CEL (DEAL) CCJ received after submitting defence quoting Parking Eye vs Beavis

jaisonix

Hi Guys

I was wondering if you can help me understand where I am

I have used most of the advice submitted in forums and pages and in 2013 ignored a parking charge from Civil Enforcement Limited regarding overstaying in a Co-Op car park. After the infamous 2015 Parking Eye v Beavis case in which private parking charges were upheld by the supreme court, CEL have decided to issue me with a Northampton County Court claim for this PCN, which i've recently defended. I've submitted a defence claiming and proving (with evidence) that the client listed in the case (Co-op) is not pursuing this claim

Furthermore, i challenged the fine, the fees, the circumstances, the contract, and used a lot of advice from these forums to submit my defence to Wandsworth County Court (selected my own court). There was no hearing assigned

Yesterday i have received a CC judgement form N24 (General Form of Judgement of Order) claiming 'The defence discloses no defence in law (see Parking Eye vs Beavis (2015)) EWCA Civil 402) and is accordingly struck out' - without allowing me to present my arguements in a hearing

This morning I decided to give up and pay, but Civil Enforcement Limited would not accept my payment as it is now payable to DEAL - Debt Enforcement and Action Limited which was not involed in the case as Claimant and i don't have any contact details to them

My questions are as follows:

1. This N24 (CCJ) means that if i pay within a month, i can have it removed from register and it won't be outstanding for 6 years, correct? I read that this should be true
2. As i understand, there is no way i can appeal the decision, only set it aside and claim court error or wrong judgement. Is that right? I really don't want CCJ to be on my name
3. I don't even know how to pay, i will try to find papers from CEL/DEAL but i'm not confident they will tell the court that i have paid, even if i can contact them. When contacting CEL, only an automated payment line is available, and they reject my call playing a message that i have to pay 'DEAL'. Should i seek to prove to court myself if i pay to have CCJ removed from register?
4. Is there any other way to move forward, i imagine this is now a similar case for hundreds of people who received claim forms from CEL submitted to Northampton County Court. Has anyone got experiene of moving beyond the point where i am? Or should i just seek payment and finish this
5. I am not even sure that the Judge at Wandsworth County Court reviewed my case properly. How can i pay the fine when the client 'Co-op' doesn't want it paid? It is listed as the client in court case. Has anyone managed to prove this at CC?

I appreciate any advice from you fair people

Best Regards
Anthony

Redx

firstly, its not a fine, its an unpaid speculative invoice

I hope you did not use the incorrect word "fine" in your defence ?

secondly, the Beavis case isnt over as the Supreme Court wont decide the outcome until at least October 2015 (it was in court a few weeks ago but no decision has been made and wont be for a few months)

so no idea why you think a decision has been made , I suspect you meant Court of Appeal, not Supreme Court

if the claim is "struck out" , then surely this means you won as you are the defendant , not the claimant

bazster

No, he means the defence has been struck out by a trigger-happy and ignorant judge.

ManxRed

No, his defence has been struck out - presumably as having no reasonable prospects of success in light of the Beavis CoA case (which is now at Supreme Court, as we know).

I think the Judge has !!!!ed up royally here, but not sure what the OPs options are.

jaisonix

Thank you very much for your replies so far, i am very happy that i had 3 responses already

Yes, my defence has been has been struck out, even though the client seeks no payment, the claimant no longer manages the payment (as it has been transferred to this poor excuse of a company called DEAL apparently, even though all correspondence and court claim was from CEL)

And thank you for informing me that it is Court of Appeal, not Supreme Court. This is news to me, but not sure how it affects me

I am really baffled by this decision, and i can submit what i wrote in my defence here if that would help. I keep all my case files at work in a draw, so i can post them on Monday. Not sure if that would help. I really want to avoid CCJ on my file for 6 years

Redx

clearly you didnt keep up with events, as Barry Beavis crowd funded his appeal to the Supreme Court and was there just over 2 weeks ago , his CoA appeal was last february and he has since appealed it for the third time (County Court , Court of Appeal , Supreme Court)

suggest you read parking pranksters various blogs starting with his july 2015 blogs

http://parking-prankster.blogspot.co.uk/2015_07_01_archive.html

the SC decision is expected before xmas , so I would have thought your defence would have argued a "stay" pending the outcome of the SC decision at the very least

post #5 of the newbies sticky thread also deals with DEAL and CEL , plus pranksters august blogs also mention about multiple cases recently in court on the same day

http://parking-prankster.blogspot.co.uk/2015/08/preliminary-hearing-11-deal-cases-in.html

jaisonix

Thank you, i will read the progressing case in detail

So at this time would you recommend that i

1. apply for the Court to set the judgemet aside for £155 on these grounds that it is currently at Supreme Court?
2. or set it aside and appeal the decision myself
3. or pay the judgement, apply with CEL/DEAL to write to court to have CCJ removed from the register, and then appeal still?

The_Deep

Are you sure that Beavis applies? Was it a free car park with no facility to buy extra time? Did the PPC have a financial interest in the land? Was a penalty commercially justified?. Was the PPC's charge in line with local authority parking penalties?

There is so much that is dodgy about CEL/Deal that you should try to get this in front of another judge. Have you read this?

http://parking-prankster.blogspot.co.uk/2015/08/preliminary-hearing-11-deal-cases-in.html

hoohoo

CEL/DEAL are the bottom feeding end of the parking companies. They file a huge number of claims hoping motorists pay up, but if a defence is filed they have hardly ever been known to turn up, and never known to win.

It is ironic then that the only known case of them winning is because a f***wit of a judge struck out your defence without giving you a hearing.

This opens the door to any parking company filing a claim for any amount and being guaranteed to get it.

In reality every car park has different signage, layout, terms and conditions, charge levels and authority. Every case therefore has to be heard on the facts which means every case should go to a hearing because the facts are different *every* time.

The bright side is when you appeal and win, CEL will have an extra £155 to pay over and above the usual amounts!

I hope you included signage in your defence btw....will wait until Monday

The_Deep

This is clearly a perverse decision and if it happened to me I would engage a solicitor/credit cleaning specialist and fight it tooth and nail, but I realise that that is not everyone's pint of Blue Nun, and not everyone can afford it.

Would there be a solicitor who would take it on on a contingency basis? This judge needs a kicking.

DandelionPatrol

jaisonix wrote: »

Furthermore, i challenged the fine, the fees, the circumstances, the contract, and used a lot of advice from these forums to submit my defence to Wandsworth County Court (selected my own court). There was no hearing assigned

Yesterday i have received a CC judgement form N24 (General Form of Judgement of Order) claiming 'The defence discloses no defence in law (see Parking Eye vs Beavis (2015)) EWCA Civil 402) and is accordingly struck out' - without allowing me to present my arguements in a hearing

The key to this is knowing what has gone wrong here.

Does the N24 come from Northampton or from Wandsworth? It seems to me to be a straight admin messup in that either your request to change venue did not reach Northampton or your defence did not reach Wandsworth.