Civil Enforcement Ltd - Have I left it too late for a POPLA?

D_P_Dance

The "debt unpaid" has now risen to £170 

They have added what appears to be an extra unlawful amount of £70 for debt collection.

This amounts to double recovery and Judges all over the country are dismissing these spurious additions. Indeed some judges have dismissed entire claims because of this. Read this and complain to Trading Standards and your MP,

Excel v Wilkinson

At the Bradford County Court, District Judge Claire Jackson (now HHJ Jackson, a Specialist Civil Circuit Judge) decided to hear a 'test case' a few months ago, where £60 had been added to a parking charge despite Judges up and down the country repeatedly disallowing that sum and warning parking firms not to waste court time with such spurious claims.   That case was Excel v Wilkinson: G4QZ465V, heard in July 2020 and leave to appeal was refused and that route was not pursued.  The Judge concluded that such claims are proceedings with 'an improper collateral purpose'.   This Judge - and others who have since copied her words and struck dozens of cases out in late 2020 and into 2021 - went into significant detail and concluded that parking operators (such as this Claimant) are seeking to circumvent CPR 27.14 as well as breaching the Consumer Rights Act 2015.   DJ Hickinbottom has recently struck more cases out in that court area, stating: ''I find that striking out this claim is the only appropriate manner in which the disapproval of the court can be shown''.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/16qovzulab1szem/G4QZ465V%20Excel%20v%20Wilkinson.pdf?dl=0

However, VCS appealed this so it may not apply in all cases, read this

https://www.dropbox.com/s/ntksx9g7177ahyg/VCS v Percy v1 Amendments (2).pdf?dl=0Also read this

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6279348/witness-statements-2-transcripts-re-parking-firms-false-costs-recorder-cohen-qc-judgment-2021/p1

Also consider complaining to The SRA about the solicitor, if one is involved They are fully aware of the unlawful nature of most of thse additions yet persist in adding them..

https://www.sra.org.uk/consumers/problems/

FernandoYoghurt

Coupon-mad said:

It's not paperwork, don't use the forms.  This is all explained in the NEWBIES thread.

Understood, sorry, by "paperwork", I mean all the reading / typing / writing is a nightmare and I'll start reading the AoS PDF.

Once again, thanks for all the assistance boys and girls. It's very much appreciated.

FernandoYoghurt

D_P_Dance said:

The "debt unpaid" has now risen to £170 

That's all a little bit over my head but my understanding is that I should include reference to this in my defence letter.

I'm leaving worrying about that till new year but will post it up here once I've got a first draft.

Fruitcake

The fake add on is already included in the defence template. You will only need to amend a few paragraphs, usually 2 and 3, from that template to suit your case and post just those few paragraphs here for checking.

That all comes after you have done the AoS, but don't leave either too late.

FernandoYoghurt

Just a quick update.

AoS filed today (I did leave it till the very last day like an idiot but it's done now)
Working on the defence document now.

FernandoYoghurt

So, wording for 2. and 3. of my defence document are as follows, Thoughts / Comments?

2. It is admitted that the Defendant was both the registered keeper and driver of the vehicle in question but liability is denied.

3. The Defendant is Dyslexic and as such struggles to read or make sense of overly complicated signage or signage where significant verbiage is used. Whist the Defendant admits that there are signs giving details of parking restriction the Defendant notes that;

a)   Visibility of the sign at the entrance to the carpark was blocked by a dustbin.

b)   Additional low level signage was blocked by other parked vehicles.

c)    The Defendant did not notice the sign located on the wall between two of the units when he entered the carpark as he was not walking in that direction at the time.

The Defendant parked the vehicle, proceed into the town and visited a coffee shop followed by the bank. The bank visit was in order to undertake some work for a local charity the Defendant volunteers for. The time spent in the bank was significantly longer than the defendant anticipated. After leaving the bank the Defendant visited the “Bargain Booze” shop (now closed), it was at this point that the defendant thought that he might have exceeded some sort of limit so asked the cashier at Bargain Booze if he needed to pay. The cashier told him that he did not need to anything and that the parking was free for customers of one of the 3 shops occupying the units adjacent to the carpark.

FernandoYoghurt

Given that I'm self employed and that I am having to spend my time (and yours) putting this together. Am I allowed to add a reasonable number of hours at my given hourly rate to the "in the matter of costs" section. I would very much like to make a donation to the cause (which I will be doing anyway).

Coupon-mad

Yes you can add a line saying how many hours you've spent and specifying your hourly rate if higher than the £19 per hour court rate.

Your defence looks fine.  I thought that last part was going into too much unnecessary detail at first but you needed to say about that conversation that it was free according to the shop.

Le_Kirk

I agree with @Coupon-mad that you last paragraph is essential to your defence (normally that would be saved for witness statement but in this case it is the essence of the defence) but it does need a paragraph of its own.  You also might want to think about 3c; how do you know it is there if you "did not notice" it?  Better to say that something along the lines that it was spotted on the way out of the car park or it was seen during a research visit at a later date.

FernandoYoghurt

I seem to have turned notifications off somehow. Sorry for not coming back sooner.

I'll add a couple of hours at my hourly rate to the costs line.

I will update 3c to indicate that I noticed the sign upon entering the shop on my return to the carpark and will update the last paragraph to read;

After visiting the high street, which is located a 30 second walk from the carpark, the Defendant visited the “Bargain Booze” shop (now closed) and checked with the cashier at Bargain Booze if he needed to pay. The cashier told him that he did not need to anything and that the parking was free for customers of one of the 3 shops occupying the units adjacent to the carpark.

Thanks again for the ongoing support.