CEL address of car park wrong, retailer was closed

Coupon-mad

Creative Car Parks are a trading name of CEL.

Of course it still works to not name the driver, the PCN is not POFA complaint. And every case defended here, gets stayed (no hearings, they give up). You will find that is true on any CEL defence thread you care to search for, going back over a year.

Remove this from your challenge as it has no legs and is out of date:

The proposed charge of £100 is not fair and reasonable under the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999, considering that the car park serves the B&M store, which was closed at the time. Other car parks on private land in the area (of which there are many, as it is close to the football ground) offer supervised parking for around £6 or £7. This indicates a reasonable sum to be charged for parking in this car park when spaces are not needed by customers.

once I have decided on my defence, I send it to CEL, is that right? Just checking.

You are not at defence stage. That's a late appeal and you email it to them but have more about the fact the PCN is not a POFA one (despite what it says).

I would in fact send one more like the ones you read on the Highview threads this week (no links given, I always encourage newbies to find their way around and search the forum or merely go back a page or two to find what is here already).

scruffyharry

OK. I think I mentioned that I got a Letter Before Action, but it was not signed. So I was thinking of simply saying this (for the time being):
I note that neither your Letter Before Action nor your Statement of Truth is signed, contrary to the requirements of the Pre-Action Conduct and Protocol. Unless legibly signed by legal person, your Letter Before Action and Statement of Truth have no legal status and therefore require no response from me.
Unless I hear from you within 14 days of the date of this letter, I will assume your claim to have been withdrawn.

scruffyharry

I haven't sent that yet. I could copy the Highview model instead. But I'm wondering what is the PCN lacking that makes it non-PoFA compliant? I have read elsewhere that to be compliant it must state that the creditor does not know both the name of the driver and a current address for service for the driver and invite the keeper—
(i)to pay the unpaid parking charges; or
(ii)if the keeper was not the driver of the vehicle, to notify the creditor of the name of the driver and a current address for service for the driver and to pass the notice on to the driver;

It DOES do all of that.

scruffyharry

I wrote "all that stuff about not signing letters may be very helpful" but I cant now for the life of me find the links I must have been referring to. Can anyone help with a couple of links?

The_Deep

Some reading


https://www.google.co.uk/search?sourceid=navclient&hl=en-GB&ie=UTF-8&rlz=1T4GUEA_en-GBGB707GB707&q=CEL+court+pranhster&gws_rd=ssl#spf=1

Coupon-mad

I'm wondering what is the PCN lacking that makes it non-PoFA compliant?

Look at paragraph 9, in particular 9(2)f of the POFA (it's linked in post #1 of the NEWBIES thread but easy to Google).

scruffyharry

Coupon-mad wrote: »

Look at paragraph 9, in particular 9(2)f of the POFA (it's linked in post #1 of the NEWBIES thread but easy to Google).

The required wording *is* included in the PCN, so I think it is POFA compliant, at least in this respect. I'm hoping I've got them on para 9(2)a as the address is wrong.

Lamilad

The required wording *is* included in the PCN, so I think it is POFA compliant, at least in this respect. I'm hoping I've got them on para 9(2)a as the address is wrong.

If they have failed on any aspect of pofa, no matter who trivial, then they are NOT compliant. 9.2(f)(ii) explains this.

Can you upload the redacted PCN to dropbox and post the link on here?

scruffyharry

Lamilad wrote: »

If they have failed on any aspect of pofa, no matter who trivial, then they are NOT compliant. 9.2(f)(ii) explains this.

Can you upload the redacted PCN to dropbox and post the link on here?

Can be downloaded from http://j.!!!!!!!.com/lnu78nv (change the sequence of !s into the words tiny and url but without spaces. I dont know why it wont let me type that)

scruffyharry

I have also noticed, as you can now see, that the photos show a vehicle driving on the public road in the vicinity of their car park. Should this case continue, I will require them to show proof that the car was parked in their car park as they claim.