Civil Enforcement Limited - Defence

Fruitcake

Hopefully you now know whether paragraph 8 or 9 of the PoFA schedule 4 applies. Assuming you do, then you should be able to quote which precise parts of the PoFA have not been adhered to; paragraph, section, sub-paragraph, for example, 9 (2) f.

Have you told us when the alleged event occurred by the way? The interest charged seems very high for a recent occurrence.

houseofcheshire

Thanks @Fruitcake yes, it is dated back over a year ago. Costs are currently £100 fine plus £70 that I am unaware of due to not receiving correspondence. And then they've added £25 Court fee, £50 admin, interest and apparently another £75 if I do not pay. 
I will check over POFA now.

Redx

You need to remove the word fine from your head , you want to start calling it a PCN where the p is for parking , or an invoice , so it's a £100 PCN invoice , it is most definitely NOT a fine , so never refer to it as a fine , get out of the habit

I realise it's another grammar issue , but it's also embedded in your mind , delete it from your mind , get into the right mindset

CEL cannot and do not fine anyone , ever !!

Seems to me they added the £70 and £75 as spurious additional charges , double recovery and abuse of process

Any interest is on the original £100 PCN , whereas they are inflating the charge and then inflating the interest accordingly

houseofcheshire

Thanks for the heads up on the 'fine' issue @Redx as you can probably gather I am not an expert in this situation. I do not fully understand what is what, or what the right process to take is, hence why I am on here asking for help and guidance. So that is appreciated. Noted, in any case of hearing, I will ensure I use the correct term.

So just to confirm, CEL adding the charges mentioned and interest onto said charges is abuse of process? 
Thanks

Redx

the first pcn received would have said PARKING CHARGE NOTICE or PCN, which is an invoice for perceived breach of contract under contract law, it never mentioned the word FINE, it is not a FINE , that is a legal term for something different, even though people use it without thinking which is what you have done (I suppose you Hoover up with a Dyson too ! , lol)

say what you see, the claim form would have said PCN or similar, not fine , that reminder letter also calls it a PCN, it does not mention the word FINE

the additional charges of say £70 are considered an abuse of process, as is the interest charged on that £70, because it should not be there in the first place

some of the interest charged may be legitimate, based on the £100 original pcn, but not ALL of the interest charged because its based on £170 , the devil is in the detail

houseofcheshire

Ok @Redx point was taken the first time. I will not use the term 'FINE', as I had already said on my previous comment. 
I do not understand how this has come to mocking me, but that is something I do not appreciate - the help you give, I really do. 

I guess you have had a lot of experience with this, so something that may seem totally straight forward to you is not to others, so please understand that. I have come here for help, I have asked questions based on the Defence that I have put together and 9/10 times the questions asked have been answered in a round the houses kind of way.
All I request is that the Defence points that I commented earlier, are they ample enough?

Redx

I am not mocking you , I am explaining that none of the signs or your paperwork contain that legal word , for good reason , it is not allowed to call it a fine or penalty unless it is one. You are misinterpreting facts for comedy and you brought up this word that is purely in your head alone and introduced it as a fact

I see one of my jobs to expunge the myth. If cel or any other PPC had used that word we would be telling you to use it as a defence point because as we tell everyone fighting hire or lease or company vehicles , that word that is used in contracts is one they can dispute due to a PCN not being a fine or a penalty and so that is why you should not use it , at all , it clouds your judgment and has meaning to a judge or advocate

Also , what you fail to understand is that anyone else reading this thread in the future should not be misled by you and should learn that it is wrong and why it is wrong , because it's a common misconception that we put down daily on here because many people keep on using it

As this is a legal case , it is vital to point out your errors , especially legal errors , your feelings are irrelevant , but I repeat that mockery was not the objective or even in my mind. My mind is clear that my posts were factual and came from facts , not from trying to belittle you , or anyone else for that matter , I do not come here to commit mockery

I suggest you tidy up your thoughts because you need a thick skin and to know your case inside out to win , so each and every pedantic reply is to hone your case until it's almost fireproof , which includes picking over each and every detail in minutiae

It's better for us to point it out here than be embarrassed in court by an advocate or judge that rubbishes your words as being fiction or not factually correct instead of concentrating on your actual legal arguments

I hope that explanation explains the thinking here and that legal words should be picked and used only when they are correct , otherwise confusion and embarrassment reign , whereas we want you to win , so your grammar , spelling and wordings will be picked over like buzzards on a carcass whether you like it or not

I was addressing your points that you asked regarding interest , spurious charges and what is or is not allowed. I was not addressing your earlier question about your defence points. People here will respond to questions based on their knowledge of the subject but you are expecting black and white answers whereas court cases are various shades of grey. They are complicated , uncertain , cumbersome , no two are the same , each is bespoke so I don't see why you are complaining that nearly every reply is ambiguous , nor do I think you are qualified to make that statement that 9/10 of answers skirt the issues

I believe the answers give the reply that should be given and perhaps you didn't ask the right questions or don't understand the issues. But it's your court case to deal with , not ours

Good luck

houseofcheshire

@Redx The mockery comment came from 'Hoover/Dyson' nothing else. 
As I said I appreciate your help. I haven't used any of that wording in my defence and I will be sure not to during any conversation/hearing.
So I will ask again to be sure before I submit it, are the defence points that I have made ok? In other words, not going to embarrass myself?

Redx

The issues on charges sidetracked your defence paragraphs , plus the grammar corrections

I strongly suggest you copy and paste your proposed final paragraphs below for the buzzards to pick over , including all the corrections included , so the buzzards here can pick over the bones to see if there is any more pickings on offer , or alternatively if it's good to go (get the thread back on track now that the errors have been highlighted and you have made the corrections)

Le_Kirk

If you have sorted out whether it is section 8 or section 9 (read POFA to decide) that can be amended in your paragraph 17 and, in paragraph 18, I would suggest changing "penalty" to "parking", otherwise you have adequately covered signage and the fact of the multiple car parks in the same vicinity and if that answers all the points on the Particulars of Claim (POC), then you are good to go.

@Redx The mockery comment came from 'Hoover/Dyson' nothing else. 

Not mockery but comedy!