Forum Home » Motoring » Parking Tickets, Fines & Parking

URGENT Court Claim Form Received - Civil Enforcement Ltd (CEL) - Page 2

New Post Advanced Search

Coronavirus: The latest from MSE


The MSE team is working extremely hard to keep the info we have about your travel rights, cancellation rights, sick pay (and more) up to date.
The official MSE guides: UPDATED MSE Coronavirus Guides

NEWSFLASH


New, free ‘Academoney’ course from MSE and the Open University launches
All the key areas of personal finance are covered, so that you can master your money decisions


URGENT Court Claim Form Received - Civil Enforcement Ltd (CEL)

edited 30 November -1 at 1:00AM in Parking Tickets, Fines & Parking
29 replies 1.2K views
2

Replies

  • rachityrachity Forumite
    100 posts
    TheDrummer wrote: »
    Thank you, its a lease car so would that give them more time to first find out the lease company that owns the car and then the registered driver?


    More to the point is exactly what process the parking co have used.
    Did they contact the lease co?
    (Usually the lease/hire co send you a letter explaing that you are being chased, that they have given your details & (possibly) that you now owe an admin to them as well.)
    If so, exactly what does the lease/hire T&Cs state?
    CAVEAT LECTOR
  • Coupon-madCoupon-mad Forumite
    84.9K posts
    Part of the Furniture 10,000 Posts Name Dropper Photogenic
    ✭✭✭✭✭✭
    TheDrummer wrote: »
    Thank you, its a lease car so would that give them more time to first find out the lease company that owns the car and then the registered driver?
    You will know from reading the POFA para 13 and 14 what the process was, and no-one has ever named THE DRIVER.

    The point is, the lease firm will have named the HIRER/LESSEE, and CEL hae no idea who was driving and cannot assume, and they will have failed to enclose any documents with the NTH they sent you (see para 13 and 14 of Schedule 4 of the POFA).

    This is itself adds an important defence point - no hirer liability under the POFA.
    PRIVATE 'PCN'? DON'T PAY BUT DON'T IGNORE IT (except N.Ireland).
    CLICK at the top of this/any page where it says:
    Forum Home»Motoring»Parking Tickets Fines & Parking - read the NEWBIES THREAD
  • The_Slithy_ToveThe_Slithy_Tove Forumite
    3.8K posts
    Eighth Anniversary 1,000 Posts
    ✭✭✭✭
    The_Deep wrote: »
    Debt + damages to the sum of £170.00
    £17.44 interest (8% p.a.)
    £25 Court Fee
    £50 Legal representative costs


    They are trying to scam you. If they have not used a solicitor, and they appear not to have, they cannot claim legal representation costs, (ask them for a v.a.t. invoice). They can only claim interest, (if they win), on £100, making the total £125+.
    Furthermore, where does the £170 come from? The initial charge would have been £100, but what about the rest? Again, you must challenge them to justify the other £70 (though first you deny there is any debt at all using the normal defence points). Often with CEL they claim these are debt collectors costs, but they won't have paid any debt collector a bean, since those debt collectors failed to collect the alleged debt. And I bet they charged interest on the whole lot right from the date of the supposed charge, which is another no-no (since the extra £70 would not have been incurred at that point).
    Every single penny of what they claim must be challenged individually.
  • TheDrummerTheDrummer Forumite
    12 posts
    Coupon-mad wrote: »
    You will know from reading the POFA para 13 and 14 what the process was, and no-one has ever named THE DRIVER.

    The point is, the lease firm will have named the HIRER/LESSEE, and CEL hae no idea who was driving and cannot assume, and they will have failed to enclose any documents with the NTH they sent you (see para 13 and 14 of Schedule 4 of the POFA).

    This is itself adds an important defence point - no hirer liability under the POFA.

    I've read para 13 & 14 and I must admit I have struggled to make complete sense of it. My interpretation is that:
    para 13.
    within 28 days of receipt of the NTK the creditor can be sent a copy of the hire agreement / statement of liability signed by the hirer.
    para 14.
    if the creditor receives the above they have to submit the agreement / statement along with the NTK in order to claim from the hirer in the agreement (as opposed to the driver if different)

    If the hire agreement / statement of liability were not sent to the creditor then I presume none of this is relevant? sorry for the confusion
  • TheDrummerTheDrummer Forumite
    12 posts
    Subject to any additional comments on the lease car hire defence (which I confess to not understanding fully), I've drafted the defence below and would greatly appreciate any feedback

    Defense

    IN THE COUNTY COURT

    CLAIM No: xxx

    BETWEEN:

    CIVIL ENFORCEMENT LTD (Claimant)

    -and-

    xxx (Defendant)

    ________________________________________
    DEFENCE
    ________________________________________

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

    2. The facts are that the vehicle, registration xxx, of which the Defendant is the registered keeper, was parked on the material date (30/12/2017) at Aurora Bar and Restaurant.

    3. No notice to driver was affixed to the vehicle on the material date. A notice to keeper was issued on the 26/01/2018 and delivered on the 29/01/2018 which falls outside of the required period in which a notice to keeper must be delivered in accordance with the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012, paras. 6(1)(b) and 9(5).

    4. The notice to keeper was not accompanied by any required evidence as prescribed in the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012, paras. 10.

    5. Due to the sparseness of the particulars, it is unclear as to what legal basis the claim is brought, whether for breach of contract, contractual liability, or trespass. However, it is denied that the Defendant, or any driver of the vehicle, entered into any contractual agreement with the Claimant, whether express, implied, or by conduct.

    6. Further and in the alternative, it is denied that the claimant's signage sets out the terms in a sufficiently clear manner which would be capable of binding any reasonable person reading them. They merely state that vehicles must be parked correctly within their allocated parking bay, giving no definition of the term 'correctly parked', nor indicating which bays are allocated to whom.

    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 font would be unable to do so easily. It is, therefore, denied that the Claimant's signage is capable of creating a legally binding contract.

    8. The Claimant is put to strict proof that it has sufficient prorpietary 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.

    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. The claim includes an additional £70, for which no calculation or explanation is given, and which appears to be an attempt at double recovery.

    10. The Claimant is put to strict proof that it has incurred legal representation costs specifically related to this claim, for which a £50 cost has been included in the claim.

    11. In summary, it is the Defendant's position that the notice to keeper is invalid as it does not meet the legal requirements, the claim discloses no cause of action, is without merit, have no real prospect of success. Accordingly, the Court is invited to strike out the claim of its own initiative, using its case management powers pursuant to CPR 3.4.

    I believe the facts contained in this Defence are true.

    Name
    Signature
    Date
  • CastleCastle Forumite
    2.7K posts
    Fifth Anniversary 1,000 Posts Name Dropper
    ✭✭✭✭
    TheDrummer wrote: »

    2. The facts are that the vehicle, registration xxx, of which the Defendant is the registered keeper, was parked on the material date.

    The lease company is the registered keeper.
  • edited 14 May 2019 at 2:16PM
    TheDrummerTheDrummer Forumite
    12 posts
    edited 14 May 2019 at 2:16PM
    Castle wrote: »
    The lease company is the registered keeper.

    Thank you, updated to

    2. The facts are that the vehicle, registration xxxx, of which the Defendant is the hirer of the vehicle, was parked on the material date (30/12/2017) at Aurora Bar and Restaurant.
  • Edit your post to remove the the registration number.
  • edited 14 May 2019 at 2:25PM
    Coupon-madCoupon-mad Forumite
    84.9K posts
    Part of the Furniture 10,000 Posts Name Dropper Photogenic
    ✭✭✭✭✭✭
    edited 14 May 2019 at 2:25PM
    Today 1:40 PM
    Edit your post to remove the the registration number.
    Interesting first post from Parkingparking to register then advise here rather than post a query? Are you about to post a new thread as you need help yourself?

    EDIT - I see you have swiftly posted a new thread...you seem adept at using the forum, Parkingparking, are you a newbie or a returning poster using a new name?
    My interpretation is that:
    para 13.
    within 28 days of receipt of the NTK the creditor can be sent a copy of the hire agreement / statement of liability signed by the hirer.
    para 14.
    if the creditor receives the above they have to submit the agreement / statement along with the NTK in order to claim from the hirer in the agreement (as opposed to the driver if different)

    If the hire agreement / statement of liability were not sent to the creditor then I presume none of this is relevant?
    You assume wrong. The opposite is true, this law REQUIRES enclosures with a NTH.
    PRIVATE 'PCN'? DON'T PAY BUT DON'T IGNORE IT (except N.Ireland).
    CLICK at the top of this/any page where it says:
    Forum Home»Motoring»Parking Tickets Fines & Parking - read the NEWBIES THREAD
  • Coupon-mad wrote: »
    Interesting first post from Parkingparking to register then advise here rather than post a query? Are you about to post a new thread as you need help yourself?

    EDIT - I see you have swiftly posted a new thread...you seem adept at using the forum, Parkingparking, are you a newbie or a returning poster using a new name?

    Newbie to fighting parking tickets, but I have posted on MSE forums before. I have done a lot of reading up though to try to help out a friend with a parking ticket they received and no personal details was one that was repeated a lot on here haha.
Sign In or Register to comment.

Quick links

Essential Money | Who & Where are you? | Work & Benefits | Household and travel | Shopping & Freebies | About MSE | The MoneySavers Arms | Covid-19 & Coronavirus Support