Civil Enforcement ltd Court claim

Mini2274

Have tweaked a few bits let me know what you think! 

2.       It is admitted that the Defendant was the registered keeper of the vehicle in question. It is admitted that the Defendant was the driver but liability is denied.

 

3. The Particulars of Claim states that the Defendant was the registered keeper of XXXX on 30/10/2019. The defendant admits to parking onsite at the Masala Bazaar car park on 30th October 2019. On October 30th 2019 the defendant went into Masala Bazaar and inputted the VRM XXXX correctly in accordance to the terms and conditions of the car park. The terms and condition state ‘Masala Bazaar customers must register for a permit at one of the till points’. The defendant registered at the till on 30th October 2019 entering correctly the VRM XXXXX, once registering for a permit the parking at Masala Bazaar; the parking is free. 

4. The defendant avers that the system fails to provide an email (or any) confirmation or receipt exemptions when customers use the keypad at the till point. Consumers have no way to know if the system has stored and exempted the VRM they have input. The system breaches the Consumer Contracts (Information, Cancellation and Additional Charges) Regulations 2013, in which contracts completed by a way of digital exchange of information require receipts by a Durable Medium. Therefore the Claimant has no evidence of the Defendants alleged breach, which is denied. 

Redx

Change 2 to Keeper and driver , if you are admitting to driving , the remove just that part later on , leaving liability is denied

Mini2274

Right have just changed 2 to keeper and driver 

Coupon-mad

Mini2274 said:

Have tweaked a few bits let me know what you think! 

2.       It is admitted that the Defendant was the registered keeper of the vehicle in question. It is admitted that the Defendant was the driver but liability is denied.

 

3. The Particulars of Claim states that the Defendant was the registered keeper of XXXX on 30/10/2019. The defendant admits to parking onsite at the Masala Bazaar car park on 30th October 2019. On October 30th 2019 the defendant went into Masala Bazaar and inputted the VRM XXXX correctly in accordance to the terms and conditions of the car park. The terms and condition state ‘Masala Bazaar customers must register for a permit at one of the till points’. The defendant registered at the till on 30th October 2019 entering correctly the VRM XXXXX, once registering for a permit the parking at Masala Bazaar; the parking is free. 

4. The defendant avers that the system fails to provide an email (or any) confirmation or receipt exemptions when customers use the keypad at the till point. Consumers have no way to know if the system has stored and exempted the VRM they have input. The system breaches the Consumer Contracts (Information, Cancellation and Additional Charges) Regulations 2013, in which contracts completed by a way of digital exchange of information require receipts by a Durable Medium. Therefore the Claimant has no evidence of the Defendants alleged breach, which is denied. 

Nice, you found the wording I wrote earlier.  The only other thing I would do is find the section in the template about unclear signs and add in a sentence saying that the signs at this location are almost completely obscured by graffiti and have been for months/years, which demonstrates how little regard this Claimant pays to the interests of drivers and the basics of allegedly forming a contract with people, who cannot read the most basic terms, let alone be deemed to have agreed to pay an exorbitant amount when the Claimant's VRM exemption processing system fails.

Mini2274

Hi all just a quick update, I submitted my defence on 4/5/21 and the defence has been received. Haven't had any correspondence as of yet from CEL but have had a letter from the court to say my defence has been received and CEL have 28 days to respond. 

Today I received my SAR request through the post from CEL!  Which is all of good use the first letter doesn't actually state how I 'breached' only gives me pictures of my car but obviously it was a VRM machine I put my reg into so they have no evidence of that at all. They sent a second letter over 2 months later adding £40 onto the £100 'fine' no break down of the added costs. A month later they sent a 'debt letter demanding £170 which was from ZZPS and then another 10 days letter same from ZZPS. Now interestingly enough I did not receive any other correspondence until 28/1/21 nearly a year later after the last 'debt letter' which of course they claim to have written to me on several occasions- 2! And putting it up to £182 this letter was there attempt of PAP. Then I received the final reminder before legal action 4/3/21 then of course the claim form 23/4/21. So I'm pretty happy receiving this today as it's going to work in my favour! Let me know of any thoughts of all this! And how long do I expect to be waiting before hearing anything from the court? 

KeithP

Mini2274 said:

...how long do I expect to be waiting before hearing anything from the court? 

What you don't know is when the CCBC sent a copy of your Defence to the Claimant. 

It follows from that that it is not known when the Claimant has to respond to the CCBC. 

Further, we don't know what delays there are in the CCBC that means they don't send you a DQ as promptly as you might like.

Can I suggest that you keep checking your MCOL Claim History and as soon as you see that the CCBC has sent a DQ to you, you are ready to download a DQ, complete it and fire it back to the CCBC, remembering to send a copy to the Claimant of course.

Mini2274

Thanks @KeithP I will keep checking it! 

Mini2274

Hi all,
just an update. CCBC accepted my defence then rejected it and then re accepted and sent to CEL finally on the 24/5/21. Just checked MCOL and CEL have just submitted their DQ today and it says I have been sent my DQ. Does anyone know if this is done through paper or email? I know I have to send CEL a copy of my DQ but just wondering if I can do it via email or it has to be done in the post! 

Coupon-mad

You will get it by post but can email it back to the CCBC and CEL. 

Now we need to ask you to do something important:

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/78411172/#Comment_78411172

Do not miss that Consultation by not checking back here. This is your only chance to stop people getting a £100 private parking charge for this, in future. The Government proposes £50 (£25) but the PPCs have kicked up a stink and the MHCLG has a final consultation coming soon. 

Don’t let real consumer voices be drowned by PPC World like they almost achieved last year in the first consultation they were seen to have spammed. When we responded we could all see the sudden cut & paste replies in the BSI portal that showed that PPCs and friends had bombarded it in the final few days. 

KeithP

Remember that list you were following when you filed your Defence?

Go back to it and read items 8, 9 and 10 on that list.