Civil Enforcements Ltd

Stravinsky

pappa_golf wrote: »

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

The original case wasnt tried before a Judge in Birmingham. As stated, it was tried in Northampton and the CCJ was issued in Northampton. When I applied to Northampton to have the CCJ set aside THEY transferred it to Birmingham CC for the CCJ set aside 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 for that very illuminating. No, I dont assume anything. Ive found this whole procedure very stressful indeed and my faith in the system as a whole is not great. Thats why I took the mediation option, as I felt it quite possible I would end up in court, lose, and get stuck with more and more costs.

I was going to show you my defence however you understandably dont receive pm's.

The deadline has passed for submitting a defence, however you think it is still possible to submit exhibits relating to POFA schedule 4? I've also downloaded a print of the Beavis sign and pages 12 & 13 of the POPLA annual report 2015 which refers to keeper liability.

The last document I submitted last week was form N180 (proposed allocation to the small claims track) which actually gave me until 28 November to file it

I'm limited to what I can do though as I dont know for sure which car park or where this is claimed to have happened. Comparing the Beavis sign to anything therefore is not realistically possible, although I do have a photo of a CEL sign which is very "pretty" compared to the parking eye business like one. I can only claim that I dont know if I was driving the car or not as others have constant access to the car as well at any time.

All I know is that whatever happened, happened on 4 February 2015 and they didnt go to court until April 2016, 14 months later. the time that it has taken to go to court coupled with the lack of any documentation from them at all despite numerous requests leads me to believe they will, as said, try to hijack me in court

Quentin

Stravinsky wrote: »

All I know is that whatever happened, happened on 4 February 2015 and they didnt go to court until April 2016, 14 months later. the time that it has taken to go to court coupled with the lack of any documentation from them at all despite numerous requests leads me to believe they will, as said, try to hijack me in court

Creditors are allowed to take up to 6 years to take legal action against the debtor - your 14 months wait isn't unusual in the context of private parking companies.


You can post your defence here for comment (make sure any identifying parts are ******* out)

Stravinsky

OK, thanks Quentin

In the BIRMINGHAM County Court Claim XXXXXXXX
BETWEEN
Civil Enforcement Limited
and
XXXXXXXX

---

Defence

---

1. The Defendant became aware of the claim XXXXXXXX dated 13 April 2016 at Northampton County Court on 26 July 2016 when he applied for a credit loan and at which point was informed by the credit company that a county court judgement had been placed against his name

2. The Claimants' statement of case does not comply with CPR 16.4 in that it gives inadequate information. In particular, it does not:
(a) identify the specific details of the claim
(b) identify what the offence was
(c) Provide any documentation

3. Accordingly, the Claimants’ statement of case does not identify the issues in the claim and fails to disclose any arguable course of action. Therefore, the claim can only amount to abuse of process.

4. The Defendant further notes that the claimant has issued the claim form to the defendants previous place of residence. The Defendant has not lived at said address since 28 March 2014, some two years prior to the date of judgement. At no point has the Defendant received any correspondence and despite repeated requests to obtain such correspondence since becoming aware, the Claimant has so far refused to co-operate. The Defendant will rely on two letters sent to the Claimant by way of signed delivery on 28 July and 2 August 2016 as well as Rix LJ in Expandable v Rubin (2008) EWCA Civ 59 (at para24):
"The general ethos of the CPR is for a more cards on the table approach to litigation. If a party thinks it worthwhile to mention a document in his pleadings, witness statements or affidavits, I do not see why, subject as I say to the question of privilege, the court should put difficulties in the way of inspection. I look upon the mention of a document in pleadings etc as a form of disclosure. The document in question has not been disclosed by list, or at any rate not yet, but it has been disclosed by mention in what, for the purposes of litigation, is another important and formal category of documents. If so, then the party deploying that document by its mention should in principal be prepared to be required to permit its inspection, and the other party should be entitled to its inspection."

5. The Defendant would like to draw the courts attention to the fact that without disclosure of the requested documents, the Defendant is unable to properly assess his position and is therefore prejudiced by the actions of the Claimant and are in breach of his right to a fair trial

6. The Defendant further contends that service of the claim form is defective. If the Claimant had taken reasonable steps to ascertain the Defendants address pursuant to CPR 6.9, the Claimant would have otherwise become aware of the Defendants present residence.

7. In view of the matters pleaded above, the Defendant respectfully requests that the court gives consideration to whether the Claimant's statement of case should be struck out as disclosing no reasonable grounds for bringing the claim, and/or that it fails to comply with CPR Part 16 and Practice Direction 16.

8. Alternatively if the court decides not to strike out the claimant’s case, it is requested that the court orders full disclosure of the requested documents pursuant to the Civil Procedure Rules.

9. In the event that the relevant documents are received from the Claimant the Defendant will then be in a position to amend his defence, and would ask that the Claimant bears the costs of the amendment.

10. The Defendant respectfully asks the permission of the court to amend this defence when the Claimant provides full disclosure of the requested documents.

11. For the reasons set out above it is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief as claimed or at all.

STATEMENT OF TRUTH
The Defendant believes that the facts stated in the Defence are true

Quentin

Check what you have posted and edit out identifying bit in 1.

Coupon-mad

That's interesting and does appear to cover you to plead 'no keeper liability, non-POFA documents' once they are disclosed. Otherwise as you say, how can you defend? If we'd seen this earlier we would have suggested adding a safety net alleging that CEL are unable to hold keepers liable as they do not use the only applicable law to enable that = the POFA sch4.

Stravinsky

Coupon-mad wrote: »

That's interesting and does appear to cover you to plead 'no keeper liability, non-POFA documents' once they are disclosed. Otherwise as you say, how can you defend? If we'd seen this earlier we would have suggested adding a safety net alleging that CEL are unable to hold keepers liable as they do not use the only applicable law to enable that = the POFA sch4.

OK, thanks .... I should add that the person / people that graciously helped me were a group on an internet forum, not a friend. As you can see. we are limited in what can be said due to CEL's inability to provide any information whatsoever.

On paper I shouldnt have a problem winning it, but as I said I am I suppose looking on the pessimistic side.

I have (and continue) to collate information which I hope to be able to use as we asked permission to amend the defence when (and if) the claimant actually provides anything. You are probably quite correct in pointing out that mediation will be pointless and quick. I cant mediate when I have nothing to base the mediation on

Oh, and thank you also for your advice and help, for someone out of their depth it is very helpful indeed

Coupon-mad

Was it Legal Beagles? They are good!

pappa_golf

Stravinsky wrote: »

Well, they ignored my calls to them so they are showi ng a strange way of getting another punter to pay :-).

I have sight of the claim that Birmingham CC has, which just shows debt and damages. The original claim was made in Northampton CC and transferred to Birmingham. I know the address the papers were allegedly sent to as the court has told me ... sent by a bulk handling agent office in Northampton. Its an address I used to live at 12 monthsor so before the alleged offence. There was also 12 months between the alleged offence and the court hearing. No mail was received at that address, I am in contact with the new owner

I think this thread was really to warn others .... I'm doing all I can do
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

CEL dont have a good record on turning up to court proceedings and communicating with people

please make your mind up

was the origional claim or the setaside or both at birmingham

Stravinsky

I dont know what you dont understand!!!!!

I'll try and make it clearer for you!

The original claim was made in Northampton. Thats always been the case. thats where CEL made the claim.

I discovered it, and made application to have the set aside done to Northampton

The next I received was a letter from Northampton CC saying the case was being transferred to Birmingham CC, whereupon I subsequently received a hearing date

At the hearing (In Birmingham) the judge agreed to set aside the CCJ on condition I made a defence for the claim.

The defence to the claim was subsequently lodged with him / the court

So ........ I dont understand the "make up your mind" comment. I'm perfectly aware of what I am saying

Trust that clears it up :-)