Civil Enforcements Ltd

Coupon-mad

If CEL respond to the mediation process, it will be interesting to see

If they dont then the mediation company will be able to report that to the court

Mediation doesn't assist in these case though.

Stravinsky

Coupon-mad wrote: »

Mediation doesn't assist in these case though.

Yes they do

I had the documents from the court to apply for a particulsar course which began with mediation ... which have been returned to the court.

If mediation doesnt work (i.e. we dont come to an agreement) then it reverts to a court hearing

Stravinsky

Remember ...... it is mediation over the original fine, not the CCJ

Coupon-mad

No, I mediation will not help you, not that the Mediation service per se 'doesn't assist'.

So sorry if I wasn't clear, I meant it's pointless for you and won't assist you (and it's not a fine anyway). Everyone gets offered mediation in these cases; we deal with several legal defences/witness statements per week and never tell people to go for mediation.

Look - read the two links within this reply by Umkomaas:

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/71582139#Comment_71582139

and also from bargepole in his guide on the court process re PPCs:

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/5546325

''NO to mediation (they want the whole amount, you want to pay them nothing, so no scope for mediation. This will not go against you).''


You said you had advice from ''a solicitor who knows about parking problems'' (that's a rare breed). Has he told you how this can be won using the POFA Schedule 4 non-compliance by CEL and the POPLA Annual Report 2015 (citing Henry Greenslade's words about Understanding Keeper Liability)? With CEL, it's a keeper's best defence of all, regardless of details, signs etc.

Stravinsky

Thanks, Yes I am aware its not a fine. Incorrect terminology, sorry

At this moment in time I dont know what "it" is. If i go straight to court I go with just the defence that I dont know what it is and I might not have been driving I'm not sure how that pans out.

The court recommends that it goes to mediation first. I agree with you, if they do get to join the conversation they will probably demand full payment. I cant agree because I dont know what "it" is. Ive been furnished with no details, no photographic proof, no indication of where it happened. Ive read the links you sent, and yes it seems pretty pointless.

So presumably then we go to court anyway with no correspondance or detail provided by them (unless they suddenly magic up what they have not supplied over the last 5 months), lack of any evidence, and the fact that three people have access to my car

I do understand what you say about the keeper / driver. A defence has gone in but as I said I dont strictly know what I am defending as yet which is the frustrating thing. Thats really why we havent been able to specificly defend using anything

The Parking eye v Beavis case cant be used I guess from what I see if I was not driving, correct?

Coupon-mad

If i go straight to court I go with just the defence that I dont know what it is and I might not have been driving I'm not sure how that pans out.

Please don't just assume you can win at a hearing by turning up unprepared and saying you don't know anything about it. You would be in danger of being ambushed and losing against an assured, confident legal rep who the Judge might even recognise from countless appearances before (not saying the decision will be biased at all but you can't turn up with the cards stacked against you). You need bullets and you need to evidence them before the hearing and bring them with you as well, in your court bundle.

If a defence has gone in, what did that defence say and did it reference the POFA Schedule 4 and the fact that CEL are known (100% known) not to use POFA wording? I hope your solicitor friend put the Claimant to strict proof of POFA compliance because CEL will fail.

A mediator will try to get you to settle; it's their job, like 'Mary' in one of the links I showed you. They are clueless and think Beavis beats all.

The Parking eye v Beavis case cant be used I guess from what I see if I was not driving, correct?

CEL will try to use it and a lot of Judges will think that Beavis beats all (same as Mediators think). Your job is to show you are not liable and the POFA Schedule 4 printed out as evidence, plus Henry Greenslade's wording from the POPLA Annual Report 2015 'Understanding Keeper Liability' are your best bets. Along with a printed version of the Beavis sign to compare with any wordy, pale and cluttered sign they produce (to show the difference with brief terms in large lettering, a la Beavis case).

So, have you already had to submit all the exhibits and your final witness statement that you will be relying upon?

Even if you have already got to that stage and passed it but feel you missed a trick at all, just go ahead and add the 3 things I've mentioned anyway. File them as exhibits for your case at Birmingham Court and to the Claimant and say you care having to guess how to defend this due to receiving no evidence or information about the alleged incident but have established from other documented CEL cases that they cannot hold registered keepers liable. Explain that this is because they have never used 'Schedule 4 compliant' wording and as such, that merely leaves them to have to prove who was driving. And the POPLA Lead Adjudicator's words about keeper liability (Mr Greenslade is a barrister with specific parking law expert opinion and unrivalled experience via PATAS and POPLA) are vital to assist the court in the interest of justice and a fair hearing for a keeper of a car.

A keeper cannot be held liable outwith the POFA and has no obligation to name the driver, nor can that party be assumed on the balance of probabilities in the absence of evidence. As far as CEL is concerned it is 'prove the driver or there is no case' but the Judge will not have the exhibits to support that argument in front of him/her unless you put them there, like this Defendant did:

http://parking-prankster.blogspot.co.uk/2016/11/mr-pickups-fun-day-out.html

Apologies if you've already done all that/know all that!

We are keen to ensure that defendants with comparatively easy cases like this one, win as they certainly should do.

pappa_golf

ok , this is getting very complex

earlier posts

m not sure Ive made myself clear judging by your comment papa golf
I dont have any information
I never received a parking notice. I never received a reminder
I didnt know I was put into court

then you say

I have sight of the claim that Birmingham CC The original claim was made in Northampton CC and transferred to Birmingham.

then tonight you say

The court transferred the claim to Birmingham as they realised thats where I was situated when I made the application to set aside the CCJ


what has a setaside got to do with the origional location of the case?

if the case was transfered to birmingham , someone MUST have replied to the court papers and requested that location

if no reply was recieved the default would have been done on paper at northampton

Coupon-mad

I think the default was done at Northampton but the set aside application has brought the case to the defendant's local court now, for a hearing.

Stravinsky

Coupon-mad wrote: »

Please don't just assume you can win at a hearing by turning up unprepared and saying you don't know anything about it. You would be in danger of being ambushed and losing against an assured, confident legal rep who the Judge might even recognise from countless appearances before (not saying the decision will be biased at all but you can't turn up with the cards stacked against you). You need bullets and you need to evidence them before the hearing and bring them with you as well, in your court bundle.

If a defence has gone in, what did that defence say and did it reference the POFA Schedule 4 and the fact that CEL are known (100% known) not to use POFA wording? I hope your solicitor friend put the Claimant to strict proof of POFA compliance because CEL will fail.

A mediator will try to get you to settle; it's their job, like 'Mary' in one of the links I showed you. They are clueless and think Beavis beats all.


CEL will try to use it and a lot of Judges will think that Beavis beats all (same as Mediators think). Your job is to show you are not liable and the POFA Schedule 4 printed out as evidence, plus Henry Greenslade's wording from the POPLA Annual Report 2015 'Understanding Keeper Liability' are your best bets. Along with a printed version of the Beavis sign to compare with any wordy, pale and cluttered sign they produce (to show the difference with brief terms in large lettering, a la Beavis case).

So, have you already had to submit all the exhibits and your final witness statement that you will be relying upon?

Even if you have already got to that stage and passed it but feel you missed a trick at all, just go ahead and add the 3 things I've mentioned anyway. File them as exhibits for your case at Birmingham Court and to the Claimant and say you care having to guess how to defend this due to receiving no evidence or information about the alleged incident but have established from other documented CEL cases that they cannot hold registered keepers liable. Explain that this is because they have never used 'Schedule 4 compliant' wording and as such, that merely leaves them to have to prove who was driving. And the POPLA Lead Adjudicator's words about keeper liability (Mr Greenslade is a barrister with specific parking law expert opinion and unrivalled experience via PATAS and POPLA) are vital to assist the court in the interest of justice and a fair hearing for a keeper of a car.

A keeper cannot be held liable outwith the POFA and has no obligation to name the driver, nor can that party be assumed on the balance of probabilities in the absence of evidence. As far as CEL is concerned it is 'prove the driver or there is no case' but the Judge will not have the exhibits to support that argument in front of him/her unless you put them there, like this Defendant did:

http://parking-prankster.blogspot.co.uk/2016/11/mr-pickups-fun-day-out.html

Apologies if you've already done all that/know all that!

We are keen to ensure that defendants with comparatively easy cases like this one, win as they certainly should do.

Thanks, I'll have a good read through this tomorrow

pappa_golf wrote: »

ok , this is getting very complex

earlier posts

m not sure Ive made myself clear judging by your comment papa golf
I dont have any information
I never received a parking notice. I never received a reminder
I didnt know I was put into court

then you say

I have sight of the claim that Birmingham CC The original claim was made in Northampton CC and transferred to Birmingham.

then tonight you say

The court transferred the claim to Birmingham as they realised thats where I was situated when I made the application to set aside the CCJ


what has a setaside got to do with the origional location of the case?

if the case was transfered to birmingham , someone MUST have replied to the court papers and requested that location

if no reply was recieved the default would have been done on paper at northampton

Yes, all I said was correct about not knowing about court or having any information

When I applied to Northampton CC to get the CCJ set aside they transferred it to Birmingham. I didnt ask for it. They just did it. There was a hearing subsequently in Birmingham CC and the judgement was set aside on condition I submit a defence.

The set aside has everything to do with the original location therefore because thats where I had to apply to have it done as thats where the original claim was heard.

I eventually got a copy of the claim from Birmingham County Court a day or so before the deadline for my defence to be lodged but it says very little other than debt and damages

pappa_golf

why was the ORIGIONAL case tried before aa judge in BIRMINGHAM!!

if you did not reply to the origional court papers , defend and state that you wanted the case transfering to birmingham , the default would have been done at northhampton