Civil Enforcement Ltd - Restaurant PCN

RF10

So I have today received the long awaited Claim form and will now have to write the defence which I've been dreading, but hopefully can beat these crooks. The issue date on claim form is 09 Jan 2020.

KeithP

RF10 wrote: »

So I have today received the long awaited Claim form and will now have to write the defence which I've been dreading, but hopefully can beat these crooks. The issue date on claim form is 09 Jan 2020.

With a Claim Issue Date of 9th January, you have until Tuesday 28th January to file an Acknowledgment of Service, but there is nothing to be gained by delaying it. To file an AoS, follow the guidance offered in a Dropbox file linked from post #2 of the NEWBIES FAQ sticky thread. About ten minutes work - no thinking required.

Having filed an AoS, you have until 4pm on Tuesday 11th February 2020 to file your Defence.

That's four weeks away. Plenty of time to produce a Defence, but please don't leave it to the last minute.


When you are happy with the content, your Defence could be filed via email as suggested here:

Print your Defence.
1. Sign it and date it.
   
2. Scan the signed document back in and save it as a pdf.
   
3. Send that pdf as an email attachment to CCBCAQ@Justice.gov.uk
   
4. Just put the claim number and the word Defence in the email title, and in the body of the email something like 'Please find my Defence attached'.
   
5. No need to do anything on MCOL, but do check it after a few days to see if the Claim is marked "defence received". If not, chase the CCBC until it is.

Having filed your Defence, there is more to do...

1. Do not be surprised to receive an early copy of the Claimant's Directions Questionnaire. Nothing of interest there. Just file it.
   
2. Wait for your own Directions Questionnaire from the CCBC, or download one from the internet, and then complete it as described by bargepole in his 'what happens when' post.
3. The completed DQ should be returned by email to the CCBC to the same address and in the same way as your Defence was filed earlier.
4. Send a copy of your completed DQ to the Claimant - to their address on your Claim Form.

RF10

I have now drafted my defense, please see below. Any advice would be appreciated.

IN THE COUNTY COURT

CLAIM No: XXXXX

BETWEEN:

CIVIL ENFORCEMENT LTD (Claimant)

-and-

XXXXXX (Defendant)

________________________________________
DEFENCE STATEMENT
________________________________________

1. The Defendant denies the Claimant is entitled to relief in the sum claimed, or at all.

2. The facts are that the vehicle, registration XXXXXX, of which the Defendant is the registered keeper, allegedly breached parking conditions set by the Claimant which is denied. It is also denied that there was any agreement to pay the Claimant a £100.00 ‘Parking Charge Notice’ for the lawful conduct described below.

3. The allegation appears to suggest the vehicle was not authorised to use the facility without a parking permit. No evidence has been provided by the Claimant to prove the vehicle was parked on the facility and has merely shown the vehicle positioned at the entrance and exit on the facility record by ANPR Cameras.

4. It is denied by the Defendant that the Claimants signage sets out the terms in a sufficiently clear manner, capable of binding any reasonable person reading them. The Defendant has already proven the requirements implied by the Claimant to obtain a permit from inside the premises was not possible as there was no access to the facility as it was outside of business hours.

5. It is expected for visitors to input their Vehicle Registration Number (VRN). This is not displayed on any of the sparse signage on the premises and no evidence has been provided by the Claimant to prove otherwise.

6. The signage throughout the facility is purposely positioned in an insufficient manner making them hidden to any passing or entering vehicle. The further signage affixed is located sparsely again making them hidden and therefore unable to bring attention to any terms and conditions set.

7. The terms on the Claimant's signage are also displayed in a font which is too small to be read from a passing vehicle and is in such a position that anyone attempting to read the tiny, illegible font would be unable to do so easily. It is, therefore, denied that the Claimant's signage can be capable of creating a legally binding contract.

8. The Protection of Freedoms Act 2012, Schedule 4, at Section 4(5) states that the maximum sum that may be recovered from the keeper is the charge stated on the Notice to Keeper, in this case £100.00. The claim includes an additional £60.00, for which no calculation or explanation is given, and which appears to be an attempt at double recovery.

9.0 In addition to the original parking charge, for which liability is denied, the Claimants have artificially inflated the value of the Claim by adding purported Legal representative cost £50.00, which have not actually been incurred by the Claimant.
9.1 Whilst £50.00 may be recoverable in an instance where a claimant has used a legal firm to prepare a claim, the Claimant has not expended any such sum in this case. This Claimant has a Legal Team not incurring any legal costs per case. The Defendant puts the Claimant to strict proof to the contrary.

10. The Claimant is put to strict proof that it has sufficient proprietary interest in the land, or that it has the necessary authorisation from the landowner to issue parking charge notices, and to pursue payment by means of litigation.

11. In summary, it is the Defendant's position that the claim discloses no cause of action, is without merit, and has no real prospect of success.

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


Name

Signature

Date

Coupon-mad

There is an existing example defence in the NEWBIES thread about a hidden VRN keypad, which adds more meat to the bones about how this breaches the Consumer Rights Act.

Remove the word 'statement' from your title of the document:

DEFENCE [STRIKE]STATEMENT[/STRIKE]

nosferatu1001

VRM, not VRN

Defence defence defence defence... UK spelling please OP

5) No, that is not a correct term. there is no such thing as a VRN. there is a VR Mark, VRM, only

RF10

I'm confused regarding this as I've read on multiple defences term VRN used? And as Coupon mentioned an example defence based on this on Newbies?

Coupon-mad

VRN or VRM, it matters not. Same thing!

And as Coupon mentioned an example defence based on this on Newbies?

Yep - just go find it. There are only 17 example defences and all are summarised.

RF10

Thanks Coupon for the help. See below the amended defence excluding the title etc.

1. The Defendant denies the Claimant is entitled to relief in the sum claimed, or at all.

2. The facts are that the vehicle, registration XXXXXX, of which the Defendant is the registered keeper, allegedly breached parking conditions set by the Claimant which is denied. It is also denied that there was any agreement to pay the Claimant a £100.00 ‘Parking Charge Notice’ for the lawful conduct described below.

3. It is denied by the Defendant that the Claimants signage sets out the terms in a sufficiently clear manner, capable of binding any reasonable person reading them. The Defendant has already proven the requirements implied by the Claimant to obtain a permit from inside the premises was not possible as there was no access to the facility as it was outside of business hours.

4. The allegation appears to suggest the vehicle was not authorised to use the facility without a parking permit. No evidence has been provided by the Claimant to prove the vehicle was parked on the facility and has merely shown the vehicle positioned at the entrance and exit on the facility record by ANPR Cameras.

5. It is expected for visitors to input their Vehicle Registration Number (VRN). This is not displayed on any of the sparse signage on the premises and the input keypad was nowhere to be seen. No evidence has been provided by the Claimant to prove otherwise.

5.1 In addition, there can be no cause of action in a parking charge case without a ‘relecant obligation’ and/or ‘relevant contract’ (the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012, Schedules 4 refers). Expecting a drive to somehow realise they need to input their VRN into an unseen keypad, in what the consumer is confident is an unrestricted free car park for patrons with no visible machines of any description, is indisputably a ‘concealed pitfall’ and cannot be described as a ‘relevant obligation’.

6. This Claimant uses ANPR camera systems to process data but fails to comply with the Information Commissioner’s ‘Data Protection Code of Practice for Surveillance Cameras and Personal Information’ (the ICO Code). This is both a specific Data Protection and BRPA Code of Practice breach. The Supreme Court Judges in Beavis held that a Code of Practice is effectively ‘regulation’ for this blatantly rogue industry, full compliance with which is both mandatory and binding upon any parking operator.

6.1 The ICO Code applies to all ANPR systems, and states that the private sector is required to follow it, in order to meet its legal obligation as a data processor. Members of the BPA are required to comply fully with the Data Protection Act (DPA) and all ICO rules and guidelines, as a pre-requisite of being able to use the DVLA KADOE system and in order to enforce parking charges on private land. At this location, the Claimant has failed on all counts and the data gathered about patrons of the site is unconscionable and excessive, given the lack of transparency about the risk of a charge for failing to do something that the driver never knew was a requirement.

6.2 If a parking firm was acting in good faith and keeping the interests of consumers at the heart of their thinking, they would ensure that patrons could not miss the keypad(s).

7. The signage throughout the facility is purposely positioned in an insufficient manner making them hidden to any passing or entering vehicle. The further signage affixed is located sparsely again making them hidden and therefore unable to bring attention to any terms and conditions set.

8. The terms on the Claimant's signage are also displayed in a font which is too small to be read from a passing vehicle and is in such a position that anyone attempting to read the tiny, illegible font would be unable to do so easily. It is, therefore, denied that the Claimant's signage can be capable of creating a legally binding contract.

9. The Protection of Freedoms Act 2012, Schedule 4, at Section 4(5) states that the maximum sum that may be recovered from the keeper is the charge stated on the Notice to Keeper, in this case £100.00. The claim includes an additional £60.00, for which no calculation or explanation is given, and which appears to be an attempt at double recovery.

10.0 In addition to the original parking charge, for which liability is denied, the Claimants have artificially inflated the value of the Claim by adding purported Legal representative cost £50.00, which have not actually been incurred by the Claimant.

10.1 Whilst £50.00 may be recoverable in an instance where a claimant has used a legal firm to prepare a claim, the Claimant has not expended any such sum in this case. This Claimant has a Legal Team not incurring any legal costs per case. The Defendant puts the Claimant to strict proof to the contrary.

11. The Claimant is put to strict proof that it has sufficient proprietary interest in the land, or that it has the necessary authorisation from the landowner to issue parking charge notices, and to pursue payment by means of litigation.

12. In summary, it is the Defendant's position that the claim discloses no cause of action, is without merit, and has no real prospect of success. The Court is invited to dismiss the Claim, and to allow such Defendant’s costs as are permissible under Civil Procedure Rule 27.14.

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

Coupon-mad

Looks good to me except for one typo

5.1 In addition, there can be no cause of action in a parking charge case without a ‘relecant obligation’

1505grandad

Also - "Expecting a (drive) to somehow realise...." - (driver)