Civil Enforcement Ltd - threatening legal action

Celeste2012

I could really do with some advice, I've found lots of helpful info here when the incident first occurred, but we're being threatened with a CCJ I'm getting nervous!

Back in May my husband's car received a fine from Civil Enforcement Ltd for over-staying in our local Co-op carpark. The car is registered in his name but he was not driving at the time.

We replied to the fine stating that as he wasn't the driver we wouldn't be paying, we received another letter threatening to take us to court to force my husband to reveal the name of the driver and advising us to pay, we decided to ignore it.

We have now had 2 letters from Debt Recovery Plus Ltd telling us we have to pay £140 or they may issue County Court Proceedings against us.

I know the law has recently changed (and I'm assuming that's why they're now chasing it) but am I right in thinking that as he wasn't driving he can't be liable for the fine. Would a court side with the company?

What do we do? I'm becoming increasingly worried & my husband has suggested paying the fine just to get rid of them.

SodG24

Stop worrying - the Debt Recovery letters are just part of the scam. Look at the stickies and you'll see you have exactly the same letters that everyone gets.

The PPC can't "give" you a CCJ, they need to take you to court and win ( neither will happen ) and then you not pay what the judge says to get a CCJ against you.

The new law has no affect other than the PPC can ask registered keeper who was driving if they can't identify the driver. And it is literally "ask" not demand - there is no legal obligation on the RK to provide the information and they can't take you to court to get the answer.

Continue to ignore, you're nearly at the end now.

And your husband needs to man up a bit ! Does he pay the email scammers who tell him they have a million pounds waiting for him ?

AlexisV

Carry on ignoring. Law hasn't changed apart from a couple of new points re. driver identity, but since all this happened before Oct 1st it's not applicable.

If they wanted to take you to court to 'force you to the name the driver' (which would cost them a big chunk of cash, time and risk) why did they just pass your account onto Debt Recovery Plus Ltd?

Just ignore. If you've had 2 letters from the debt collection clowns, you're near the end of the process anyway.

I believe all the CCJs DR Plus mention are utility bills etc.

P.S. it's not a fine.

ManxRed

The new law is not retrospective, your husband CANNOT be pursued for this. The court would most definitely not side with Civil Enforcement for a number of reasons.

1. Any contract can only be formed with the driver, there is no legislation in place to place liability on the Registered Keeper as this occured prior to Oct 1st.

2. Any contract can only be formed with the driver by a company having suitable proprietary rights of occupation on the land, this is the freeholder or leaseholder. A third part agent would not be in a position to do this (i.e. Civil Enforcement Ltd)

3. The amount sought is very likely a punitive penalty, unrepresentative of actual losses incurred by the landowner, and hence unenforceable under contract law.

Its not a fine. No private company has the necessary stautory authority to issue a fine. Its not a penalty charge under relevant legislation (e.g. the Road Traffic Act) either. Its a speculative invoice inviting you (nothing more than that) to pay a charge you don't legally owe anyone.

DO NOT PAY THIS. I think you're getting near the end of the letter chain anyway.

Debt Recovery Plus are third party agents and CANNOT bring a court claim against anyone else (as per Legal Services Act) without being registered lawyers, which they aren't.

Civil Enforcement would be insane to try court action for the three reasons above. Its just a bluff to scare you into paying up. No court action will follow.

trisontana

It's sad to see such an ethical company as the CO-OP being mixed up with this scam. Perhaps they are not so "ethical" after all?

Celeste2012

Thank you so much, I guess these letters are just designed to scare people into paying.

Is it worth contacting Debt Recovery Plus Ltd to explain why my husband isn't liable, or should we just continue to ignore, ignore, ignore?

Celeste2012

I know, I've actually considered contacting the Co-op about it, as it seems so at odds with their ethos.

ManxRed

I would ignore. Writing to them just encourages them to pester you even more. Ignoring shows them that you're just not interested.

trisontana

Celeste2012 wrote: »

I know, I've actually considered contacting the Co-op about it, as it seems so at odds with their ethos.

We have found time after time on here that supermarket managers (both junior and senior) have no idea about the actual realities of the private parking industry. They have been fed propaganda dished out by various PPCs about imaginary problems rife in many car-parks, and the "magic bullet" they offer to cure them.

RENEGADE_2

Celeste2012 wrote: »

Is it worth contacting Debt Recovery Plus Ltd to explain why my husband isn't liable, or should we just continue to ignore, ignore, ignore?

You're wasting your time. They are certified deception artists and they know this very well. They'll just try to argue "ah but the signage said this, the terms state that" and so on. You'll find yourself arguing with them.

Your position is such that you do not have to nominate a person and they cannot seek a penny in lost revenue out of you. Ignore them, treat the case like it never happened.

BASFORDLAD

Dont bother with DR+ they wont listen nor will they care