Please Help Parking CEL

Castle

MFTaylor3 wrote: »

2. The facts of the matter are that the vehicle was parked at Halls Retail Park, Bury on the date in question but due to the vehicle being used by multiple employees I have no recollection of who was driving at the time of the alleged parking breach.

Are you an Employer?

MFTaylor3

I was at the time of the alleged offence yes. I had up to 30 sub-contractors working for me.

Castle

MFTaylor3 wrote: »

I was at the time of the alleged offence yes. I had up to 30 sub-contractors working for me.

Sub-contractors are not employees.

MFTaylor3

ok thanks will alter that to sub-contractors that regularly used the vehicle

Coupon-mad

DPO = Data Protection Officer...so the data protection email is clearly the right one!

MFTaylor3

Thanks for all the input guys. Shall I submit this defence now?

Coupon-mad

You aren't submitting a defence though if this is a set aside application, you are submitting a form N244, a Witness Statement, a draft order and the £255 fee (unless you qualify for court fees help).

nosferatu1001

C-M - they already have the set aside, see page 1.

Coupon-mad

Ah OK, I looked a few posts up and the draft order and WS etc were posted, not a defence! Confused now. I looked too far up the thread!

MFTaylor3

Ah sorry for the confusion please see below my defence


1. Defendant was registered keeper at the time in question
2. Defendant was not driving or presant at the time in question
3. CEL do not own the land and have failed to evidence a contract with the landowner authorising them to bring charges against the defendant (I have verified this via the land registry)
4. Nothing to significantly evidence alleged 'breach of contract' no date/time stamped photographs showing the vehicle parked in an incorrect way (I have submitted a SAR to CEL)
4. Claim for incorrectly filed


In the County Court Claim No: xxxx
Between Civil Enforcement Ltd (Claimant)
And
XXXXXX (Defendant)

DEFENCE



1. The defendant was the registered keeper of vehicle registration number XXXXX on the material date. The defendant denies the claim in its entirety and denies that the claimant is entitled to the sum or any part of the amount claimed

2. The facts of the matter are that the vehicle was parked at Halls Retail Park, Bury on the date in question but due to the vehicle being used by multiple sub-contractors that worked for me I have no recollection of who was driving at the time of the alleged parking breach.

3. The land in question is not owned by the Claimant nor has the claimant produced any evidence of the required authority in the form of a contract with the land owner. Without this the Claimant has no right to bring these charges against the defendant. Accordingly, it is denied that the Defendant breached any of the Claimant's purported contractual terms, whether express, implied, or by conduct.


4. BPA Code of Practice Section 20 (20.5a) states: ‘when issuing a parking charge notice you may use photographs as evidence that a vehicle was parked in an unauthorised way. The photographs must refer to and confirm the incident which you claim was unauthorised. A date and time stamp should be included on the photograph. All photographs used for evidence should be clear and legible and must not be retouched or digitally altered.’ I am yet to receive any photographs as evidence.

6. The Claim form issued on 21st December 2018 by Civil Enforcement Ltd has been incorrectly filed under The Practice Direction. As it was not signed by a Director or legal representative. Practice Direction 22 requires that a statement of case on behalf of a company must be signed by a person holding a senior position and state the position. The claim form was signed by Mr A. Cohen with no further details of position held at Civil Enforcement Limited.

6. The claimant’s calculations of £272.05 have been received on 21st December 2018. The additional sum of £172.05 for ‘debt recovery, admin cost and accrued interest’ appears to be a cost with no apparent qualification and an attempt at double recovery In accordance with The Protection of Freedom Act Paragraph 4 (5) The maximum sum which may be recovered from the keeper by virtue of the right conferred by this paragraph is the amount specified in the notice to keeper

(c) The defendant refutes that the Claimant is entitled to claim £50 legal representation costs CPR 27.14 does not permit these to be recovered in the Small Claims Court. In Ladak v DRC Locums UKEAT/0488/13/LA the Claimant can only recover the direct and provable costs of the time spent on preparing the claim in a legal capacity, not any administration cost.

(d) No figure for additional charges has been ‘agreed’ nor could they have been included as part of the alleged ‘contract’ because no such costs have been quantified on the signs or on any of the subsequent correspondence from The Claimant

The defendant believes that the claim has no merit or reasonable prospects of success and invites the court to strike out the claim.

I believe the facts stated in this defence are true