Parking offence- CCJ!! District Enforcement

HO87

@PG - please see my reply on PPP. The DOCREF date on the V5 is the date that the DVLA updated the vehicle record not the date the OP submitted his notification. I also suggest that even had the OP submitted his updated details to the DVLA with the alacrity you clearly suggest he should that DE would still have got the previous address.

pappa_golf

and as posted previously , the fact that the date of change was 3-4 mths after the incident will not go down well at a setaside , whereas a doc ref dated 2-3 weeks later (dvla timescale)n would assist the OP , as he had acted correctly*


*apart from the obvious mail redirect


this is a bit of a self inflicted incident , that could have been avoided or sorted quickly

peter_the_piper

Sammyb77 wrote: »

There are other means of capturing my address, I amended bank, council tax, etc very quickly. And surely they could've searched again?

How long does a CCJ take to go through the application process etc. It just seems very quick, from an offence in November, through to having a CCJ in March??!!

Regards

Sam

I can't think of a reason why a ppc would want to do another search when they will win a case by default and then add the cost of finding you onto your bill.

Coupon-mad

Indeed, and the system doesn't allow it and they do not have to provide proof of service of the court papers.

pappa_golf

Sammyb77 wrote: »

How long does a CCJ take to go through the application process etc. It just seems very quick, from an offence in November, through to having a CCJ in March??!!

Regards

Sam

because the court did not get a reply , an automatic default was issued shortly after 14 days


so you could say , less than 4 weeks after DE applied started a MCOL

Coupon-mad

The 14 days till default judgment in our courts is utterly pathetic and something to include in your 'organised rant' by snail mail letter at your MP, Mrs May and Sir Oliver Heald. NOW is the time to show them how parking firms are using and abusing the UK Court system to enable unchallenged double recovery of parking charges, this is worse than car clamping when it 'clamps' your future creditworthiness for six years. Make that clear, they are currently being forced to listen and Mrs May has pledged to the Daily Mail to 'end' this farce which strikes consumers at the heart of their ability to get credit, without them knowing.

I agree with pappa golf, surely PO mail redirection for a few quid was imperative when moving house...lesson learnt.

Not a big deal though compared to what DE and Gladstones have done to you, taking advantage of the failings of the DVLA system and the court system which never checks to be sure that a keeper even got the paperwork/has moved (even though the DVLA knew this within weeks of the request made by DE).

Sammyb77

Ok thanks,

Coupon Mad- thank you for your assistance!! I will do as you suggest, write to my MP/PM and Sir Oliver.

With regards to defending my case, I genuinely don't know if I was in the wrong! there are visitors car parks next to staff ones, and if I've parked incorrectly and thus warranted a ticket, then is it still worth trying to defend myself? Can I apply for a setaside purely on the basis that the court papers were sent to the wrong address, given the short timescales between committing the alleged offence and moving house?

Secondly, on the other forum that I posted- somebody has reccommended approaching District Enforcement, on the premise that I will pay immediately (which if it will result in removing the mark on my credit record, then I will) to assist with the set aside. Which would be the best approach!

Coupon-mad

With regards to defending my case, I genuinely don't know if I was in the wrong! there are visitors car parks next to staff ones, and if I've parked incorrectly and thus warranted a ticket, then is it still worth trying to defend myself?

Yes...it's not just 'was I in the wrong?' It is more about DE's unclear & ambiguous signs with no 'offer' to park in an unauthorised way. Did you have a permit or not, I did show you the PCM case to show you how to argue this sort of thing. The PCM parkers had parked 'in the wrong' but it wasn't won on that basis, it was about the signs and we know DE's signs here are unclear. If they offer no consideration to unauthorised parkers then there is NO CONTRACT.

Can I apply for a set aside purely on the basis that the court papers were sent to the wrong address, given the short timescales between committing the alleged offence and moving house?

Yes but expect the Judge to want to hear that you can defend this and have good chances of success.

You could have with you a printout of the lecturer case, the guy who beat DE in court:

http://parking-prankster.blogspot.co.uk/2014/12/district-enforcement-lose-to-lecturer.html

Here's the signage, you can tell the Judge you have no idea about the allegation but can say that the signage and two car parks next to each other was unclear and certainly worth being heard, these stealth CCJs by parking firms being considered unfair by MPs including Mrs May herself ! :

http://parking-prankster.blogspot.co.uk/2014/12/district-enforcement-appeal-after-all.html

Not sure if that appeal by DE ever actually got heard, anyone know?

Sammyb77

Hi Coupon-Mad, thanks so much for your reply.

I don't have a permit for the University, I was just visiting as part of my work with them.

Regards

Sam

Coupon-mad

Good, like I said that's a better standpoint as a defence - you were authorised by the landowner who failed to inform you about any permit. At best you could only be considered a trespasser (denied) for which only the landowner can sue under tort, for nominal damages (none). But the landowner themselves caused the lack of permit (if it was an issue to them at all) and a third party contractor like DE has no case to 'charge' for trespass...the Beavis case confirmed that a charge 'in lieu of' a trespass case cannot be recovered.

This was not a matter of any consideration offered by DE, so there was no contract/'agreement on a charge' that could bind a non-permit holding visitor authorised by the University and should never have gone this far. It's an unfair penalty of the exact type that the Beavis case actually exposed as unrecoverable.

Complain to the University Dean/Proctor (top person) in writing. Try to get this sorted and set aside with consent, as that costs less than £255, and if you are out of pocket then ask the Uni to pay it and if they don't you can sue them as they caused the entire farce.