Claim Form (CEL) | PoC INCLUDED in Claim Form??

Coupon-mad

7. No standing; this distinguishes this case from the Beavis case:
It is believed Civil Enforcement Ltd 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. is this applicable to all CEL defences? just checking as it's a cut n'paste, if this is applicable to my situation?

Yes, that's fine.

Did you also post on pepipoo? I saw a defence just the same over there.

denchgang9

Thank you - will submit this now to ccbcaq@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk

I can't remember where I saw how to address the email/subject (lost among the many tabs I have open of old threads!), I'm going to put the claim form reference no. in it and attach a signed/dated PDF of my defence.

I trust this is all that's needed now and nothing left to do with MCOL (already done AOS)?

And yes I did cross-post with pepipoo just to get as much help as possible! I noticed someone had done this in another thread. Just realised you must be schoolrunmum! Very perceptive haha.

denchgang9

Also, I never received an initial NTK... as mentioned above, the first ever correspondence received from CEL was a "final reminder before legal action" @ £100 with no specification of the location or time of the "incident"... Hence why it was ignored as it literally looked like a spam letter in red writing with nothing but my number plate and an alleged date of PCN issued...

Should I be requesting anything at this stage from them to add to my defence when they inevitably ignore it?

I have proof of an email I sent them early 2017 requesting to see the PCN / evidence/ photos from the incident - I received no response

[Deleted User]

Should I be requesting anything at this stage from them to add to my defence when they inevitably ignore it?

Err yes, because they are REQUIRED to provide information relevant to the debt in accordance with the Pre-action protocol for debt claims. Failure to do so will not preclude them from issue of court proceedings, but may permit you to argue prejudice and that they should be debarred from claiming interest (in addtion to their bolt-ons) even if they are successful.

And yes, because their failure to correspond to reasonable correspondence at this stage may assist with any arguments you make for unreasonable conduct of the litigation

And yes, because if they point to your earlier failures to correspond, you can simply point out that they ignore whatever replies they receive in any event.

denchgang9

Thanks Johnersh - is this fine to do via email or do I need to post and get proof of postage? (paying for stamps seems so wasteful when there's obviously never a response!) and email has proof of date sent.

I'll be guided by you.

Thank you :money:

[Deleted User]

The law recognises email correspondence as a written communication, so your emails are fine and can be printed out and put in the trial bundle with all the other relevant materials.

It's not yet relevant, but in relation to service of Court documents you should bear in mind that the rules relating to electronic service and postal service are quite different. For that reason, I like the post and refuse to accept service of any substantive court proceedings / disclosure etc by email.

denchgang9

Perfect - thanks.

I've submitted my Defence via email

Can I just confirm that (having already completed AOS via MCOL) that I do NOT need to do anything else on MCOL so they know I've submitted defence via email, as in, I don't have to go through the "submit defence" process and leave the box blank?

Guess it's just a waiting game now. Will keep you guys posted.

Thanks again for the guidance

Coupon-mad

No more needed on MCOL but if you check it next week it should update.

ABC10minutes

A lot of this looks relevent to my case. My car entrered a hotel carpark to pick up a friend. The driver did not leave the car, phoned the friend who after a short delay came out and they drove off. CEL sent a parking charge notice with a picture of my car with driver sat in car saying it was there for about 11 minutes.

I have so far ignored all their letters which have just kept claiming extra debt charges.

I have had the court letter from Northampton and have been online to do the AOS - will start my own thread - as there must be others like me who have ignored all their letters - and this site does claim to be able to win 99% of cases

Coupon-mad

OK good, I see you have started a new thread so we will help you there.

We see 99% of cases won, yes. Even higher with CEL as they always discontinue.