N1 from Civil Enforcement Ltd.

kate199164

bod1467 wrote: »

How are you working that out? Are you confusing N1 with NI? Or is N1 specific to NI?

OP - is it a properly-stamped claim form with a claim reference number? Or is it a copy form used as a threatogram? If it's a proper one then it'll likely need to be responded to.

It has no claim number or issue date in the top right hand corner and is not signed in any way other than 'Mr M Schwartz' but this is not a signature, it is just typed. There is no stamp, just a circle that says 'seal' in the middle. The letter just says that 'the court will write to you directly within the next 7 days'.

Should they take this further, my defense is that the 'breach' of contract occurred a full 6 months before keepers liability came into force under the Protection of Freedoms 2012 and that I was not and have never admitted to being the driver of the vehicle at the time of the alleged 'breach'. Is that a strong enough defense?

enfield_freddy

google coop , cel Schwartz all will be revealed ,




do some research THEN come back and ask questions

kate199164

enfield_freddy wrote: »

do some research THEN come back and ask questions

Nobody forced you to reply to this thread but thank you for your previously polite advice all the same.

The_Deep

Im do not understand, is this a contractual charge, or is it a claim for breach of contract, it cannot be both, and it can certainly not be trespass unless the Co-op are bringing it.

It sounds like a case of vexatious litigation to me, I should also read up on that if I were you, this claim has no chance of succeeding unless they can prove that you were the driver.

waamo

Does the form have details on how to log in to MCOL and defend a claim?

Whilst Freddy might be blunt he has a point that you need to do some research. Defending a claim isn't overly difficult but you do need to know what your on about and the issues involved. In a well defended case CEL don't even turn up.

Google parking prankster and download his guide to defending a court claim. It's a couple of quid but well worth it.

enfield_freddy

ok , continue asking questions ,


however , you have missed most of the details off , so do not expect more help than READ THE NEWBIES THREAD,


I,m out of it it , enjoy!

Iceweasel

bod1467 wrote: »

How are you working that out? Are you confusing N1 with NI?

Oops yes - I probably am - senior moment there.

Despite that, the advice to the OP to ignore threats and wait until real court papers arrive is still valid.

bargepole

waamo wrote: »

Does the form have details on how to log in to MCOL and defend a claim?

For the 240,000,000th time, CEL do not use MCOL, they issue manual forms via Salford.


You can't 'log in', it all has to be dealt with on paper.

Coupon-mad

kate199164 wrote: »

It has no claim number or issue date in the top right hand corner and is not signed in any way other than 'Mr M Schwartz' but this is not a signature, it is just typed. There is no stamp, just a circle that says 'seal' in the middle. The letter just says that 'the court will write to you directly within the next 7 days'.

They also included a copy of a recent Court of Appeal Judgement for Parking Eye ltd. Vs. Beavis dated 24.02.2015. They have never proven I was the driver (there were multiple driver insured on the car).

It's sounds like it's not a real claim form then; you say it's only a letter. No claim number (not even a sticker with claim number, top right?) and it's just a letter with enclosure about Beavis, not a front page 'claim form' and no extra several pages of court forms to acknowledge and no 'response pack', nothing to acknowledge the claim or defend?

Please show us this letter - cover your ID and any refs/VRN of car and take a scan or photos of it and then link the picture here by removing the http from the start of the link to tinypic or wherever you host the picture online.

Should they take this further, my defense is that the 'breach' of contract occurred a full 6 months before keepers liability came into force under the Protection of Freedoms 2012 and that I was not and have never admitted to being the driver of the vehicle at the time of the alleged 'breach'. Is that a strong enough defense?

That's one good line of defence (defense is American spelling but maybe it's your PC). It's NOT the only thing for a decent defence - NEVER rely on one point if you do get real court papers. There are several links about CEL and other court claims and defences, in the 'Newbies read this first!' thread (one of the lower posts of the Newbies thread, 4 or 5). Self explanatory I hope.

Of course you'd also be defending by pointing out Beavis isn't the settled case they say it is - Barry Beavis is off to the Supreme Court this month to appeal that.

And search the forum for 'CEL Co-op Claim' as the obvious keywords.

kate199164

I submitted a defence and it went through the motions. It was assigned to the small claims track and I received a court date for December on Tuesday this week. Today I received a letter from CEL informing me that they were 'no longer pursuing the PCN originally issued to you and enclose a Notice of Discontinuance of the court action which was being taken against you. This matter is now closed.'

So there we have it. Bullies and fraudsters.