Civil Enforcement Ltd (CEL) – POPLA Appeal Advice

Han_Solo

I finally received a letter before action a few days ago. As directed in the Newbies thread, I have now sent an SAR to CEL's data protection officer.

The LBA was sent directly by CEL, therefore should I send a physical letter informing them of the SAR or is a further email okay (I will include the additional points, such as requesting the case is put 'on hold')?

I have been drafting a defence on and off the past few months, so I will post that for advice in the near future. I have included the recent developments noted in CEC16's thread (thanks Coupon-mad for the pointer).

Coupon-mad

You could add something like this to your LBC response (and a version of it in your defence in due course), which is adapted from another recent CEL thread at the same stage:

CEL's conduct pays no regard to the pre-action protocol for debt claims and the overriding objective.  To threaten a spurious and exaggerated court claim, when CEL failed to prominently display information or ensure staff explained how to exempt vehicles for genuine patrons of the Connaught House Hotel, is sharp practice and contrary to the Consumer Protection from Unfair Terms Regulations and the Consumer Rights Act 2015.  CEL will be unable to plead any 'legitimate interest' in pursuing a robo-claim for over £250 - being well aware from the 2019 POPLA appeal, that the driver was a patron who has since complained to the hotel, your principal - yet still your steamroller regime of intimidation and false demands continues.  Your behaviour will be drawn to the attention of the Judge should you persist.  Your position is wholly unreasonable, but perhaps not unexpected, given that CEL's current batch of meritless claims are now prepared and filed by Scott Wilson 'Head of Legal and Compliance' who astonishingly boasts in his LinkedIn profile, of previously being 'Commercial and Legal Manager' at Wonga.com.  That's the calibre of your company, then.  See you in court.

Han_Solo

Thanks Coupon-mad. Not sure why, but CEL are 'only' demanding £140. Maybe they like me! Anyway, I plan to send this as my LBA response:

With respect to your letter before action dated xxxx.
 
I write to confirm that I have sent a subject access request to your data protection officer via email to dataprotectionofficer@ce‑service.co.uk. Therefore, I request a restriction of data processing and that the case be put ‘on hold’.
 
For the correct ‘address for service’ please refer to the top of this letter.
 
I take this opportunity to highlight CEL’s disregard for the pre-action protocol for debt claims. To threaten a spurious and exaggerated court claim, despite failing to prominently display terms or ensure that staff adequately explain how to exempt vehicles of genuine patrons of Connaught House Hotel, is contrary to the Consumer Protection from Unfair Terms Regulations and the Consumer Rights Act 2015. CEL will be unable to plead any ‘legitimate interest’ in pursuing a claim for £140, being well aware from the 2019 POPLA appeal that the driver was a patron, yet still you rely on intimidation and false demands to extort money. This behaviour will be drawn to the attention of the Judge should you persist. Your position is wholly unreasonable, but not unexpected given that CEL’s current batch of meritless claims are now prepared and filed by Scott Wilson as Head of Legal and Compliance, who astonishingly boasts in his LinkedIn profile of previously being Commercial and Legal Manager at Wonga.com. The calibre of your company and choice of senior personnel leaves much to be desired.

Have I missed anything? Thanks.

Coupon-mad

Very good, I like that last line!

Maybe the sum on the signs was £70 and they've added £70 (LOL, good luck with that then CEL!).

D_P_Dance

IMO this will never get before a judge, read this

https://www.gov.uk/guidance/coronavirus-covid-19-courts-and-tribunals-planning-and-preparation

I Love your letter, have you complained to the SRA?

https://www.sra.org.uk/  

Han_Solo

It would be nice if it doesn't get that far, but I assume CEL can still submit a claim. It just may take longer for it to be dealt with by the courts due to current circumstances.

I've not written to the SRA. Any correspondence of significance so far has been direct from CEL. Plus, based on a quick search it appears the SRA aren't much use anyway. I have been meaning to write to my MP though, must get that done.

Is it advisable to obtain proof of postage for my response to the LBA or is it more of a formality?

D_P_Dance said:

IMO this will never get before a judge, read this

https://www.gov.uk/guidance/coronavirus-covid-19-courts-and-tribunals-planning-and-preparation

I Love your letter, have you complained to the SRA?

https://www.sra.org.uk/  

nosferatu1001

Always get proof of posting. Always tell the, you're seeking debt advice so they must hold fire for 30 days min. 

Complain to the sra 

D_P_Dance

I would definitely recommend you complain to the SRA, straws and camel's backs ...

Han_Solo

I will add a sentence regarding debt advice. Thanks for that and other pointers.

beamerguy

Your position is wholly unreasonable, but not unexpected given that CEL’s current batch of meritless claims are now prepared and filed by Scott Wilson as Head of Legal and Compliance, who astonishingly boasts in his LinkedIn profile of previously being Commercial and Legal Manager at Wonga.com. 

Good homework ........ So it probably was Scott Wilson who authorised the fake letters sent out by Wonga ?
And that crashed Wonga and they went bust quickly.  If fake letters are Mr Wilson's forte, CEL can only expect spankings in court and with the new Civil Procedure rules where contempt of court will be the name of the game, could mean that Mr Wilson will be a hell of a liability for CEL