PCN - Civil Enforcement Limited - Atheneum Road, London - Failed to pay within 10 minuets.

Ce1ticWarri0r

Hi everyone,

I received a PCN from CEL on 16/09/2019.  I attempted a POPLA appeal before I discovered this amazing forum and lost. I made a number of classic mistakes including admitting I was the driver (Doh!).

The situation was that I arrived and struggled to get the payment app to load and accept a payment. Eventually I managed and paid for a full 24 hours parking despite only staying for just opver 3 hours. I assumed all was well until the PCN came statiung that I should have paid within 10 minutes of arriving. There was no alternative payment method (which I am sure is intentional to catch you out!)

I have since followed advice and ignored letters. I thought it had gone away but I have now received a letter stating that if I do not pay the £140  charge that they may instruct their legal department to commence proceedings.  Is this considered the LBA?

The ticket started at £60 then went to £100 as expected. I am not sure where this new £140 charge has come from!

If this is the LBA then I am tempted to make the without prejudice offer as the work involved to fight this in court seems extremely time consuming, I am loathed to do that though! What should I do next? Any other easy ways out? 

D_P_Dance

  Have you read the stickies?  Did you include grace periods in your PoPLA appeal?  .

 I am not sure where this new £140 charge  

Almost certainly an unlawful charge, read this

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6014081/abuse-of-process-district-judge-tells-bwlegal

Nine times out of ten these tickets are scams, so consider complaining to your MP, it can cause the scammer extra costs and work, and has been known to get the charge cancelled.

Parliament is well aware of the MO of these private parking companies, many of whom are former clampers, and on 15th March 2019 a Bill was enacted to curb the excesses of these shysters. Codes of Practice are being drawn up, an independent appeals service will be set up, and access to the DVLA's date base more rigorously policed, persistent offenders denied access to the DVLA database and unable to operate.

Hopefully life will become impossible for the worst of these scammers, but until this is done you should still complain to your MP, citing the new legislation.

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2019/8/contents/enacted

Just as the clampers were finally closed down, so hopefully will many of these Private Parking Companies.

Coupon-mad

The 'work' involved is not that time consuming nowadays. 
DO NOT MAKE AN OFFER TO THESE PEOPLE.

When you get a claim, you simply:
(a) acknowledge it, online, following the picture guide link I posted in the NEWBIES thread (dead easy)
(b) download the new template defence and change the red bits (dead easy)
(c) read other similar cases and crib from them, for example I just wrote some words re

(1) a CEL case that include the fact the person who signs off their claims is (according to his Linked-In page) responsible for the 'legals' used by Wonga, and
(2) another defence this week where the person paid during the parking sessions and the PPC is also trying to hold them to a 10 minute time limit to have paid at machines that were not even visible in the dark and they only noticed on return to the car, then paid.

It is simple to write a defence by copying from others and downloading the template defence, as your base.

If anyone reading this wants the template defence, search the forum, please, as I will NOT link it... writing a template was more than enough spoon-feeding for me, and I will not provide links to threads everyone can find in seconds.

The_Slithy_Tove

Ce1ticWarri0r said:

I have now received a letter stating that if I do not pay the £140  charge that they may instruct their legal department to commence proceedings.  Is this considered the LBA?

Doesn't sound like it. An LBA is more definite, giving timeframes and stating that the WILL take legal action, not they may suggest to the legal team that they might to something - so vague. Who is this letter from? CEL or some debt collector.

Ce1ticWarri0r said:

The ticket started at £60 then went to £100 as expected. I am not sure where this new £140 charge has come from!

Something they, too, will have to justify come the time.

BTW, what did they signage say about having to pay within 10 minutes?

As this doesn't appear to be an LBA, you do nothing but file it. Though you might want to send a SAR to CEL now, just to get your ducks in order for what comes next.

Ce1ticWarri0r

Hi everyone, thanks for the responses so far! I feel far more confident in attempting to fight this then.

The_Slithy_Tove said:
BTW, what did they signage say about having to pay within 10 minutes?

It said "You must a) pay within 10 minutes of arrival..." (It took me 18 minutes according to their evidence)

Worth sending them a letter explaining that the £140 is clearly unlawful citing precidence and asking them to drop it pending a complaint to SRA?

Coupon-mad

It's not 'worth it' in terms of that it won't stop CEL.

But showing them the Southampton Order and pointing out that they are clearly 'forum shopping' is something that you can later show the court, whose Judge will not like to think that their court is the easy court the PPC has shopped for...

Here is a recent example, just change it to make sense as the recipient is CEL, not a solicitor acting for a client:
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/76921532#Comment_76921532

You could also add in the Wonga word that I recommend throwing into all CEL cases, how about this at the end:

CEL's conduct pays no regard to the pre-action protocol for debt claims and the overriding objective.  To prepare a spurious claim when CEL offered no alternative payment method except a stuttering app that takes more than ten minutes to get to work, then penalising paying drivers for taking that time to pay, is sharp practice and contrary to the Consumer Protection from Unfair Terms Regulations and the Consumer Rights Act 2015.  CEL is well aware that the tariff was paid during the parking session for a full 24 hours parking despite only staying for just over 3 hours.  Your behaviour will be drawn to the attention of the Judge should you continue and 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 at Creative Car Parks Ltd' but previously boasting in his LinkedIn profile, of being 'Commercial and Legal Manager' at Wonga.com.

D_P_Dance

It said "You must a) pay within 10 minutes of arrival..."

That sounds like an unfair term in a consumer contract.  It could take you longer than that to find a space, read these

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/450410/Unfair_Terms_Explained.pdf

http://parking-prankster.blogspot.com/2014/03/waiting-for-space-is-not-parking.html

Ce1ticWarri0r

OK SAR sent asking for the following. Also going to make a complaint about the increased amount

Please supply ALL data about me that I am entitled to under data protection law relating to myself.

Specifically, I would like the following

-       ALL photos taken of my vehicle 

-       All letters/emails sent and received, including any appeal correspondence earlier.

-       The payment log showing all payments made via the Phone and Pay App for my Vehicle 

-       All data held, all evidence you may rely on should you decide to take this to court, and a full copy of the PCN and NTK 

-       A list of all PCNs you consider are outstanding against me and/or VRN

Ce1ticWarri0r

OK I have drafted the following to send over to CEL. Its worth a shot getting this cancelled before it goes to court.

I am in receipt of your letter dated 29 February 2020.

Just in case you have not reviewed the history of this case:

The driver has paid in full for the 3hrs 10 minutes of the stay (in fact paid for a total of 16hrs 33mins parking). It is alleged that the driver failed to pay within a 10-minute window upon arrival. The system provided accepted the payment on the day.

Where a ticket has been paid for the claimant has accepted that the driver has a contract to stay in the car park. The only other alternative is that the claimant has stolen the £6 I paid.

Further to this, I insist that you explain the additional £40 that has been added unlawfully to this PCN? This is an Abuse of Process as you will undoubtably be aware.

In a very recent case, District Judge Taylor, dismissed a case from BWLegal that included a false amount of £60

“Claim number is F0DP201T District Judge Taylor

Southampton Court, 10th June 2019

IT IS ORDERED THAT

The claim is struck out as an abuse of process

"The claim contains a substantial charge additional to the parking charge which it is alleged the defendant contracted to pay, This additional charge is not recoverable under the protection of freedoms act 2012, Schedule 4 not with reference to the judgement in parking eye v Beavis. It is an abuse of process from the claimant to issue a knowingly inflated claim for an additional sum which it is not entitled to recover...”

To save all concerned the wasted time, acrimony and negative reputational impact, I strongly suggest that you arrange for this parking charge to be cancelled and notify me that this case is closed. I will not be paying any money to yourselves or a debt collector without an order from a judge.

If you insist on pursuing this claim I will be claiming costs. Please also provide an email address to continue correspondence.

Your faithfully