PCN with County Court N1 form (Excel (ELMS Legal))

Ed2022

Good afternoon

Would be most grateful for advise on this.

PCN with County Court N1 form (Excel (ELMS Legal)).

Timeline:

• 25/01/2022 - PCN issued for event on the 
• 21/07/2022 - CCBC form received (attached)
• 27/07/2022 - Made a CPR 31.14 request to ELMS Legal (not received)
• 27-28/07/2022 - Offer without prejudice, declined so told to fill CCBC admitting liability
• 28/07/2022 - DPA request files received - the letters sent out, no photographs of actual signage
• 31/07/2022 - AOS online on the MCOL site

• Pending - Defence (2nd post with particulars)

Background:

• Driver had entered car park, assumed it was council, parked in disabled bay awaiting a passenger, left the car park.
• Driver had a valid blue badge.
• There was no clear signage (see attached).
• Car park in question is next to a council car park - no signage to have indicated otherwise (see attached).
• Various correspondences sent via the post, PCN, although the keeper was working away and likely all correspondence was binned/discarded/not received.
• The first letter has a fine of £100 then adds on £70 as a debt collection charge.

Furthermore, the keeper had made a complaint to the local MP (although not his local MP) and got a very helpful reply. His words, "Every week for the past couple of years, I have received a number of e-mails from constituents appealing the fines they received. The parking machines do not issue a receipt and, therefore, the person parking had no way of proving they had paid. I have never been successful in having them overturned. Excel Parking has now lost the contract." 

Running a HM land registry search also finding that lease for the shopping centre is by the Rail Pensions Nominees Limited so have been contact as well as the shopping centre admin team.

Would be grateful on anything else guidance wise?

Thank you.

Ed

Ed2022

Defence statement particulars, adapted from https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6108153/template-defence-to-adapt-for-all-parking-cases-where-they-add-false-admin-costs-edited-march-2022/p1, so the rest from point 6 onwards follows on from coupan-mad’s.

1.     The parking charges referred to in this claim did not arise from any agreement of terms. The charge and the claim was an unexpected shock. The Defendant denies that the Claimant is entitled to relief in the sum claimed, or at all.  It is denied that any conduct by the driver was a breach of any prominent term, and it is denied that this Claimant (understood to have a bare licence as managers) has standing to sue or form contracts in their own name. Liability is denied, whether or not the Claimant is claiming 'keeper liability', which is unclear from the Particulars.

The facts as known to the Defendant:

2.     The Defendant vehicle XXXXX was/has not been or present at the Three Spires Shopping Centre car parks on the 2/01/2022 as claimed in the Particulars of Claim.

3.     It is admitted that the Defendant was the registered keeper of the vehicle in question (registration XXXXX).

4.     The Defendant at the time parked in the Three Spires Shopping Centre short stay car park. It was stationary within the disabled space normally permitted by the issuance of a disability badge held by the keeper. The Defendant did not leave the vehicle. There was no clear signage entering the car park in question to indicate it was privately administered. There was no signage to indicate it was any different from the car park adjacent administered by Lichfield Council. The Defendant was of the belief that it was council administered and holding a disabled badge, could park in the disabled bay marked in the Three Spires Shopping Centre short stay car park.

5.     It has come to the attention of the Defendant by way of correspondence with the Right Honourable MP of Lichfield that the contract for the Three Spires Shopping Centre short stay car park administered by Excel Parking Services Limited has been withdrawn due to its business practises.

KeithP

You have told us you received a County Court Claim Form on 21st July, but what is the Issue Date on that Claim Form?

Your background detail is careful to not identify the driver.
However, your proposed Defence paragraph 4 clearly states who was driving.


@Snakes_Belly knows this car park well and will surely have something to say about this. 

Ed2022

KeithP said:

You have told us you received a County Court Claim Form on 21st July, but what is the Issue Date on that Claim Form?

Your background detail is careful to not identify the driver.
However, your proposed Defence paragraph 4 clearly states who was driving.


@Snakes_Belly knows this car park well and will surely have something to say about this. 

Apologies, the date of issue is the 21st of July.

That is my error for the Defence paragraph 4. Should I keep that same narrative i.e., not identifying the driver?
Cannot find how to edit the post.

KeithP

With a Claim Issue Date of 21st July, and having filed an Acknowledgment of Service in a timely manner, you have until 4pm on Tuesday 23rd August 2022 to file your Defence.

That's over two weeks away. Plenty of time to produce a Defence and it is good to see that you are not leaving it to the last minute.

To create a Defence, and then file a Defence by email, look at the second post in the NEWBIES thread.

Don't miss the deadline for filing a Defence.

Do not try and file a Defence via the MoneyClaimOnline website. Once an Acknowledgment of Service has been filed, the MCOL website should be treated as 'read only'.

Ed2022

KeithP said:

With a Claim Issue Date of 21st July, and having filed an Acknowledgment of Service in a timely manner, you have until 4pm on Tuesday 23rd August 2022 to file your Defence.

That's over two weeks away. Plenty of time to produce a Defence and it is good to see that you are not leaving it to the last minute.

To create a Defence, and then file a Defence by email, look at the second post in the NEWBIES thread.

Don't miss the deadline for filing a Defence.

Do not try and file a Defence via the MoneyClaimOnline website. Once an Acknowledgment of Service has been filed, the MCOL website should be treated as 'read only'.

Many thanks for this KeithP, read through the FAQ etc and the 2nd post in the NEWBIES thread is really helpful. I just need to tidy up that fourth paragraph.

Snakes_Belly

"Every week for the past couple of years, I have received a number of e-mails from constituents appealing the fines they received. The parking machines do not issue a receipt and, therefore, the person parking had no way of proving they had paid. I have never been successful in having them overturned. Excel Parking has now lost the contract." 

Here are more comments by Michael Fabricant.

Lichfield MP Michael Fabricant said he was pleased to see the change of operator.

“This is seriously good news – I have never before had to deal with a company that has so little interest in engaging with genuine concerns of the customers it is meant to serve.

“Even when I have taken up miscarriages of justice with the company concerning constituents who have been served parking penalty notices by them because their machines were faulty, they have shown no interest in righting obvious wrongs.

“Good riddance to a company that damaged the good name of Lichfield by their unwillingness to engage with the community. Their lack of engagement is a testimony to how a company should not be run.

“I feel sorry for other towns who have to endure them.”

There is a FB group set up for people who have received PCN's from Excel. You seem to be fairly down the line with the claim. 

These car parks were previously run by the council and there is a petition to have them returned to council control. Unfortunately the the owner/leaseholder of Three Spires has appointed another PPC. 

Excel are an ex-clamping company and are very litigious but have been regularly beaten at court. The MP's comments are very damming.

There has been numerous PCN's issued as a result of the changeover from council run to Excel and the majority of these are without merit. As yet I have not seen the outcome of any of the claims.  

There has always been a disparity between council run car parks and car parks run by private parking companies. When one of these car parks changes from council to privately run it creates issues but this change seems to have created a horrendous amount of issues.

The new Code of Practice was designed to bring PPC's and Council run car parks more in line with each other but this has now stalled and is subject to a further public consultation. 

I was not ticketed on this car park but have had my own run in with this company on a car park in Burton on Trent.      
 

Ed2022

Thank you for your reply @Snakes_Belly.

I've been told it has been sold in May and a new operator manages the car park.

I've not been on facebook for years, would the quotation help in anyway aside from the case itself?

I have asked for photographs of the signs as you would see them as a driver, the ELMS legal person has only sent the PDF.

Any other thoughts on defence etc?

Snakes_Belly

There are photo's of the signage on the FB page.

I would certainly use the MP's comments from the article below in your WS. 

https://lichfieldlive.co.uk/2022/06/12/decision-by-shopping-centre-owner-to-end-contract-with-car-parking-company-welcomed-by-lichfield-mp/

Was the driver with a passenger and the driver stayed in the car?    

Ed2022

Snakes_Belly said:

There are photo's of the signage on the FB page.

I would certainly use the MP's comments from the article below in your WS. 

......

Was the driver with a passenger and the driver stayed in the car?    

Thank you for this.
The group is private unfortunately and as said no longer use FB.

The driver was with a passenger and stayed in the vehicle at all times.

Snakes_Belly

I asume that the Backcester sign would be the same. This is not the entrance sign but it would take a long time to read this.

I can't find an image of the entrance to see what the signage or lack of it looks like. That is crucial as that is what forms the contract.