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
    • JohnTee2017
    • By JohnTee2017 18th Oct 17, 2:04 PM
    • 16Posts
    • 10Thanks
    JohnTee2017
    KFC parking, CEL & county court
    • #1
    • 18th Oct 17, 2:04 PM
    KFC parking, CEL & county court 18th Oct 17 at 2:04 PM
    Hi all
    Ive reached my limit and would appreciate any advice with a County Court Claim.

    in response to a Letter of Claim i wrote to Wright Hassall earlier this year mentioning:

    Address is accurate but the name is misspelled albeit by one letter, and if genuine people know how to spell my name their letter could be a Scam or Junk Mail.
    I requested confirmation that I am then intended recipient.
    i confirmed that I am the registered keeper.
    I asked for evidence of the alleged offence at KFC car park, Stockport early morning and copies of any previous correspondence.
    I asked that proceeding be stopped until ive had time to assess content.

    I receive a letter confirming that its on hold and has been referred to the client.
    I have not received anything further.

    Now i receive Court Claim
    I have today completed AOS with MCOL

    Im confused with what to do next in my defence. I read references to Beavis and to a recent change in Law.
    Any help appreciated.
Page 2
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 13th Nov 17, 12:26 AM
    • 51,787 Posts
    • 65,410 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    If the POC were backdated and you kept the envelope that proved they were not posted when dated, PLEASE NOW forward the complaint you made to the CCBC, to another email address.

    We need LOTS of these to fly into a specific inbox now:

    http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.php?p=73400735#post73400735

    Once that has been done, please confirm. We need to bombard the CCBC (specifically to Amanda Beck who is aware of this scam) with evidence about CEL.

    Do this - even if you've already emailed a complaint - PLEASE forward it now!
    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.

    • JohnTee2017
    • By JohnTee2017 13th Nov 17, 12:27 PM
    • 16 Posts
    • 10 Thanks
    JohnTee2017
    CCBC update
    I have just spoken with an Advisor at CCBC who seemed very knowledgable and helpful.
    Despite explaining my circumstances I am advised that my deadline is today and that I should submit by 4pm.
    I was unable to speak directly with Amanda-Helpdesk Manager but the Advisor did speak with her whilst I was put on-hold. As a result, I am requested to resend my previous emails to her.
    Although I didn't confirm with the advisor, I assume Amanda agreed with my Defence submission today.
    Advisor reminded me to include late PoC delivery in my defence statement.
    • JohnTee2017
    • By JohnTee2017 13th Nov 17, 1:01 PM
    • 16 Posts
    • 10 Thanks
    JohnTee2017
    I know you're all busy so rather that repost my full Defence with amendments I thought it may help if I just ask for critique on the changes:

    1. The Claim Form issued on the 11/10/2017 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”.
    Also, the claimant has not provided detailed “Particulars of Claim” as stated on “Claim Form”. The sparse “Particulars of Claim” dated 11/10/17 arrived after 30th October 2017 in an envelope dated 1st November 2017. Arriving after 30th October 2017 is against Rule 7.4(1)(b) and is without applying for relief ref Rule 3.8 and 3.9. Prior to receipt I informed Claimant and CCBC of late filing. I have had no response.

    f) Alternatively, and as previously requested 13th March 2017, the Defendant asks the Claimant to provide complete and detailed Particulars and to file Particulars which comply with Practice Directions and include at least the following information;

    10. The additional particulars of claim are signed purportedly by Ashley Cohen, Mr Cohen was reported to sign off witness statements under London Councils POPLA on behalf of landowners, for CEL POPLA cases falsely stating authority. It is submitted that he is a director of another company, Bemrose Mobile Limited which supplies the pay by phone payment methods for parking. Mr. Cohen was a former director of Creative Contracts Ltd but has since resigned. Mr. Cohen is therefore put to strict proof the capacity and authority he has in signing such statements.
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 15th Nov 17, 1:38 PM
    • 51,787 Posts
    • 65,410 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    Looks fine - did you get this filed?
    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.

    • JohnTee2017
    • By JohnTee2017 15th Nov 17, 2:01 PM
    • 16 Posts
    • 10 Thanks
    JohnTee2017
    Hi
    Yes, filed just in time. Sent to ccbcaq email address as requested by the Advisor but to be on the safe side I also tried to inform the same through my Money Claim login. it failed! Ive since logged back in and it does confirm my Defence received. I only mention this in case other defendants experience similar problems.
    Also, emails re Late PoC emailed to Amanda.
    I will of course post any updates.
    Thanks
    • nosferatu1001
    • By nosferatu1001 15th Nov 17, 2:31 PM
    • 1,166 Posts
    • 1,204 Thanks
    nosferatu1001
    I would also make a separate complaint
    they cannot arbitrarily ignore their own rules - i.e. CPR9 and CPR15.4 - and to do so to a litigant in person against a serial litigant is disgusting.
    • Loadsofchildren123
    • By Loadsofchildren123 15th Nov 17, 2:33 PM
    • 1,756 Posts
    • 2,871 Thanks
    Loadsofchildren123
    see yesterday's developments and my advice from yesterday about the late/backdated PoC and MCOL's failure to address it here:


    http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.php?t=5727770
    • JohnTee2017
    • By JohnTee2017 16th Nov 17, 11:32 AM
    • 16 Posts
    • 10 Thanks
    JohnTee2017
    N244
    FYI

    The court is not able to strike out a case of its own volition. If you wish to do this are required to make an application (N244) with a fee to request that the case be struck out. The fee payable is £100.00 without a Court hearing and £255.00 with a court hearing.

    The above, with details of how to apply, has been received from CCBC in response to my request re late filing of PoC.
    • nosferatu1001
    • By nosferatu1001 16th Nov 17, 12:20 PM
    • 1,166 Posts
    • 1,204 Thanks
    nosferatu1001
    Yes, the court IS able to do so. It has inherent case management powers, including striking claims.
    They have chosen not to use them, or they just dont understand their own rules!
    • JohnTee2017
    • By JohnTee2017 5th Dec 17, 6:42 PM
    • 16 Posts
    • 10 Thanks
    JohnTee2017
    Update.
    Update: re nosferatu1001 reply.
    I sent a response stating that they do have powers and that they should help protect against the scare tactics CEL employ etc.
    This week I have been asked to resend the "date proof" showing late PoC receipt. I await their response.
    Last edited by JohnTee2017; 07-12-2017 at 1:27 PM. Reason: mixed information
    • JohnTee2017
    • By JohnTee2017 7th Dec 17, 1:30 PM
    • 16 Posts
    • 10 Thanks
    JohnTee2017
    N180
    Advice:
    I have receive a Proposed Allocation to the Small Claims Track. Form N180
    It is my intent to respond "no, i do not agree that its most appropriate" because of a lack of detailed claim information it would make defence impossible.
    A lack of information has already been detailed in my original defence. Which makes me wonder why or how my case can have been deemed suitable for allocation to the small claims track? And if i do accept that it is acceptable will i then lose part of my defence?
    Included in this documentation is the offer of Mediation. In fact Mediation is not available if you dont have enough information about the claim.
    I am now starting to second guess and rather than make a mistake I thought id ask for help here.
    • Loadsofchildren123
    • By Loadsofchildren123 7th Dec 17, 3:29 PM
    • 1,756 Posts
    • 2,871 Thanks
    Loadsofchildren123
    it's a small claim because of the sum being sought, and you know what that is.
    I haven't seen anyone not agree to small claims because of rubbish PoC but you could have a go - this may make a judge sit up and take more notice of the rubbish the PPC has produced and more inclined to punish them.
    Worst that can happen is judge ignores your rant and just allocates it to the small track based on the figure claimed. Best that can happen is it highlights to him that the claim is a load of tosh and he'll make the Claimant correct it, or even strike it out.
    Although a practising Solicitor, my posts here are NOT legal advice, but are personal opinion based on limited facts provided anonymously by forum users. I accept no liability for the accuracy of any such posts and users are advised that, if they wish to obtain formal legal advice specific to their case, they must seek instruct and pay a solicitor.
    • Loadsofchildren123
    • By Loadsofchildren123 7th Dec 17, 3:30 PM
    • 1,756 Posts
    • 2,871 Thanks
    Loadsofchildren123
    Just say no to mediation, it's a waste of time
    Although a practising Solicitor, my posts here are NOT legal advice, but are personal opinion based on limited facts provided anonymously by forum users. I accept no liability for the accuracy of any such posts and users are advised that, if they wish to obtain formal legal advice specific to their case, they must seek instruct and pay a solicitor.
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

434Posts Today

2,092Users online

Martin's Twitter
  • Nice debating with (all but the rude ones) of you. Bedtime for me now. Goodnight #bbcqt

  • RT @kevmthomas: @MartinSLewis It was a comment you made about the referendum being a binary choice on a non binary issue that helped me rea?

  • To clarify this. Cameron's gamble that having a stark vote'd mean his team won. He gambled wrong (that's not a stat? https://t.co/NSCT3aKvGS

  • Follow Martin