CEL Defence

DeBanker

Evening all.

I have received a small court Claim form from CEL Ltd who are pursuing me for a particular amount in relation to an incident 3 years ago. Despite purchasing an all day ticket at 11 minutes from entering the car-park (apparently stated 10 mins to do this). Making regretful initial contact in 2014 advising that this was the reason behind it.

I was not familiar with the area where the car was parked, being somewhat 20 miles from where its registered and so took longer than expected to get change for the machine.

• Claim date was 05/10/17

• acknowledgement of service 12/10/17 (late due to being abroad)

• PoC dated 10/10/17 but not received until 28/10/17 and datestamped 26/10/17

I am also aware I may have put in the AoS too early isntead of waiting for the PoC that where 'to follow' (reading the new guidelines put by Loadsofchildren123).

I have read through the Newbie section and I am currently building a good basis and understanding of forming my defence and I will post it ASAP.

Should I include anything specific in relation to the driver of the vehicle actually buying an all day ticket and them pursuing for costs that technically don't exist?

Massively appreciate the help.

DeBanker

Alternatively, the Defendant asks that the Claimant is required to file Particulars which comply with Practice Directions and include at least the following information;
Whether the matter is being brought for trespass, breach of contract or a contractual charge, and an explanation as to the exact nature of the charge

Should this be in included as the PoC that was received states that entering the reg. of the car is accepting the Ts & Cs and the defendant has breached them as a result?

claxtome

Sorry for not answering your questions but I am a bit confused and maybe others are too as to what you did wrong,

If I get this right the signs at the car park state you need to buy a ticket within 10 minutes of driving into the car park and you took too long to buy one so they reckon you need to be penalised?

(Never heard of anything like this before and didn't know they could enforce it. Maybe just me)

I presume that ANPR cameras are in operation at the site AND you have to put your full reg into the ticket machine when buying a ticket?

The_Deep

entering the reg. of the car is accepting the Ts & Cs and the defendant has breached them as a result?

Whether you enter a VRN correctly or not you can only he held to be in breach of a contract if that contract is fair and reasonable. Many so called contracts on which PPCs rely are not, and therefore invalid.

Does a minor typo, an error which I may make dozens of times a day, entitle one side to claim £100 when they are not out of pocket. That surely a matter for the judge and I think that he/she is more than likely to rule that it is in fact an unlawful penalty.

Read this for unfair terms in consumer contracts

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2015/15/contents/enacted

Loadsofchildren123

DeBanker wrote: »

Should this be in included as the PoC that was received states that entering the reg. of the car is accepting the Ts & Cs and the defendant has breached them as a result?

No, because now you know it's a breach of contract claim.


The complaints about failure to comply with pre-action obligations are still valid because
- they've robbed you of the opportunity to understand the claim in the pre-action phase, to respond to it and to request clarification/further information,
- they've robbed both you and themselves of the opportunity to "take stock" and narrow the issues or agree a compromise,
all of which is the clear aim of those obligations.
Instead, they've ignored their obligations (who made the parking industry immune from the court rules? - I'm not aware of any provision providing that some people must comply and others don't need to do so) and gone straight to proceedings, which is just an attempt to bully confused Defendants into paying inflated additional charges.


This is relevant when it comes to costs, and depending on their breaches (eg if you responded to the LBC with requests for information/documents and they ignored you) you could have a good reason to apply for a stay (ie a suspension) of the proceedings under paragraph 15(b) of the Practice Direction - Pre-Action Conduct (which continues to apply as per para 7.2 of the new Debt Claims Protocol)

Loadsofchildren123

If they allow 10 minutes and you took 11 the additional minute is really de minimis. Read this:
https://uk.practicallaw.thomsonreuters.com/1-382-3382?transitionType=Default&contextData=(sc.Default)&firstPage=true&bhcp=1
"A legal term meaning too small to be meaningful or taken into consideration; immaterial. As a matter of policy, the law does not encourage parties to bring legal actions for technical breaches of rules or agreements where the impact of the breach is negligible"


De minimis - short for de minimis non curat lex: the law does not concern itself with trifles. It basically means insignificant or too small to bother with


You clearly have a good defence under the doctrine de minimis non curat lex - not only were you just a minute over the allowed time, but you paid for a full day's parking, so you didn't "get away" with anything for free (eg you didn't have a free 11 minutes then pay for 2 hours parking and left at the very end of that 2 hours, thereby getting 11 "free" minutes).

Why did you take 11 minutes? Eg was there a queue to park, was it difficult to find a space, was there a queue at the machine, did you not have enough change, did you have to go and get replacement change because it wasn't accepting what you had?

The_Deep

did you have to go and get replacement change because it wasn't accepting what you had?

Which of course would mean that any PCN for leaving site would be an unfair condition in a parking contract.

DeBanker

claxtome wrote: »

Sorry for not answering your questions but I am a bit confused and maybe others are too as to what you did wrong,

If I get this right the signs at the car park state you need to buy a ticket within 10 minutes of driving into the car park and you took too long to buy one so they reckon you need to be penalised?

(Never heard of anything like this before and didn't know they could enforce it. Maybe just me)

I presume that ANPR cameras are in operation at the site AND you have to put your full reg into the ticket machine when buying a ticket?

I know it's bemusing. Apparently from the moment the car is driven into the car-park there is a 10 minute timescale to purchase a ticket (I would imagine to put off short, non paying stayers). But to clarify, was late by 1.5 mins purchasing the ticket as it would not accept the £1 coin and had to get change from a nearby cafe. In theory I should of drove out and back in to reset the timer who knows. Crazy that I bought an all day ticket too so all dues paid.

Loadsofchildren123 wrote: »

If they allow 10 minutes and you took 11 the additional minute is really de minimis. Read this:
"A legal term meaning too small to be meaningful or taken into consideration; immaterial. As a matter of policy, the law does not encourage parties to bring legal actions for technical breaches of rules or agreements where the impact of the breach is negligible"


De minimis - short for de minimis non curat lex: the law does not concern itself with trifles. It basically means insignificant or too small to bother with


You clearly have a good defence under the doctrine de minimis non curat lex - not only were you just a minute over the allowed time, but you paid for a full day's parking, so you didn't "get away" with anything for free (eg you didn't have a free 11 minutes then pay for 2 hours parking and left at the very end of that 2 hours, thereby getting 11 "free" minutes).

Why did you take 11 minutes? Eg was there a queue to park, was it difficult to find a space, was there a queue at the machine, did you not have enough change, did you have to go and get replacement change because it wasn't accepting what you had?

Thanks for the information I will read up now and try form it into my draft.

One of the £1 coins wouldn't work and I had to find somewhere to get change locally (not from that area). I found a cafe and got change and returned to buy an all day ticket.

Coupon-mad

You can't rely on time to go and get change for parking, not in street nor on private land. Even a Council could issue a PCN under these circs.

Not saying it's not beatable, just saying that ''going for change'' is NOT something to ever do. You are expected to arrive with change/not park unless you can comply (same from Councils).

De minimis is part of a defence, however.

DeBanker

In addition to their PoC there is an attached schedule of Information stating the details, car reg, times dates etc.

Summary of terms on there also states:

Phone and Pay or pay at machine - Payment must be made within 10 minutes of arrival. This land is private property. These parking terms apply 24 hours a day. Disabled badge holders are not exempt from these conditions. if you (a) do not pay within 10 minutes of arrival; or (b) overstay the purchased parking time, you agree to pay out charge. Additional costs will be incurred if payment is not received within 28 days.

KeithP

DeBanker wrote: »

Summary of terms on there also states:

Phone and Pay or pay at machine - Payment must be made within 10 minutes of arrival. This land is private property. These parking terms apply 24 hours a day. Disabled badge holders are not exempt from these conditions. if you (a) do not pay within 10 minutes of arrival; or (b) overstay the purchased parking time, you agree to pay out charge. Additional costs will be incurred if payment is not received within 28 days.

It's all very well them saying that now, but is there any evidence that that was part of the contract the driver agreed to at the time?

Let me put that another way... it is for the claimant to prove the terms that were agreed.

Of course if you have pictures of signs saying something different, that would help immensely.