Help

muth

I spent over an hour (I think it was on the 8th Feb) typing up a new thread about a Claim form I have received from Northampton and hit the submit thread button. I thought it was strange that I had no replies and then found that my post is not here. Can anyone suggest what might have happened and whether I might find it somewhere rather than having to type it all up again?
Thanks

Quentin

If you used the same forum name as here then it's lost.

Everyone is politely asked to read up on this in the Newbies FAQ thread near the top of the forum before starting a new thread

Go there now to learn about the game you are now caught up in and how to deal with this

#2 in the FAQ covers Court claim and how to deal with this.

If you have not done so then concentrate on doing an AOC now to get an extra 14 days to get a defence in. All explained in the FAQ

muth

Hi
Thanks for your reply. I have read the newbies thread and have got to the point where I should urgently start my own thread. I have done an AOC and have until 27 February to submit my defence. I'll have to redo all the details of my initial post. Thanks again.

Quentin

If you now have just till 27th Feb then it looks like you were too late to do an AOC???


What date was your claim "served"?


If you are too late to do an AOC then you may already have a default ccj against you


(Or did you already do the AOC prior to coming here?)

The_Deep

Th[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]is is an entirely unregulated industry which is scamming the public with inflated claims for minor breaches of contracts for alleged parking offences. [/FONT]

[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Parking Eye, Smart and a smaller company have already been named and shamed, as has Gladstones Solicitors, who take hundreds of these cases to court, who have also been reported to the regulatory authority. [/FONT]

[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]The problem has become so rampant that MPs have agreed to enact a Bill to regulate these scammers. Watch the video of the Second Reading in the HofC recently.[/FONT]

[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]http://parliamentlive.tv/event/index/2f0384f2-eba5-4fff-ab07-cf24b6a22918?in=12:49:41[/FONT]

[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]and complain in the most robust terms to your MP. With a fair wind most of these companies may well be put out of business by Christmas.[/FONT]

muth

Sorry, Quentin I should have made it clearer that I did the AOC before I did the original post that I lost somehow.
I realise now that I have been acting on old advice and have ignored a PCN and final reminder from Excel parking for failing to pay and display in a Keighley car park that they now no longer manage, so I can't get photographic evidence that the signs were not clear about a £100 charge. I also ignored various letters from BW Legal threatening Count Court proceedings, CCJs, bailiffs, and Parking Eye v Beavis among other things, and then I received a claim form from Nottingham court dated 26 January 2018. I have been on to the moneyclaim site and acknowledged the claim and said I will defend it.
The claim relates to a failure to pay and display in December 2016. The cost of this would have been 50p and the claim is for not far short of £250.

I can't remember who was driving the car, but whichever of us it was we would not have deliberately failed to pay. It isn't a car park we regularly use, and I had only owned the car for a week, so it is quite possible that the wrong registration number was entered in the machine.
I really don't know how I can defend this. Excel seem to have followed the correct procedures to notify me as the owner of the car and BW legal have issued two separate letters of claim, the second one including all the necessary information and forms required under the new protocols. I have read the thread on useless defences like the £100 charge being a penalty, so unenforceable, and unfair because it is disproportionately high, so assume It's not worth using these.
The only things I can think of are that the notice to keeper did not describe the parking charges that were due from the driver at the time (ie. 50p), and it did not state the maximum additional costs Excel may seek to recover. Also, the Claim Form is not signed by a person, but BW Legal Services Ltd.

The particulars of claim do not mention any breach of contract or agreement, just that the monies (£100) are due in respect of a PCN. £60 is also claimed for contractual costs pursuant to the PCN terms and conditions (these are initial legal costs according to BWL's original letter of claim) and then there is interest, court fees and legal representative's costs.

So, I would appreciate it if anyone would like to tell me whether it's worth trying to defend this. It infuriates me that these firms and lawyers think that it's OK to behave like this. I am unlikely ever to need any credit in future (apart from a mobile phone contract possibly) so could probably live with a CCJ rather than pay up.

One other thing is that BWL e-mailed me as well as posted a notice of county court claim. I have no idea how they got my e-mail address. Can they legally find it?

Thank you for reading and for any help you might be able to offer me.

KeithP

Is this the Cavendish Retail Park car park?

If so, there are several threads about this car park.

Put Cavendish Retail Park defence into the forum search facility, choose Show Posts, and find out how others have dealt with it.

A google search will find plenty of pictures of Excel signs there too.

Coupon-mad

so I can't get photographic evidence that the signs were not clear about a £100 charge.

You reckon?

What happened when you did a Google images search? Of course there are photos online.

What did you learn from Lamilads' wins v Excel?

What did you find when you searched the forum for all the other Cavendish defended cases?

So, I would appreciate it if anyone would like to tell me whether it's worth trying to defend this

YES.

We won 99% of well defended cases in 2017, and we assisted with hundreds. Of those who stayed with us from defence, through the DQ and WS stage, and right to the hearing, fully coached, only TWO lost.

My Goodness you could search for other defences now and copy one, and probably win by copying!

muth

When I searched the other cases I found generally that Excel or BWL had slipped up somewhere and not followed the correct procedures/protocol whereas in my case they have. I'll re-read everything.

And, Yes, "The Deep" I will be writing to my MP.

Thank you all.

Coupon-mad

Not following protocol is not what wins a defended case.

We win 99% of the time and we know what we are doing.

waamo

muth wrote: »

When I searched the other cases I found generally that Excel or BWL had slipped up somewhere and not followed the correct procedures/protocol whereas in my case they have. I'll re-read everything.

And, Yes, "The Deep" I will be writing to my MP.

Thank you all.

I bet they haven't. Defences are built on many factors such as the correct signage, correct wording on notices etc.

You can bet somewhere along the line the ppc has got it wrong. It is not your job to assist them and say it is correct. If you challenge them on a point they have to demonstrate they have done it right.