CEL parking defence help!?

ruffneck247

beamerguy wrote: »

RustyRascal

I congratulate you on your continued attack.
You may have discovered a flaw in the legal system
and this Amanda does not know what to do except
suggesting you spend money to complain

You may wish to report this to
The Rt Hon David Lidington MP
Lord Chancellor and Secretary of State for Justice
[EMAIL="david.lidington.mp@parliament.uk"]david.lidington.mp@parliament.uk[/EMAIL]
[EMAIL="office@aylesburyconservatives.com"]office@aylesburyconservatives.com[/EMAIL]

I am not sure that the email that I sent actually made it to Amanda Beck. The email that I received this morning was from an "L Webb".

beamerguy

ruffneck247 wrote: »

I am not sure that the email that I sent actually made it to Amanda Beck. The email that I received this morning was from an "L Webb".

Probably not, as in life generally, if no suitable
answer is forthcoming you seek out the person
who can answer

Amanda Beck will just be a pawn in the system

777ade777

Beamer Guy - Could you provide a rough example of what to send to The Rt Hon David Lidington MP please?

RustyRascal

beamerguy wrote: »

RustyRascal

I congratulate you on your continued attack.
You may have discovered a flaw in the legal system
and this Amanda does not know what to do except
suggesting you spend money to complain

You may wish to report this to
The Rt Hon David Lidington MP
Lord Chancellor and Secretary of State for Justice
[EMAIL="david.lidington.mp@parliament.uk"]david.lidington.mp@parliament.uk[/EMAIL]
[EMAIL="office@aylesburyconservatives.com"]office@aylesburyconservatives.com[/EMAIL]

Seriously, this sounds like reply from the IAS scam

I don't think i've ever felt so bemused by a process! In essence, CEL can go online to file a claim, CCBC do no checks on them or the claim they are looking to bring to members of the public, take the money from CEL and serve the claim form to the defendant.

At this point, there is no checking, whatsoever, by anyone with any legal training (seeing as no one with any legal training works within this "court").

CCBC do not at any point become arbitrators, instead become a gateway for the passing of documents, that again, are not checked by anyone their side.

At any point if you have an issue with the process and wish to complain, you have to pay £255 for the privilege?

How about I want to complain about the CCBC? Surely they have to let me do that for free!

Loadsofchildren123

That email from Amanda Beck (or whoever) telling you that court staff are not legally trained and you should read the CPR is a disgrace.


Nobody is expecting legal advice from MCOL. People are, as they have the gall to suggest, reading the CPR for themselves, and are pointing out that the court is allowing and enabling CEL to flout those rules on a mass-claim basis.


You aren't expecting legal advice from MCOL, you are expecting them to enforce their own rules and require a serial litigant to comply with a serial flouting of the court rules. They are what their name suggests THE RULES OF THE COURT - the court (even MCOL numpties) should be enforcing their own rules (and should also have a basic understanding of what the rules say). If they can read English then they can (as they suggest you do) read the rules quite easily.


You are a user of the court. There must be some accountability. The legislature cannot impose rules on litigants and then not require certain litigants to comply with them, thus prejudicing ordinary users.


This is a formal complaint and the answer is not to complain to CEL. It is for the court to enforce its own rules.

Loadsofchildren123

I think it would cost you £100 to make an application if you were to ask for it to be dealt with on the papers. £255 is the fee required when there needs to be a hearing.


Anyone got the cash to be our guinea pig?


The point dear Amanda is missing is this:
This is a CEL-wide problem which is applicable to a large number of claim.
It is no good one person complaining to one court, this is a mass problem and should be dealt with at source, by the court that is allowing them to flout its own rules.
And how can one person ask that one judge in another court instructs MCOL what to do.


MCOL needs to be able to ensure that rules are followed, and when a breach is pointed out to them (quoting every relevant part of the CPR) then they should be capable of investigating.


There must be someone to complain to!

Loadsofchildren123

I think that is the essence of the complaint to the MP, that MCOL is unwilling and apparently unable to enforce its own rules when it has been evidenced that in a large number of cases the same litigant is flagrantly breaching them, and in so doing is causing prejudice to defendants. With the excuse that they are all admin staff and therefore can't be expected to know the rules they are expected to uphold and require litigants to follow.


MCOL is not fit for purpose in that case.


And why is nobody accountable for it because they are all "admin staff"

Loadsofchildren123

I'm in rant mode now. This is absurd. All CEL defendants should just keep plugging away and asking how to make a formal complaint about MCOL not following its own rules and procedures.

RustyRascal

Loadsofchildren123 wrote: »

I'm in rant mode now. This is absurd. All CEL defendants should just keep plugging away and asking how to make a formal complaint about MCOL not following its own rules and procedures.

I have written back to Lucy (who appears to have taken the reins from Amanda..)

Good afternoon Lucy,

I am confused as to how it is possible you are not in a position to manage a complaint about a company blatantly and routinely abusing the processes which are set out to ensure a fair and just outcome?

If I understand correctly, the ONLY way in which the malpractices being carried out by Civil Enforcement will be investigated, and possibly stopped, is if I were to pay you £255. To me, this feels like extortion!

I would appreciate it if you were to call me personally to discuss this matter further in case i have misunderstood you.

If you could call me on XXXXXXXXXXX

I look forward to speaking to you in due course,

Regards

Quentin

You don't pay £255, as already advised in #87 - £255 is for a hearing.


The fee being asked for is £100