CEL County Court Defence

Redx

SportHorse said:

Coupon-mad said:

Every time he got a letter I researched and the advice was always not to respond right up until County Court Claim when the        advice was at this point Do Not Ignore

Where?  We haven't said to ignore a CEL charge since 2013.  Nor does pepipoo, nor does any parking forum worth reading.

The SAR will show him the NTK and he can then check if it's a POFA one.

My mistake, reading resurrected old forums on CEL. Debt Recovery Plus and Zenith Collections are still advised to ignore I think.
The SAR will show him the NTK and he can then check if it's a POFA one.

Where will I find the SAR?  He has not received a NTK just a Notification Regarding Keeper Liability.

Also the initial PCN states that it has been issued because "the driver failed to pay the parking charge in respect of the period of parking and the parking charges have not been paid in full."  If there is no meter/app to pay for parking how could he pay?

Yes ignore debt recovery plus and zenith (same company) or any other debt collectors , repeat , debt collectors , but not parking companies like CEL , after 7.5 years of telling people not to ignore parking companies , it's ludicrous to say anything since 2013 says to ignore parking companies , because you have to ask yourself what the reply is when a judge asks that obvious question (crutch word deliberately included) ??

He emails a SAR to CEL to their DPO , their reply to the SAR gives him any details where he has been told to look , namely in their reply , in their documents etc , a SAR is mentioned in the newbies thread , please read it again , it's an important step to be done by the defendant

The NTK is the first postal PCN , usually received in the first 14 days but CEL are or were notorious for not complying with POFA so it could be late , but certainly within 6 months

Just because it doesn't say ntk it's still a Notice To Keeper , or NTK , is it not ??
Check it for POFA compliance , or not

Parking companies are not known for due diligence , but are known for stupidity and not proof reading , use this as part of any defence and WS , as incompetence

Le_Kirk

SportHorse said:

Coupon-mad said:

Every time he got a letter I researched and the advice was always not to respond right up until County Court Claim when the        advice was at this point Do Not Ignore

Where?  We haven't said to ignore a CEL charge since 2013.  Nor does pepipoo, nor does any parking forum worth reading.
The SAR will show him the NTK and he can then check if it's a POFA one.

The SAR will show him the NTK and he can then check if it's a POFA one.
Where will I find the SAR?  He has not received a NTK just a Notification Regarding Keeper Liability.

Are you sure you read the NEWBIE sticky. It's there in the second post.

Coupon-mad

AND - get ANGRY and GET EVEN about this scam! 

Please now make a real difference because not enough people have::

A TASK FOR SEPTEMBER:

The Government is (this month only) consulting about a new statutory code of practice (CoP) and framework to rein in the rogue parking firms.  Read and comment on the draft CoP proposal and the enforcement framework consultation, and get everyone you know to do the same.

You will need to register to comment on the CoP and enter an occupation even if you are retired or a homemaker, but otherwise it is easy to navigate, and comment upon each section/subsection individually. You can save comments to edit later and or submit comments once you are happy with them.

https://standardsdevelopment.bsigroup.com/projects/2020-00193#/section

You do not need to register to comment on the enforcement framework which can be found here. It has a link on page 5 to make comments.

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/913272/Code_Enforcement_Framework_consultation.pdf

At the very least, we say the parking charge level should be £50/£25 or higher level £70/£35, as per Council PCNs in E&W.  

And we say the added fake 'debt recovery' costs are just double counting the cost of letters and MUST GO.  Remove that layer and you remove the ‘drivers’ behind the race to court.

HOW TO DO THE SUBMISSIONS:

Responses into the PAS 232 and MHCLG framework documents are not completely straightforward:

On the MHCLG response, you have to answer the questions on a 1-5 scale from strongly agree to strongly disagree, and then put some commentary. No way to upload documents or alternatives.

 

On the PAS 232, you have to click on each clause and sub-clause to put your comments, and a suggested rewording of their draft.  You can see comments which other people have written! 

 

But, when you click ‘submit’, a message pops up to say your comments have been received, but that only applies to the particular clause you have just addressed.

 

You have to click ‘submit’ separately for each individual clause response.

 

Some people will be caught out by this but can revisit it and add further responses up to 12 October.

 

 

SportHorse

Redx said:

SportHorse said:

Coupon-mad said:

Every time he got a letter I researched and the advice was always not to respond right up until County Court Claim when the        advice was at this point Do Not Ignore

Where?  We haven't said to ignore a CEL charge since 2013.  Nor does pepipoo, nor does any parking forum worth reading.

The SAR will show him the NTK and he can then check if it's a POFA one.

My mistake, reading resurrected old forums on CEL. Debt Recovery Plus and Zenith Collections are still advised to ignore I think.
The SAR will show him the NTK and he can then check if it's a POFA one.

Where will I find the SAR?  He has not received a NTK just a Notification Regarding Keeper Liability.

Also the initial PCN states that it has been issued because "the driver failed to pay the parking charge in respect of the period of parking and the parking charges have not been paid in full."  If there is no meter/app to pay for parking how could he pay?

Yes ignore debt recovery plus and zenith (same company) or any other debt collectors , repeat , debt collectors , but not parking companies like CEL , after 7.5 years of telling people not to ignore parking companies , it's ludicrous to say anything since 2013 says to ignore parking companies , because you have to ask yourself what the reply is when a judge asks that obvious question (crutch word deliberately included) ??

He emails a SAR to CEL to their DPO , their reply to the SAR gives him any details where he has been told to look , namely in their reply , in their documents etc , a SAR is mentioned in the newbies thread , please read it again , it's an important step to be done by the defendant

The NTK is the first postal PCN , usually received in the first 14 days but CEL are or were notorious for not complying with POFA so it could be late , but certainly within 6 months

Just because it doesn't say ntk it's still a Notice To Keeper , or NTK , is it not ??
Check it for POFA compliance , or not

Parking companies are not known for due diligence , but are known for stupidity and not proof reading , use this as part of any defence and WS , as incompetence

Thank you for your response.  I don't think I have time to email a SAR to CEL, my defence has to be in by next Tuesday 4pm.  I don't know how to email a SAR to CEL, I understand what it is but thats about all.  I didn't realise the first PCN was classed as NTK although I understand now, yes it is.  I have looked at the POFA requirements and the PCN appears to comply.  So I will remove para 17 from my defence letter completely.
I will add in the fact that it was not possible to pay for parking as there is no meter/app to pay through so unable to pay for the period time parked,.beyond first hour, this relates to the statement on the back of the PCN
Thank you

Coupon-mad

Everyone does a SAR and no-one waits for it before they put in their defence.  It helps you LATER at WS stage!

 I don't know how to email a SAR to CEL.

Then you haven't read the SAR section of post #2 of the NEWBIES thread properly, where it tells you how to find the right email address and what to send!  Unless you read the NEWBIES thread you are going to fall victim to this by thinking defence is all you need to do.  Please don't be one of those people.

I have looked at the POFA requirements and the PCN appears to comply.

Unlikely, given CEL don't use the 9(2)f wording warning about keeper liability.

 

Please, please read the NEWBIES thread second post again.

And please do the Government consultations, both of them, this month, so you can make a difference and stop this scam. I even tell everyone above how to do the comments and where to click, everything...

Redx

The SAR is easily emailed with a copy of the V5C by the defendant in the name of the defendant , using an email address in their name , all basic stuff , not difficult , not required at defence stage anyway , but important and must be done , no excuses , no I can't !!

There is more chance of life on Neptune or me winning 50 million on the national lottery than of CEL complying with POFA , so I personally do not believe you when you say it's compliant , I would be assuming it is not compliant and would not be removing any such paragraph from the DEFENCE

I did tell you that CEL do not comply with Pofa , so you needed to check more closely
You should take our advice as gospel and true and act accordingly

It is your son's defence , not yours , you are assisting him , so at no time can you say MY defence , unless you receive a court claim with your name on it

To be clear , you are assisting the defendant , everything is done in their name , even the SAR , you cannot just take over like when they were a child , it's important that you understand this crucial point

SportHorse

Redx said:

The SAR is easily emailed with a copy of the V5C by the defendant in the name of the defendant , using an email address in their name , all basic stuff , not difficult , not required at defence stage anyway , but important and must be done , no excuses , no I can't !!

There is more chance of life on Neptune or me winning 50 million on the national lottery than of CEL complying with POFA , so I personally do not believe you when you say it's compliant , I would be assuming it is not compliant and would not be removing any such paragraph from the DEFENCE

I did tell you that CEL do not comply with Pofa , so you needed to check more closely
You should take our advice as gospel and true and act accordingly

It is your son's defence , not yours , you are assisting him , so at no time can you say MY defence , unless you receive a court claim with your name on it

To be clear , you are assisting the defendant , everything is done in their name , even the SAR , you cannot just take over like when they were a child , it's important that you understand this crucial point

I have set up a email just for this defence and I will be sure to keep everything in his name.  I will proceed as instructed but I'm not going to lie I find the whole thing extremely confusing and I am beginning to regret offering to fight this for him!

SportHorse

Coupon-mad said:

Everyone does a SAR and no-one waits for it before they put in their defence.  It helps you LATER at WS stage!

 I don't know how to email a SAR to CEL.

Then you haven't read the SAR section of post #2 of the NEWBIES thread properly, where it tells you how to find the right email address and what to send!  Unless you read the NEWBIES thread you are going to fall victim to this by thinking defence is all you need to do.  Please don't be one of those people.

I have looked at the POFA requirements and the PCN appears to comply.

Unlikely, given CEL don't use the 9(2)f wording warning about keeper liability.

 

Please, please read the NEWBIES thread second post again.

And please do the Government consultations, both of them, this month, so you can make a difference and stop this scam. I even tell everyone above how to do the comments and where to click, everything...

I will do the SAR once I have read through the newbies #2 post as advised.  And when this defence is emailed I will do the Government consultation also.
To be clear, should I leave para 17 in the letter and refer to 9 of the POFA . A previous comment said I needed to refer to one and not both in the letter?

Redx

Nobody has told you to lie , but we are saying that it's all done in his name because he is making a statement of truth at each stage , ideally the defendant should come here for advice

The earlier comment said to use either section 8 or section 9 , depending on if was a windscreen ticket first , or anpr first

So one or the other , check what the NTK says , I suspect there was no windscreen ticket issued , so just anpr and a postal notice. Pofa has a lot of words , so check for relevancy

So it's either include section 8 , or section 9 depending on what happened , there is no discussion or omission , it's one or the other , probably the anpr only option

There are no letters , just emails

There is nothing stressful in doing what we advise you to do , because your decisions are made for you , as long as you do what we tell you and stop the arguing

SportHorse

I have now sent a SAR email to the data protection officer at CEL.
I have attached a revised Defence email which I would appreciate comments on or if it is good to go.
Thank you for all advice so far.