a parking ticket for illegally parking at the same car park mentioned above, I challenged the fine explaining the circumstances and got a letter with rejection.*

    At the time we were moving house while I was going serious medical issues there forward this completely slip my mind until couple of days ago when i discovered the CCJ because of it.*


    ( The rejection letter from parking eye was send 15th of February.

    (We moved house on the 06th of March.

    My license was changed on the 15th of March. (changed to the new address)

    The papers of the V5 were send off 15th of April (changed to the new address)

    Received on the 3rd of May (with the new address)


    However non of this was reflected and all the papers were send to the old address.



    I contacted parking eye today the 1st of September and spoke with a very rude lady on the other side of the phone which informed me that there is nothing they can do I need to file a N244 form and pray for the best !


    I read that you could email parking eye and ask them if they would be prepared to sign a consent order if I paid the charges in full. However I am struggling to find their legal teams email and to structure this right.



    I know there is many people how are going through this and i highly appreciate any assistance, I only want the CCJ set aside. I don't mind paying I just want the CCJ removed.I beg you for any advice and help I will be very grateful .


    Thank you !
Page 4
    • HeatonGuy
    • By HeatonGuy 25th Nov 17, 2:11 PM
    • 79 Posts
    • 46 Thanks
    HeatonGuy
    Nothing on these forums constitutes formal legal advice. No one is told what to do and no one has a retainer or takes a controlling role in the active litigation. Indeed such is the exchange of ideas most forum users take a selection of thoughts and choose their own course for their claims.
    Originally posted by Johnersh
    Agreed, but that doesn't change the element of Fraud, and criminal liability if someone is making a dishonestly false representation such that another poster suffers, or is exposed to the potential of, a loss.

    However, as this isn't parking-specific, I'm going to open a discussion thread in the Money Saving Arms for this to be discussed, where I will welcome alternate views. .

    http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.php?p=73465314#post73465314
    Last edited by HeatonGuy; 25-11-2017 at 2:23 PM. Reason: Moving off-topic discussion to Money Saving Arms
    • IamEmanresu
    • By IamEmanresu 25th Nov 17, 2:15 PM
    • 1,812 Posts
    • 3,202 Thanks
    IamEmanresu
    @Johnersh

    You've just made the point I was trying to make somewhat badly.

    Though this site is called MoneySavingExpert, there are no experts here even those with professional qualifications (and insurance) in the subject they are commenting on.

    All you get here is information and opinion - the good, the bad and the atrocious.
    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
    • Johnersh
    • By Johnersh 25th Nov 17, 2:35 PM
    • 734 Posts
    • 1,361 Thanks
    Johnersh
    Noted. Thanks.

    So. Back on track...

    * When's the hearing?
    * Does the o/p wish to consider consenting this off?
    * Has s/he prepared a defence of the claim?
    • HeatonGuy
    • By HeatonGuy 25th Nov 17, 2:37 PM
    • 79 Posts
    • 46 Thanks
    HeatonGuy
    * When's the hearing?
    Originally posted by Johnersh
    30 January, apparently

    * Does the o/p wish to consider consenting this off?
    Even if they do, they should be seeking costs due to PE's failures.

    * Has s/he prepared a defence of the claim?
    Unknown.
    • deshulina
    • By deshulina 25th Nov 17, 6:31 PM
    • 24 Posts
    • 14 Thanks
    deshulina
    Good evening all,
    I agree with all of the above said by @HeatonGuy,

    I do admit, I used some of the other posts on the forum and hoped to get guidance on how to structurally form my defence and complete it as I never done anything like this before.
    I would highly appreciate if someone can have a quick read through the defence once more and help with any additional relating information needed.
    • deshulina
    • By deshulina 25th Nov 17, 7:17 PM
    • 24 Posts
    • 14 Thanks
    deshulina
    Just a quick side note

    The fine states :

    'By either not purchasing the appropriate parking time or by reaming at the car park for longer than permitted in accordance with the terms and conditions set out in the signage the parking charge is now payable to PE LTD (as the creditor)'

    And the small print at the signage reads ( a picture of the signage can be found on the link bellow):

    PE LTD is authorised by the landowner to operate this private car park for and on its behave. We are not responsible for the car park surface damage or lost to or from vehicle or general site safety. Parking is at the absolute discretion of the landowner and the T&C that apply are set out within this notice (the 'parking contract' ).
    By parking,waiting or otherwise remaining within this private CP you agree to comply with these T&C ( the 'parking contract') and are authorized to park only if you follow these correctly. Including making payment where directed entering your registration details via the payment and /or permit systems. If you fail to comply you except liability to pay the fee for authorized parking (the parking charge). This parking contract shall form the entire agreement between the parties. By entering this private CR, you consent, for the purpose of car park management to: the capturing of photographs of the vehicle and registration by the ANPR cameras and /or by the attendant and to the processing of this data, together with any data provided by you or others via the payment or permit systems:correspondence; telephone; or in person, by PE LTD and any authorized sub-contractor to check compliance with the parking contract. Further more you consent to the processing of this data to request registered keepers details from the DVLA, where the parking contract is not adhered to and a) enforcement is undertaken remotely via ANPR; or b) the parking charge notice is issued manually by the attended, but remains unpaid. Parking changes incurrred: a) will be notified to the register keeper by post, where the ANPR system identifies non compliance with the parking contract, and maybe reissued to the relevant driver or receipt of the drivers valid name and address; or b) will be notified to the driver where an attendant identifies non compliance with the parking contract, and may subsequently be notified to the register keeper. Personal data may also be shared with the BPA, POPLA, mall service providers, credit reference agents, collection agents or solicitors for this purpose and authorised sub-contractors. A reduction of at least 40% of the parking charge will be available for a period of 14 days. Failure to pay the parking charge within this period will result in full amount becoming payable. Where parking charges remain unpaid beyond 28 days, recovery charges in respect of further action may apply. A charge reflecting the cost to PE may apply for payments made with a credit/debit card.


    Which fails to describe
    the appropriate parking time or by reaming at the car park for longer than permitted
    • deshulina
    • By deshulina 25th Nov 17, 7:25 PM
    • 24 Posts
    • 14 Thanks
    deshulina
    hppps://www.dropbox.com/s/7j3pjrehp7z7lz2/23972731_10210892501694816_259090327_n.jpg?dl=0

    hppps://www.dropbox.com/s/zxktl8hv5pga378/21733589_10210377805147724_243984412_o.jpg?dl=0
    Last edited by deshulina; 25-11-2017 at 7:28 PM.
    • beamerguy
    • By beamerguy 25th Nov 17, 7:25 PM
    • 6,465 Posts
    • 8,275 Thanks
    beamerguy
    Good evening all,
    I agree with all of the above said by @HeatonGuy,

    I do admit, I used some of the other posts on the forum and hoped to get guidance on how to structurally form my defence and complete it as I never done anything like this before.
    I would highly appreciate if someone can have a quick read through the defence once more and help with any additional relating information needed.
    Originally posted by deshulina
    It is unclear what you agree with, please enlighten us.

    Also, if you want others to read, please paragraph as
    people will not read a wall of text
    RBS - MNBA - CAPITAL ONE - LLOYDS

    DISGUSTING BEHAVIOUR
    • HeatonGuy
    • By HeatonGuy 25th Nov 17, 7:46 PM
    • 79 Posts
    • 46 Thanks
    HeatonGuy
    https://www.dropbox.com/s/7j3pjrehp7z7lz2/23972731_10210892501694816_259090327_n.jpg?dl=0

    https://www.dropbox.com/s/zxktl8hv5pga378/21733589_10210377805147724_243984412_o.jpg?dl=0
    • beamerguy
    • By beamerguy 25th Nov 17, 7:52 PM
    • 6,465 Posts
    • 8,275 Thanks
    beamerguy
    hppps://www.dropbox.com/s/7j3pjrehp7z7lz2/23972731_10210892501694816_259090327_n.jpg?dl=0

    hppps://www.dropbox.com/s/zxktl8hv5pga378/21733589_10210377805147724_243984412_o.jpg?dl=0
    Originally posted by deshulina
    So here are your live links
    https://www.dropbox.com/s/7j3pjrehp7z7lz2/23972731_10210892501694816_259090327_n.jpg?dl=0

    https://www.dropbox.com/s/zxktl8hv5pga378/21733589_10210377805147724_243984412_o.jpg?dl=0

    I must warn you ... do not respond to any PM's from those
    who have less than 1000 posts, this is for safety and security
    RBS - MNBA - CAPITAL ONE - LLOYDS

    DISGUSTING BEHAVIOUR
    • deshulina
    • By deshulina 25th Nov 17, 8:10 PM
    • 24 Posts
    • 14 Thanks
    deshulina
    It is unclear what you agree with, please enlighten us.

    Also, if you want others to read, please paragraph as
    people will not read a wall of text
    Originally posted by beamerguy
    30 January, apparently



    Even if they do, they should be seeking costs due to PE's failures.



    Unknown.
    Originally posted by HeatonGuy
    Noted. Thanks.

    So. Back on track...

    * When's the hearing?
    * Does the o/p wish to consider consenting this off?
    * Has s/he prepared a defence of the claim?
    Originally posted by Johnersh
    Sorry to be unclear. I meant I agree with @HeatonGuy post, but as for the defence I do think I will need some help if possible just to make sure it's presented in the best way possible.
    • beamerguy
    • By beamerguy 25th Nov 17, 8:21 PM
    • 6,465 Posts
    • 8,275 Thanks
    beamerguy
    Sorry to be unclear. I meant I agree with @HeatonGuy post, but as for the defence I do think I will need some help if possible just to make sure it's presented in the best way possible.
    Originally posted by deshulina
    Johnersh is the best help for you, also rely on Redx, Lamilad
    and Umkomaas etc and of course loadsofchildren
    Simply lots of posts from a member, they can be relied upon
    Last edited by beamerguy; 25-11-2017 at 8:32 PM.
    RBS - MNBA - CAPITAL ONE - LLOYDS

    DISGUSTING BEHAVIOUR
    • deshulina
    • By deshulina 25th Nov 17, 8:56 PM
    • 24 Posts
    • 14 Thanks
    deshulina
    Johnersh is the best help for you, also rely on Redx, Lamilad
    and Umkomaas etc and of course loadsofchildren
    Simply lots of posts from a member, they can be relied upon
    Originally posted by beamerguy
    Thank you very much !
    • Johnersh
    • By Johnersh 26th Nov 17, 12:05 AM
    • 734 Posts
    • 1,361 Thanks
    Johnersh
    You'll have to decide whether to fight to a hearing or whether you want to try and make some sort of payment linked to an agreement to set aside a CCJ

    Were I to defend this, I'd do a statement AND a defence. My statement would explain (a) what happened and (b) why I didn't receive court papers.

    I would also refer to the tests in the court rules at CPR 13.3 and append a full defence to show that the case is defensible.

    Questions
    1. Is that the sign you saw and read - often parking eye use different signs at the entrance to the car park?
    2. Why, if you can pay by phone, did you need to get change? Not a criticism, but that will, I'd imagine, be raised by the claimant.
    • deshulina
    • By deshulina 29th Nov 17, 12:24 PM
    • 24 Posts
    • 14 Thanks
    deshulina
    You'll have to decide whether to fight to a hearing or whether you want to try and make some sort of payment linked to an agreement to set aside a CCJ

    Were I to defend this, I'd do a statement AND a defence. My statement would explain (a) what happened and (b) why I didn't receive court papers.

    I would also refer to the tests in the court rules at CPR 13.3 and append a full defence to show that the case is defensible.

    Questions
    1. Is that the sign you saw and read - often parking eye use different signs at the entrance to the car park?
    2. Why, if you can pay by phone, did you need to get change? Not a criticism, but that will, I'd imagine, be raised by the claimant.
    Originally posted by Johnersh

    Afternoon all,


    Please excuse the delay in my reply. Haven't been able to make it to the compute in the past few days.


    Back on track
    1. There were three sings all together two blocked by cars at the time of entry and one up 7feet in the air so this is the one I read once I entered, waited for someone to reverse, got out look around, fount the 7ft one impossible to reed and walked up to find this one the side in front of a bay with a parked car.
    2. I had my car recently changed and didn't have a debit nor a credit card with me at the time, as the cards were changed the pay by phone app didn't work as it needed new details.


    Can my defence written earlier on here be use or it will have to be edited throughout?
    • jkdd77
    • By jkdd77 29th Nov 17, 11:25 PM
    • 249 Posts
    • 320 Thanks
    jkdd77
    It is trite that "costs follow the event" in civil litigation; meaning the winner gets his/her costs. However, where the court sets aside default judgment which was properly entered then it is the court's standard practice to award the Claimant - ParkingEye, in this case - its costs. You will therefore have lost your £255, and PE might seek additional costs.
    Originally posted by filthynines
    I don't believe this poster is a lawyer. If he/she was, he/she would know that, on the contrary, it is standard practice to "reserve" application and hearing costs relating to a successful set-aside application pending the final hearing on the substantive merits, and that, in most cases, the loser at the final hearing gets lumped with the costs. In any case, the court papers were sent to the wrong address so that the default judgement was not "properly entered" at all.

    The bit about PE supposedly having the "best processes to ensure top-notch evidence" is laughable and shows his/her true colours, given that PE regularly pursue individual frivolous claims (e.g. "double-dip cases") as part of their mass automated MCOL robo-claims, only to drop when faced with a strong defence.

    If nothing else, getting the set-aside will repair the OP's credit record, even if he/ she loses at the substantive hearing. PE usually don't attend set-aside hearing, so I think that the OP has an excellent chance of obtaining a set aside.

    There has been at least one case where a motorist who stopped temporarily to seek change, before, having failed to obtain change, driving off, was held by the district judge not to have accepted the purported agreement to park their vehicle.

    I would argue that the OP's actions in driving off at the first reasonable opportunity (given the specific circumstances) amounts to a rejection rather than an acceptance of the purported "contract to park".

    It sounds like the signage can be clearly distinguished from Beavis, being incapable of being easily seen and easily understood, especially so given the onerous nature of the charge, so this could also be a key point to raise at the set-aside hearing to show a realistic prospect a success.

    I would also argue that PE acted recklessly in issuing court papers to the wrong address without taking fresh steps to verify that the OP's address was correct as at the time of issue, and ask the judge to consider ordering that the costs associated with the set aside be immediately repayable by PE to the OP, irrespective of the outcome of the substantive case.
    Last edited by jkdd77; 29-11-2017 at 11:53 PM.
    • ampersand
    • By ampersand 30th Nov 17, 2:26 AM
    • 8,301 Posts
    • 31,747 Thanks
    ampersand
    jkdd77 - re: your 1st sentence, agreed.

    Hopefully, this poster stays in the shallow end before unsettling other newbies.

    Deshulina, stay on track as you've been advised, by trusted, long-posting msers.
    We're all with you.
    CAP[UK]for FREE EXPERT DEBT&BUDGET HELP:01274 760720, freephone0800 328 0006
    'People don't want much. They want: "Someone to love, somewhere to live, somewhere to work and something to hope for."
    Norman Kirk, NZLP- Prime Minister, 1972
    ***JE SUIS CHARLIE***
    'It is difficult to free fools from the chains they revere' François-Marie AROUET


    • deshulina
    • By deshulina 30th Nov 17, 8:12 AM
    • 24 Posts
    • 14 Thanks
    deshulina
    Thank you very much to both jkdd77 and ampersand !!


    ampersand your words mean a lot, thank you for the support !
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

3,510Posts Today

8,186Users online

Martin's Twitter