CEL County Court claim - help needed with defence

hanger

I have received court papers from Northampton County Court relating to an alleged parking offence in May 2012 in a free co-op car park. (I was alleged to have stayed for over 5 hours when in fact I made 2 separate visits on the same day!)

I have sent back the AOS stating I am disputing the claim but I could do with help with the format and content that I should put on the defence form N9B. Should I focus on the fact that I wasn't actually parked for the amount of time as alleged or should I use other more legal and technical arguments?

I am aware that there are similar cases discussed on here but I could do with advice on what to say on the defence form in my case.

Thanks in advance,

Coupon-mad

Same as the others, read the Newbies thread post #5 and that tells you what to put in a defence among all the other links & advice about the court procedure and forms and what happens. There are specific links about CEL and Co-op stuff.

All you would need extra would be the fact that the driver was elsewhere in between as this was 2 visits (you do not say who was driving!). And you MUST turn up if this goes to a hearing, you lose if you don't turn up - and CEL won't appear themselves.

Read liseylou's thread as she won today v Parking Eye and will hopefully write about it later. It will help you see these can be beaten - yours being CEL is easier than hers though.

Buts your was CEL, they won't turn up so start a spreadsheet of your costs to claim (not joking) you will get your costs and must claim them for being mucked about.

hanger

Coupon-mad wrote: »

Same as the others, read the Newbies thread post #5 and that tells you what to put in a defence among all the other links & advice about the court procedure and forms and what happens. There are specific links about CEL and Co-op stuff.

All you would need extra would be the fact that the driver was elsewhere in between as this was 2 visits (you do not say who was driving!). And you MUST turn up if this goes to a hearing, you lose if you don't turn up - and CEL won't appear themselves.

Read liseylou's thread as she won today v Parking Eye and will hopefully write about it later. It will help you see these can be beaten - yours being CEL is easier than hers though.

Buts your was CEL, they won't turn up so start a spreadsheet of your costs to claim (not joking) you will get your costs and must claim them for being mucked about.

Thanks for your reply.To clarify, is the first defence I need to submit just supposed to be hand written bullet points on the N9B form?

And as it was over 2 years ago I probably don't have any 'proof' that the car wasn't parked there for the duration as suggested, will this be an issue?

What costs should I be listing for this?

Coupon-mad

Over two years ago - so the keeper (you) cannot be held liable because this was pre POFA 2012 (the Act took effect from 1st Oct 2012). Pretty easy to defend then, for a keeper who doesn't know who was driving - and this is CEL so they won't be there even if they pay for a hearing..

Yes bullet points but don't rush it and you have to acknowledge the claim first, within 14 days, then defend it within the following 14 days.

You need to read more. You need to read other CEL threads about the Co-op and about the DEAL 'assignment of debt' letter and about what people put in their defence. Don't rush. Acknowledge and then spend a week reading every thread you can find about CEL on this very forum and on pepipoo here:

http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showforum=60

Just search pepipoo or this MSE forum for 'coop' as a keyword (no need for the hyphen).

Notice on pepipoo when you start to read threads that emanresu's signature says: 'Civil Enforcement Update: FREE £100 whenever you receive a CEL court demand. They do not turn up so you get a default win plus FREE £100 costs if you ask the Judge. See BoristheSpider thread.'

...and it's true. Your costs are a running total of expenses like envelopes, printing, photocopying, stamps and your time at £18 per hour (the court rate) but the hours being within reason, just a few! And on the day if they push it to a hearing, bring proof of travel/parking costs(!) mileage and loss of income that day if applicable. Typical £90 or £100 costs are agreed if you ask the Judge because CEL have behaved unreasonably (by not turning up after dragging a keeper to court who was never liable as the law isn't retrospective and because CEL don't even use compliant letters to use the POFA even for more recent cases...oh and because CEL have already sold the debt to DEAL in most cases, as shown in one letter...).

I get the impression you haven't yet even read the cases won by defendants in the Newbies thread and found CEL v McCafferty or any other CEL threads. There are dozens and dozens on both forums for you to read. Start with post #5 (only post #5) of the top thread. Then search both forums for 'coop'.

hanger

Thanks for your response. I have done a lot of research and have now written my defence, which I intend to send to the court tomorrow. Is there someone who can look over this and advise on the content before I send it off?

Coupon-mad

Yes we all can - you are safe to post it here. CEL aren't the sharpest knives in the drawer, you will win and may even get some costs, if forced to attend a non-hearing.

hanger

Coupon-mad wrote: »

Yes we all can - you are safe to post it here. CEL aren't the sharpest knives in the drawer, you will win and may even get some costs, if forced to attend a non-hearing.

I have copied and pasted in below what I intend to submit. The numbered points are responses to the Particulars of claim which seem to be the usual from CEL so I assume you know what I'm responding to? Any advice is welcome, thanks!

ampersand

At a running glance, hanger - mainly grammar policing by me. 'neither' always needs 'nor'; 'either' takes 'or', so
-1. is prob. a typo.
5. 'them to', should be 'to them'.
7. Don't like 'admits' - why not simply 'No charge was ever due, so no charge is outstanding.'
10. 'of payment', should be 'for payment.'
#
The real experts will be along in a mo. I'm certain:-)

Guys_Dad

The fact is that there were 2 visits. That does not come out in the skeleton. The PPC should be able to supply evidence to the contrary by means of an unredacted series of images showing that there was no double dipping.

Your defence reads as if you are using technicalities to cover up what the PPC claims rather than the fact that their equipment missed your 2 visits.

Unless of course there is a no return within x hours t&c

ampersand

....which wording would have to be size, font, position compliant anyway. n'est-ce pas, GD?

Guys_Dad

ampersand wrote: »

....which wording would have to be size, font, position compliant anyway. n'est-ce pas, GD?

Of course. But I am guessing no such restriction was there.