CEL PoC on Claim and seperate

jason99991

Hi - I have a claim form that has the PoC section filled out. I filed a defence on line (before reading the threads here!) - I have now received another PoC from them dated the same day as I filed the defence. Q1 is Can they do this? Q2 If so, can I make another defence?

Date of claim 29/10 Date of defence 04/11 Date of new PoC 04/11

Just a little history - paid for 'pay and display' no overstay - registration recorded wrong (single character) - sent evidence of ticket and receipt to appeal - rejected - POPLA also rejected (for no good reason) - ignored all DCA letters thinking that there would be no way a judge could rule against me... but now read how they try and trick at legal stage not so sure.

Any advice?

Thanks

Coupon-mad

If the POC are substantially the same I would just mention it at WS but not hang your hat on the duplication.

registration recorded wrong (single character)

Why not send CEL a robust email telling them you have the POPLA Annual Report 2018 in evidence and are well aware that the BPA told its members that they were not to pursue 'simple keying errors'. As such, you urge them to discontinue before wasting your time and their costs.

Now, bite the bullet and SHOW US THE DEFENCE you put in. We need to know what to build on for WS & evidence stage.

jason99991

The appropriate amount for parking was paid with no overstay
recorded and I understand this is not disputed. I have provided
evidence in the form of display ticket and receipt for this.

This is a ‘Pay & Display’ car park, I paid and displayed the
ticket that was issued from the machine.
It appears the ticket machine recorded my registration as ‘M’, I
did not realise this and did not check as I displayed the ticket
in the windshield as instructed.

I did not recall anything being wrong when purchasing the ticket,
however on a return visit to remind myself a couple of months
later I noticed that the keypads on the machines had been
‘repaired’ by means of a plastic over lay.

Regardless of the machine working correctly or not and / or any
other reason, I provided evidence of the payment and that the
claimant has not suffered any loss relating to my paid for stay in
car park managed by them.

In summary it appears to me that the claimant is charging me for
the claimant’s machine not working correctly. I have provided
evidence that has not been disputed that I paid for the
appropriate time spent in the car park and there was no loss
suffered by the claimant.

Umkomaas

It appears the ticket machine recorded my registration as ‘M’, I
did not realise this and did not check as I displayed the ticket
in the windshield as instructed.

Are you saying the ticket just showed the letter 'M' instead of the full VRM, or that you mistyped 'M' instead of another letter, but otherwise the remainder of the VRM was correct?

jason99991

Just the letter M … TBH as it gave me a ticket to display didn't even realise when sending them the photo of it - had never even seen a 'pay and display' needing registration number before.

Umkomaas

If all it showed was the letter 'M', the POPLA Annual Report isn't really going to help you.

But a Judge might well decide that as you paid the correct fee for the parking, the CEL charge is nothing more than a penalty. But you'll obviously have to put the ongoing legwork into getting it to a hearing stage.

Please read the NEWBIES FAQ sticky, post #2 to learn of the ongoing process.

jason99991

Thanks - yep - why I came here as don't want to slip up on something as they appear to be so tricky! I still think that a judge would rule in my favour at a hearing if I get there. Bit worried that POPLA rejected but I did come across a case nearly exactly the same last year when this started … think I can find it now!! Oh well - if a judge says I got to pay it I will but not before then - with any luck it may help someone else as this company should not be allowed to get away with this.

Umkomaas

Oh well - if a judge says I got to pay it I will but not before then - with any luck it may help someone else as this company should not be allowed to get away with this.

Great attitude. I like it and I'm sure other regulars will too! Go for it.

Coupon-mad

I still think that a judge would rule in my favour at a hearing if I get there.

So do we. Very similar case here:

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/76460822#Comment_76460822

Links galore there, to use in evidence to shore up your WS stage, pre-hearing, and get on the front foot again (just drop the stuff about 'no loss').

jason99991

Thanks so much - will get rid of the 'no loss' bit (wish I had read here before) - will post what I put in at next stage. Unless someone tells me to do something first?? - Thanks again

jason99991

And thanks for link - very similar