CEL MCOL letter - does it seem okay?

DrCuriosity

Hi! Newbie here, though I could have sworn I had a log-in before and got a ticket cancelled in the pre-Beavis days.

Anyway, I moved house and ignored my pile of old mail until I was at this stage (MCOL defence)

Have read through many threads and am very thankful for everyone and all the help given to people like me

Anyway, I've cobbled together a letter based on those that went before me. Does this seem okay? I shall be emailing it to them as a PDF.

In the County Court Business Centre
Claim Number ###
Between:
Civil Enforcement Limited v Me
Defence Statement

I am Me, the defendant in this matter and registered keeper of vehicle Car. I currently reside at My House.

I deny I am liable for the entirety of the claim for each and every one of the following reasons:

1. The Claim Form issued on the 12th June 2017 by Civil Enforcement Limited was not correctly filed under the Practice Direction nor has the Claimant complied with pre-court protocol:
The Claim form is not signed by the Claimant’s Legal Representative nor a named employee/Director, nor any legal person.
The vague Particulars of Claim (which were sent separately) disclose no clear cause of action nor sufficient detail.The defendant has requested further details from the claimant and has not yet received a response.

2. There was no compliant ‘Letter before County Court Claim’ under the Practice Direction. Several details required by the practice direction were not included in this letter.

3.1 I was not the driver on the day of the parking event and this claimant cannot hold me liable under any applicable rule of law.

3.2 The driver has not been evidenced and I put the Claimant to strict proof that it issued a compliant notice under Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (POFA).

3.3 Such a notice was not served within 14 days of the parking event and when the notice was served, did not fully comply with statutory wording. The Claimant is therefore unable to hold me liable under the strict ‘keeper liability’ provisions.

3.4 Henry Greenslade, lead adjudicator of POPLA in 2015 and an eminent barrister and parking law expert, stated that “However keeper information is obtained, there is no ‘reasonable presumption’ in law that the registered keeper of a vehicle is the driver. Operators should never suggest anything of the sort.”

3.5 Therefore, since I was not the driver, this Claimant has no basis of liability against me nor cause of action and the Court is invited to use discretion to strike this case out or put the Claimant to strict proof of their cause of action against a registered keeper.

4. No standing:
(a) There is/was no compliant landowner contract. It is believed Civil Enforcement do not hold a legitimate contract at this car park. As an agent, the Claimant has no legal right to bring such a claim in their name which should be in the name of the landowner.
(b) The Beavis case confirmed the fact that, if it is a matter of trespass (not breach of any contract), a parking firm has no standing as a non-landowner to pursue even nominal damages.

5. Schedule 4 of POFA states that the only sum a keeper can be pursued for (if Schedule 4 is fully complied with, which it was not) is the sum on the Notice to Keeper. They cannot pluck another sum from thin air and bolt that on as well when neither the signs, nor the parking charge notice mentioned a possible £323.72 for outstanding debt and damages.

6. Inadequate signs incapable of binding the driver :
(a) Sporadic and illegible (charge not prominent nor large lettering) of site/entrance signage - breach of the POFA 2012 Schedule 4 and the BPA Code of Practice and no contract formed to pay any clearly stated sum.
(b) Non existent ANPR 'data use' signage - breach of ICO rules and the BPA Codes of Practice.

7. The claimant has added unrecoverable sums to the original parking charge. I challenge the claimed amount of £323.72.
a) The​ particulars of claim dated 13th June 2017 are templates, so it is not credible that £50 legal costs were incurred.
b) I put the Claimant to strict proof and of the additional fees allegedly incurred above the initial parking charge. I deny the Claimant is entitled to any interest whatsoever.

8. This case can be distinguished from ParkingEye v Beavis [2015] UKSC 67 (the Beavis case) which was dependent upon an undenied contract, formed by unusually prominent signage forming a clear offer and which turned on unique facts regarding the location and the interests of the landowner. Point 6 above, explains why strict compliance with the BPA Code of Practice signage has not been met by the defendant. No contract formed to pay any clearly stated sum. In the Supreme Court case Mr Beavis was the admitted driver. Crucially, unlike in Beavis, I was not the driver in this case and so there is an absence of any liability and a failure to establish any cause of action.

I believe the facts contained in this Defence Statement are true.

Signed
Me


Cheers!

Quentin

You need to edit your post to remove details of who was driving.

The ppcs monitor this forum and can use your posts against you

Coupon-mad

Looks good to go!

DrCuriosity

Cheers folks. Will let you know how it goes

DrCuriosity

I have received the notice of proposed allocation to the small claims track.

I am filling it out as per the advice on the board in various places. Many thanks for the links in the pinned post.

One quick question - with CEL I am sure I saw references last time I was on to them dropping it before the actual court stage. Is this something that happens, and if so, at what point does that happen? Do they just fail to submit stuff at some point, or do they turn up to court and go through with the whole thing? I can do that, but obviously it's better if I don't have to do so.

Redx

they dont usually bother after the decent defence has been put in , so they fail to pay the filing fee , which they seem to have done in your case

so forget about "what" and concentrate on those next stages , worry about what you NEED TO DO, not what they may or may not do

nosferatu1001

If there is no fee paid, ask the court when the case will be stayed. Call up and ask.

The_Deep

Can you counter claim for anything so that they cannot walk away? How abour "attempting to obtain monies to which they are not entitled" or is that a matter for the criminal courts?