Civil Enforcement Ltd.

urpal

There is a little twist to my story about CE Ltd. My car was in for it's MOT and I had a courtesy/hire car. I went to a shop I love and spent a long time in it and then had lunch in there too. (I had been to this shop before and there were no parking restrictions.) Anyway, the car company phoned me to say they had received a 'ticket' from CE Ltd. and asked me to pay. I said I would get back to them after I had researched it online. After doing so I decided I would NOT pay. I did contact the shop to report my horror at what had happened and I do have an email from them offering help. Nothing happened for 5 months when last week I received a letter from the garage enclosing a DO NOT IGNORE THIS LETTER from CE Ltd/Newlyn now asking for £355. I contacted the garage and said I was not going to pay and that if they gave the company my name and address then they would be breaching the Data Protection Act! I do hope this is correct as it seems as though it should be.

Coupon-mad

Yep you did the right thing but I think I would follow it up in writing to the garage stating that it's a scam and you will deal with the letters, they have no liability whatsoever for private parking 'charges'. State clearly that they are not to pay it as it's only your issue - and you won't be paying it either.

Stephen_Leak

It's possible that the small print of the agreement for the courtesy car has a clause stating that the driver is responsible for all fines. That's fair enough.

But this isn't a legally enforceable fine. It's a "speculative invoice".

Just make sure that, like car hire/leasing forms, they aren't going to pay up and then pass the "fine" onto you, plus a nice little earner of an administration fee.

give_them_FA

£355? Is this a new record?

patman99

Mind you, if the garage/hire company did pay and then debited the money from your account or charged your card, could you then sue them for the return of the cash?. Or, would you go after the landowner of the area in which you parked?

give_them_FA

If the garage made a debit which was unjustified by the contract (as here) they could be sued for return; though if a credit card a chargeback might suffice. I think the landowner could not be touched in this instance if the charge was paid by the garage, even though it was not due. Important to maintain contact with the garage of course to ensure they don't panic.

stuart2012

I've have today had one of these letters from Civil Enforcment Ltd and after doing some digging i found that Civil Enforcement Ltd is 100% owned by Comp Reg No - 03673065 : QA NOMINEES LIMITED.

This is a none trading company that has never submitted a Tax return.

So i am taking the following attack approach.

1/ A letter to inland Revenue as there is something wrong with there company structer.
2/ A letter of intent to start Legal Proceedings on Both companies
3/ A letter of Intent to all directors of Civil Enforcement Directors as Information available to the Public:
ANDREW MORAY STUART - SUITE, 100 THE STUDIO ST, NICHOLAS CLOSE ELSTREE, BOREHAMWOOD, HERTS, WD6 3EW This man is a director on 299 similar companies
4/ A letter of intent to all Directors of QA NOMINEES LIMITED
LIANE HAMBILIKI - 30 PURSLEY ROAD, LONDON, NW7 2BS
GRAHAM MICHAEL COWAN - 16 GLOUCESTER ROAD, BARNET, HERTS, EN5 1RT
FRANCIS RICHARDSON - THE STUDIO ST, NICHOLAS CLOSE, ELSTREE, BOREHAMWOOD, HERTS, WD6 3EW
MR ADRIAN JULIAN MANDEL - THE STUDIO ST, NICHOLAS CLOSE, ELSTREE, BOREHAMWOOD, HERTS, WD6 3EW
GRAHAM MICHAEL COWAN - 16 GLOUCESTER ROAD, BARNET, HERTS, EN5 1RT

These letters are been hand delivered Agents of a National Collections Company (I feel that giving them a taste of there own medican is worth the cost!)

I think we should all send letters to there address!

PS. all these details are available from companies house and this information is in the public domain.

Coupon-mad

I do like the attack approach! :T

give_them_FA

I feel they are going to regret taking you on.

OriginalTG

Hi there
I received one of these which is now turned into a Final Notice and they are looking for £90 They never put a ticket on my car nor does it say where the offence was committed although they say on their website in the FAQ Section that they dont have to put a ticket as they use number plate recognition technology?? On the date in question I was parked in the short stay Car Park @ Belfast City Airport where I recieve free parking as Im attending a fortnightly meeting in their Board Room They do use number plate recognition but I always have a free exit ticket (otherwise I couldnt get out!!) I notice everyone says to ignore them Am I safe to do so??
Many thanks in advance

Stephen_Leak

If it wasn't safe to do so, we wouldn't say to ignore them.

Firstly, the legal stuff.

Only councils, the police, train operators and Transport for London can impose legally enforceable fines or penalties. A private parking company (PPC) or an individual can't. Even PPCs call their tickets “Parking Charge Notices”, not “Penalty Charge Notices”. In law, they’re called “speculative invoices”.

Any warning signs are usually so badly positioned and worded, that they won’t have created a fair and legally binding deemed contract between the car park owner and a driver entering the car park in the first place. See The Unfair Contract Terms Act 1997 and Excel Parking Services vs. Cutts, Stockport, 2011, 1SE02759, the Peel Centre case.

All the car park owner (CPO) can claim from a driver in damages for any breach of contract is what they’ve lost as a result. If this is a free car park or they paid, this is £0.00. Demanding more has been judged to be unreasonable and therefore an unfair contract penalty under the terms of The Unfair Contract Terms Act 1997, which is not legally enforceable. See Dunlop Pneumatic Tyre Co. Ltd. vs. New Garage & Motor Co. Ltd., House of Lords, 1914 and countless cases since.

What should I do now?

We don’t condone not paying or overstaying in a pay car park. If you do owe the CPO anything, then you should write to them, offering this in “full and final settlement”.

In any event, advise the CPO that they are "jointly and severally liable" for the actions of their agents, the PPC, and that any further actions have been judged to constitute harassment under the terms of The Protection from Harassment Act 1997. That ought to make the CPO call off the PPC and, hopefully, realise the potential cost of doing business with them.

Don’t appeal to the PPC. They always reject them. What’s in it for them to let anyone off? Actually, there is something in it for them: information. They need to know the identity of the driver of the vehicle involved at the time, because that’s who the alleged contract was with. If they don’t know who the driver was, they have to make do with chasing the registered keeper.

With windscreen notices, an appeal letter will tell them your name and address, and maybe who was driving at the time. If they don’t know who the driver was, they have to buy the details of registered keeper from the DVLA. With postal notices, they’ve done this already. But they still need to know the identity of the driver.

They sometimes say that they have the right to ask for this information. This doesn’t mean that you have to tell them.

However, even if you’ve written and told them who the driver was, it doesn’t make their actions any less unlawful. It just means that instead of harassing the registered keeper, they can now harass the driver.

What will they do to me?

The PPC, then a debt collector and then a solicitor will send you a series of letters. The debt collector and solicitor are usually also the PPC, but using different headed paper. These letters will threaten you with every kind of financial and legal unpleasantness imaginable, to intimidate you into paying.

But, they can't actually do anything, for the same reason that a Nigerian e-mail scammer couldn't sue anyone who didn’t pay them.

What should I do then?

Continue to ignore everything you get from the PPC and their aliases. It does seem counter-intuitive to deal with something by ignoring it. Eventually, they will run out of empty threats, and stop throwing good money after bad.