Civil enforcement LTD Pre action letter

Coupon-mad

It is not true that they cannot cancel it, tell the Practice that they still can and no costs have been incurred, and their agent is lying to them.

minimeminime

Thank you so much for your advices,
I have emailed practice manager and I have mention your advices.
Please see below her reply:

Dear ....

I have had a reply from our car parking company and unfortunately they cannot cancel the ticket now, this is what they said;



This PCN has been outstanding for 323 days, our cancellation period is 28 days with the exception of goodwill sometimes. However once PCNs have gone to POPLA or Debt Recovery we are not able to cancel them, due to the length of time and it being sent to Debt recovery we cannot cancel this.

minimeminime

Any advice if I can do anything?

Coupon-mad

Not sure what you need to know, obviously you will be defending & winning in court like everyone else, instead. I already said all that last week in my reply:

What do you need to know that is not already covered by the NEWBIES thread post #2 that tells you all about LBC stage and how to later win in court when they sue (assuming you can't get the surgery to cancel it, as they could have done all along)?

minimeminime

Hello, , I have today received a claim form from Civil Enforcement Ltd with the court address of County Court Business Centre, St Katherine's Street, Northampton. The claim is demanding a payment of £196.52 plus an additional £25 court fee and £50 legal representative's costs, taking the overall total to £271.52
 Issue date is 31 Jan 2020 but I was on holiday from 28th Jan -10th February 2020.
Can I still do AoS?

KeithP

minimeminime said:

Hello, , I have today received a claim form...
Issue date is 31 Jan 2020...
Can I still do AoS?

With a Claim Issue Date of 31st January, you have until Wednesday 19th February to file an Acknowledgement of Service, but there is nothing to be gained by delaying it. To file an AoS, follow the guidance offered in a Dropbox file linked from post #2 of the NEWBIES FAQ sticky thread - https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/4816822/newbies-private-parking-ticket-old-or-new-read-these-faqs-first-thankyou 

About ten minutes work - no thinking required.

Having filed an AoS, you have until 4pm on Wednesday 4th March 2020 to file your Defence.

That's over three weeks away. Plenty of time to produce a Defence, but please don't leave it to the last minute.

When you are happy with the content, your Defence could be filed via email as suggested here:

1. Print your Defence.
   
2. Sign it and date it.
   
3. Scan the signed document back in and save it as a pdf.
   
4. Send that pdf as an email attachment to CCBCAQ@Justice.gov.uk
5. Just put the claim number and the word Defence in the email title, and in the body of the email something like 'Please find my Defence attached'.
   
6. No need to do anything on MCOL, but do check it after a few days to see if the Claim is marked "defence received". If not, chase the CCBC until it is.
   
   After filing your Defence, there is more to do...
   
   
7. Do not be surprised to receive an early copy of the Claimant's Directions Questionnaire. Nothing of interest there. Just file it.
   
8. Wait for your own Directions Questionnaire from the CCBC, or download one from the internet - https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/form-n180-directions-questionnaire-small-claims-track , and then complete it as described by bargepole in his 'what happens when' post linked from post #2 of the NEWBIES thread - https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/4816822/newbies-private-parking-ticket-old-or-new-read-these-faqs-first-thankyou"]
   
9. The completed DQ should be returned by email to the CCBC to the same address and in the same way as your Defence was filed earlier.
   
10. Send a copy of your completed DQ to the Claimant - to their address on your Claim Form.

nosferatu1001

Your FIRST port of call, for any query, is to go to the newbies thread. 2nd post, from now on. 
It tells you exactly how to do every stage, in great detail. There are 16 defences for you to read. 

minimeminime

Thank you , I have filled an AoS.
Due to my English language beginner level, Can I ask for permission for my wife to represent myself in a court hearing?

KeithP

minimeminime said:

Due to my English language beginner level, Can I ask for permission for my wife to represent myself in a court hearing?

Yes, but the named Defendant, must attend any hearing.
No need to think about that again until much much nearer the hearing.

Until then everything must be done in the name of the named Defendant.
So whilst your wife can write stuff, the Defendant must sign them.

minimeminime

Hello,
I would apprectiate any help with this so i can send off my defense.

In the matter of court claim, Xxxx I am xxxxxx xxxxxx, the defendant in this matter and the registered keeper of vehicle xxxx xxx. I can be served at the address on the claim form. I deny I am liable for the entirety of the claim on the following grounds:

1. The Claim Form issued on Xxxxx by Civil Enforcement Ltd was not correctly filed under The Practice Direction as it was not signed by a legal person. The claim does not have a valid signature and is not a statement of truth. It states that it has been issued by 'Civil Enforcement Limited' as the Claimant's 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. If the party is legally represented, the legal representative may sign the statement of truth but in his own name and not that of his firm or employer.

2. The Claimant is a serial litigant whose business model is to file large numbers of spurious claims and pressure defendants into paying up by sending letters increasing costs. In a preliminary hearing for a number of cases in Bristol, HHJ Denyer expressed his concern at the way CEL were conducting their cases and described the letters as a disgrace.

3. The Claimant has added unrecoverable sums to the original parking charge. The claim amount far exceeeds the total permitted for recovery for a parking charge amount under the Claimant's ATA Code of Practice. It is believed that the employee who drew up the paperwork is remunerated, and the particulars of claim are templates, so it is simply not credible that £50 legal representative's costs were incurred. The Defendant believes that Civil Enforcement Ltd has artificially inflated this claim. The claim was intentionally moved around various debt and collection companies in order to inflate the charge before court action was taken. They are claiming legal costs when not only is this not permitted (CPR 27.14), but the Defendant believes that they have not incurred legal costs. According to 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. The Defendant denies that the Claimant is entitled to any interest whatsoever. The claimant has not explained how the claim has increased from the original parking notice to £xxx. If the Claimant alleges that they claim the cost of its in-house administration, these cannot be recovered - they are staff performing the task that they have been employed for and essential to the Claimant's business plan.

4.The Claimant has failed to comply with the strict requirements of the Protection Of Freedoms Act 2012, schedule 4 (PoFA 2012). The driver of the vehicle has not been identified. The Defendant admits to being the registered keeper of the vehicle on the material date, but there is no evidence of who was driving. As the Claimant has not identified the driver, it cannot be assumed the keeper/driver are one and the same at the time of the supposed contravention (POFA 2012).

5.The Claimant has no standing to bring a case - this distinguishes this case from the Beavis case

It is believed Civil Enforcement Ltd do not hold a legitimate contract at this car park. As an agent, the Claimant has no legal right to bring such a claim in their name which should be in the name of the landowner.

6.This event occurred at a GP surgery where the driver was authorised to park, due to attendance of an appointment.

6.1. The Defendant has obtained written proof from the surgery of the confirmation of appointment/times and also stating that there was a legitimate reason for the patient's car to be parked in the patient car park.

The Claimant breach of the Government policy,NHS patient, visitor and staff car parking principles Oct 2015 which is the latest one as at June 2017. 

It’s was  emergency appointment due to very weak and  unstable health condition.

6.2. This removes any excuse the Claimant may have had, to try to paint a 'legitimate interest' picture to justify their extortionate charge. The GP surgery do not support the charge:

6.2.a) surgery manager xxxxxxconfirmed that Defendant did try to get the PCN cancelled as soon as he found out that he have been fined . Unfortunately Defendant was wrongly told by a Surgery Receptionist that there was nothing to be done in order to cancel it. 

6.2.b)When this issue came to light later, a surgery Receptionist provided proof of Clinic appointments to show that surgery supported Defendant appeal and  made it clear that there was no legitimate interest* in penalising him.

6.2.c)The surgery  Manager Xxxxxxtried to cancel PCN as soon as Defendant explained situation  and that it wasn't Defendant fault that he haven't been informed that registration of his car didn't go through. . Unfortunately  Surgery manager believed their hands were tied as the Claimant  has told them that it is 'too late' at this stage. Which Defendant strongly disagree because at the time he received a parking ticket he wasn’t present in the country (Defendant provided flight ticket confirmation). As soon as Defendant was notified of the parking fine he actioned and asked to cancel. He was writing numerous emails to the parking company with all explanations, however he never received anything back - only the automatic letters with the penalty increase value.

6.2.d)This situation can not be considered to be in the legitimate interest of the car park management. There wasn't minimum hours stay notice (sign), wasn't a pay machines either. As a person, who get used to pay for parking everywhere where this is necessary I would expect pay machines or advise from stuff of how to proceed. I strongly believe that this situation  is to be considered as unnecessary penalty for the patients who due to their health condition and very strict appointment schedule weren't able to understand the rules of the surgery. Surgery management understood and apologised for their stuff not advising the right procedure to the patients and was very willing to cancel the PCN, however Claimant management without any legitimate interest decided to go forther and cause more stress via sending letters, after letters with the big red capital letters, to which Defendant was always replying and asked for understanding and resolution.

6.3 To penalise patients and their drivers, who wasn't advised to enter the VRN using a cumbersome and unworkable system setting drivers/patients up to fail - is the epitome of an unconscionable charge. Given the facts, location and rules of the parking registration requirements, which were never advised by Surgery colleagues -  the charge remains an unrecoverable penalty.

6.4. Further, the charging regime offends against the Government Policy set out in the NHS Car Parking Memorandum sent to all NHS Trusts over two years ago, which made it clear that genuine patients, staff and visitors were not to be unfairly penalised and that the NHS Trusts remained fully liable and responsible for the actions of their agents, and could not allow regimes where a third party is incentivised and/or makes their money from penalties only (exactly the regime operating at this site).

7.Even if a contract had been established it would be void. The Defendant asserts that the Claimant was not acting in “good faith” and that the charges are unlawful, as they are in breach of the Consumer Rights Act 2015, specifically regulation 62(4).

7.1The Defendant believes that the charges added Legal Representative (£50) are fake and were not incurred by the Claimant and therefore cannot be recovered in Court as part of this claim.

7.2Even if the Legal representative’s cost of £50 is genuine, it cannot be recovered in Court as this does not comply with Civil Procedure Rule 27.14

7.3If the £50 legal cost to prepare the claim was not incurred, the statement of truth must be false.

7.4The Claimant is put to strict proof that it paid any debt recovery agency or legal representative in escalating the matter. If incurred – the Defendant believes this consists of the administration staff of the Claimant performing their normal duties. The Defendant believes this is another example of the Claimant artificially inflating the amount of the claim.

7.5.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.

8.The Claimant have cancelled Defendant rights to appeal to POPLA , Claimant refused to give another code

 Defendant couldn't appeal The PCN because xxxx2019 - xxxxx2019 Defendant wasn’t at his property and didn't had any access to emails and phone . The POPLA code was issued  on 11.02.19 but Defendant received a letter with a POPLA code on 10.03.19 when was back to his property (Defendant provided flight ticket confirmation). Defendant didn't had 28 days to appeal the PCN. 

8.1 The Claimant refusal to issue a POPLA code breaches the BPA Code of Practice, and this renders theirs liable to prosecution under the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Practices 2008 (the specific offence being that you have failed to comply with a code of conduct to which you have committed).

8.2 The Claimant are not following the British Parking Association Ltd Code of Practice by providing access to an appeals procedure. They are also ignoring the guidelines that were issued to BPA Ltd members in January 2014 which advises that failing to issue a correct and / or valid POPLA Code within the Rejection letter correspondence will be considered as a Code breach.

9.The Claimant is a serial abuser of the courts, filing over 3,000 claims in 2014. However, it is widely reported that the Claimant fails to turn up to defended cases, wasting the court’s and the defendant’s time.

10.The Claimants have artificially inflated the claim value by claiming to have paid vague costs (legal fees or debt collectors). The Defendant puts the Claimant to strict proof that all claimed costs were invoiced and paid.

11. I therefore ask that the claim be struck out as having no prospect of success, and bring to the courts attention a similar order made in the case of Premier Park Limited v Lisa Grafton, A3QK0712, struck out on 19 March 2015. As the Claimant is not likely to attend court even if the claim progresses, this will save costs all round.

In light of the reasons above, the Defendant respectfully asks the court to strike out this claim with immediate effect.

STATEMENT OF TRUTH

I believe that the facts stated in this defence are true

Xxxxxx