Civil Enforcement Limited - County Court

Dancingmonkey

Morning Folks,

I have had a good read of the newbies section, and recent cases involving CEL. I am close to getting my head around my current status and next steps, I just have a few points for clarification.

Long story short - wife parks in CEL ran ANPR car park twice in late 2015, first time rings the number on the sign to pay parking fee but service was down, got fed up of trying so she just went about her business. Second time she was there, she just didn't bother altogether.

Ignored correspondence for first quarter of the year, then we moved house. A few weeks ago got a bundle of post forwarded to us from the landlord of our previous property, which included the county court documents and a particulars of claim document from the infamous mr Schwartz.

luckily, issue date was 22nd July and by pure fluke I received the papers on 2nd August, so I immediately acknowledged the claim on the moneyclaim.gov website as recommended on the forum, and stated that I wish to refute the claim. From what I understand, I have until the 30th August to build my defence?

On the newbies thread it mentions that if you are bang to rights in the wrong, to go down a mediation route? Does this mean in my instance, it's pointless for me to Start pulling together extracts from other defence cases from across the forum?

Thanks in advance!

Umkomaas

luckily, issue date was 22nd July and by pure fluke I received the papers on 2nd August, so I immediately acknowledged the claim on the moneyclaim.gov website as recommended on the forum, and stated that I wish to refute the claim. From what I understand, I have until the 30th August to build my defence?

I'm afraid you're out of luck on that assumption. If you acknowledge service within 14 days of service (deemed as the date of issue plus up to 5 days) you gain a further 14 days. With the best will in the world that won't take you to 30th August.

Phone the court to find out the precise date by when you have to submit your outline defence, but as you won't be able to do that until Monday, best start putting something together over the weekend in preparation for when you know the exact date.

You do need to get something in by the deadline, otherwise you face a default Judgment against you and in favour of the PPC. Be aware that once you've submitted your outline defence (bullet point style, for further development nearer the court date) you cannot add any new points later (well, not without a hefty fee to do so).

Look over on PePiPoo as well as here in seeking out other drafts, not just CEL ones, as most PPC cases have a core theme, then further enhanced by specifics relating to you particular parking event. Look out for drafts on PePiPoo by regular contributor 'Gan'.

You might also want to post your thread over there too, as more 'courties' seem to hang out there.

http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?act=SF&s=&f=60

parkingwoes_2

Dancingmonkey wrote: »

luckily, issue date was 22nd July and by pure fluke I received the papers on 2nd August, so I immediately acknowledged the claim on the moneyclaim.gov website as recommended on the forum, and stated that I wish to refute the claim. From what I understand, I have until the 30th August to build my defence?

On the newbies thread it mentions that if you are bang to rights in the wrong, to go down a mediation route? Does this mean in my instance, it's pointless for me to Start pulling together extracts from other defence cases from across the forum?

Thanks in advance!

No you don't have until the 30th August as stated.

If the issue date is the 22nd July - it is deemed served 5 days afterwards - the claim needs to be acknowledged within 14 days of the 'served date' and defence filed within a total of 28 days from 'served date'

By my reckoning that meant you needed to have acknowledged the claim by 10th and defence filed by 24th August.

Have you received confirmation of the acknowledgement?

I am not sure where it says in the NEWBIEs thread anything about 'banged to rights'

BobJameson

Dancingmonkey wrote: »

. A few weeks ago got a bundle of post forwarded to us from the landlord of our previous property, which included the county court documents and a particulars of claim document from the infamous mr Schwartz.

What is the date of service (2 days after postmark) of the Particulars?

I have a nice template response to Mr Schwartz somewhere...

parkingwoes_2

BobJameson wrote: »

What is the date of service (2 days after postmark) of the Particulars?

I have a nice template response to Mr Schwartz somewhere...

Good point !!

if the detailed particulars were sent after the claim issue date the OP does indeed have 14 days from those.

BobJameson

Knew I had one somewhere...

I assert that I am not liable to the Claimant for the sum claimed, or any amount at all, and as such the claim is not admitted in any respect, for the following reasons:

1. Although the Particulars of Claim have been received by the Defendant, the Particulars of Claim are so generic that they do not disclose a cause of action.

2. The Particulars are so devoid of information that the Defendant is unable to confirm or deny whether the Defendant’s car was present in the car park at the time claimed by the Claimant, nor even whether the car park existed at the material time. The Claimant has provided no evidence of any contract with the landowner or any relationship with the landowner or leaseholder other than a bare assertion on which the Claimant is put to strict proof.

3. Again, the Claimant’s claim of the Defendant’s liability is based on bare assertion and the Claimant is put to strict proof of their compliance with Schedule 4 Protection of Freedoms Act in the following regards:
a. The period of parking: The Claimant has only specified the times of entry and departure from the site.
b. How the parking charges fell to be due from the driver.
c. The sum that was still unpaid on the day before the date of the notice, and the specified times at which the sum was due and payable.
d. The arrangements for the resolution of disputes by independent arbitration.
e. The date on which the notice was sent, not merely printed.
4. As it is asserted that the Claimant has not complied with the requirements of Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms act such that it is entitled to rely on Keeper Liability, and therefore must pursue the driver of the vehicle at the relevant time. No admissions will be made as to the driver, and it is for the Claimant to prove, using their own evidence, that they have issued proceedings against the correct defendant.

5. The Claim purports to be signed by ‘Mr M Schwartz’ as the Claimant’s “Legal Representative”. Mr Schwartz (SRA ID 118966) is currently under a Practising restriction whereby he may not be employed as a solicitor or act as a sole practitioner without such arrangements being approved by the SRA. As his employment by the Claimant has not been so approved or been evidenced, he is unlikely to be authorised to act in this matter and the Claimant is put to strict proof of his authority to act on its behalf. It is understood that this is being further investigated by the SRA, and the Defendant submits that under the legal doctrine of ex turpi causa, the claim should be dismissed, or at the minimum stayed while this is dealt with by the proper authorities.

6. The Claimant has a well-documented history, on various Consumer websites and other forums, of issuing large numbers of court claims, either in their own name or in their associated company names of DEAL, Star Parking and Creative Car Park, and then discontinuing the claims at the 11th hour, once it becomes clear that the defendant will turn up to court for the hearing. They are, it is submitted, using the civil justice system as a low-cost form of debt collection for monies which are not lawfully due to them.

7. In light of the Claimant’s behaviour, and their clear abuse of the small claims procedure, it is submitted that this claim should be struck out, and the case referred to the Designated Civil Judge with a recommendation that a General Civil Restraint Order be made against the Claimant, to prevent further claims being issued without the express permission of the Judge.

The above points will be explained fully in the Witness Statement, and Skeleton Argument,!which I shall serve not later than 14 days before the date of any hearing.!

See if that assists...