CCJ from private parking fine

winks3

Hi all,

I am looking for some help.

I received an alert on my credit file Friday evening of a CCJ being logged against my name - logged 4th April 2023 at my current address. This morning I have rang the County Court Business Centre to understand what this is for - they have told me that I parked last year (Oct 2021) in a carpark near where I live for 20 minutes. 

I have tried to ring Civil Enforcement, and using the refence number from the CCBC that they have given me, can only get through to a automated payment line to pay the ~£300 that is apparently outstanding. 

I have never received anything from the CCBC or from Civil Enforcement. I have not moved address in the last 5 years.

I've looked at the FAQs on this forum and done some Google'ing, I see there are options to set aside if I pay a fee, and can then fight this in court. I don't really understand why I would never have received anything in the post associated with this - I am absolutely certain I have not had anything come through. I will obviously pay this if I have done wrong, however the thought of having (even a satisfied) CCJ against my name is not something I want at all and will do whatever I can to remove that. 

So from what I can tell - I should either:

• Contact the court with a N244: writing a witness statement to say that I have never received anything from the claimant or the court and I believe I have a strong chance of successfully fighting this claim should I be presented with the opportunity
• Try to find a number that isn't automated to contact the claimant: offer to pay in full in the hope they will support a set aside and then this will settle within 30 days and avoid a full CCJ?

Would greatly appreciate any help & advice on what I should do next.

Harvez63

When you phoned the court to get through security, did they ask you for your address? this is a good indication of where the information was sent to. As with mine; I had to use my old address to satisfy the security questions which confirmed where they'd sent the information to.

winks3

Thanks for asking Harvez - yes, I used my current address. The phone advisor nonchalantly suggested it was likely a lost in the post scenario. Seems strange that I have received nothing at all though, and this company haven't written either. 

Coupon-mad

winks3 said:

Thanks for asking Harvez - yes, I used my current address. The phone advisor nonchalantly suggested it was likely a lost in the post scenario. Seems strange that I have received nothing at all though, and this company haven't written either. 

Doesn't make any sense; you'd have had letters and a LBC from CEL before the claim form.

Is there a house number typo on your car logbook?  That's the address the DVLA gave out.

You must ring the CCBC in Northampton again tomorrow and ask for a copy of the Particulars of Claim to be emailed to you while you are on the phone (do not trust them to email it later).

And ask exactly which address the supposed Claim form was sent to and on what date.

Then come back and tell us those 3 things.

And email a SAR to CEL tonight.

winks3

Hi @Coupon-mad

I have got all the information now and just sending a SAR to CEL as we speak.

House number on car logbook: this is all correct. The DVLA have absolutely got the correct address
Copy of the Particulars of Claim: here they are - 

Claim for money relating to a Parking Charge for breach of contract terms/conditions(TCs) for parking in a private car park (CP) managed by Claimant. Drivers may only park pursuant to TCs of use displayed in CP and agreed upon entry/parking. ANPR cameras or manual patrols monitor vehicles entering/exiting the CP and TC breaches. Charges of GBP182.00 claimed
Violation date: XX/10/2021
Payment due date: XX/11/2021
Time in: 07:51 Time out: 07:12
PCN: RefXXXXXXXXXXX
Vehicle red mark: {my reg} Car park: XXXXXXXX

Total due- GBP182.00
(Pay:www.ce-service.co.uk or 01158225020)
The Claimant claims the sum of GBP204.90 for the unpaid parking charge inc GBP22.90 interest under S.69 of the CCA 1984
Rate: 8.00% pa from due date to XX/04/23
Same rate to Judgment or sooner payment at daily rate of- GBP0.04
Total debt and interest due GBP 204.90

Exactly what address and dates: issue date was said to be 12th April to my address. They confirmed the correct address for me. 

Castle

The "Time in" 07.51 and "Time Out" 07.12 don't make sense.

Coupon-mad

OK so the SAR reply will reveal the PCN and letters. I think you need to understand why this happened and maybe on the letters you'll see a constant address typo or something:

"I have never received anything from the CCBC or from Civil Enforcement. I have not moved address in the last 5 years."

It's very odd (unless someone has been throwing away letters thinking it's all a scam to be ignored, or your post is terribly unreliable) because you'd have had half a dozen letters since 2021.

Hopefully you've emailed the SAR today with ID so they reply quickly. Did you send it to:

dataprotectionofficer@ce-service.co.uk

The POC reveal that this looks like a 'double dip' 24 hour ANPR error because it says the 'time of exit' was earlier than the time of entry!

I think the PCN in the SAR will reveal that they are accusing you of leaving the car there overnight because they haven't bothered with the human checks that the BPA says are mandatory to find what they call the 'orphan images' in the muddle of the 24 hour period and avoid double dip errors:

https://www.britishparking.co.uk/anpr

Basically CEL should never have had your data at all.

I would email CEL again (not to the DPO this time).  These have proved useful for Civil Enforcement in the past: -

office@ce-service.co.uk

Legal3@ce-service.co.uk

Tell them that you've never received any letters or claim form but have learnt of a CCJ.  You will be applying to set this aside and have obtained the Particulars of Claim from the CCBC.

This reveals what looks like a classic 'double dip' ANPR error across a 24 hour period where two short visits have been paired to appear to be an overnight stay.  This did not happen and is wholly CEL's fault who failed to check for orphan images and never had 'reasonable cause'  to apply for DVLA data at all.

As such, you've applied for a SAR to reveal the data held and to see the letters that were never received.

To apply to set aside the CCJ with a hearing will cost £275 (or. £108 without a hearing) and the Defendant will not only hold the liable for full costs but will also (once allowed to defend) counterclaim for not less than £300 for misuse of DVLA data and will use the authority if Simon Clay v Civil Enforcement Ltd, where he was awarded a three figure sum. Transcript available.

Given the above, the Defendant suggests an alternative that has better value for CEL:

- that their Legal Team acknowledges that this was ANPR 'double dip' error with no checks done for the orphan images where the vehicle left & returned each of the two mornings;

- that their LegalTeam draw up a Consent Order to set the CCJ aside under CPR 13.3 and (once agreed) CEL will submit it to the CCBC at their own expense to set aside the CCJ and dismiss the claim;

- if the CCBC charge a fee that will be paid by CEL;

- the Defendant will pay nothing;

- this Consent Order will be filed in July 2023 by CEL and not delayed;

- if the Consent Order is accepted by the court and the claim dismissed at no cost to the Defendant, both parties will 'drop hands' and there will be no Counterclaim or claim made for damages (or otherwise) for the Claimant's DVLA data abuse;

- if the CCBC refuses the Consent order at first, CEL will swiftly adjust the wording and resubmit immediately to ensure the rationale falls within CPR 13.3;

- if the Consent order remains refused, CEL accept liability for the £275 fee the Defendant will need to pay in order to set this CCJ aside at a hearing and will be 'on notice' of the planned counterclaim.

winks3

Castle said:

The "Time in" 07.51 and "Time Out" 07.12 don't make sense.

Apologies, that was a typo on my behalf as it wouldn't let me copy and paste. It was 08.12

winks3

Coupon-mad said:

OK so the SAR reply will reveal the PCN and letters. I think you need to understand why this happened and maybe on the letters you'll see a constant address typo or something:

"I have never received anything from the CCBC or from Civil Enforcement. I have not moved address in the last 5 years."

It's very odd (unless someone has been throwing away letters thinking it's all a scam to be ignored, or your post is terribly unreliable) because you'd have had half a dozen letters since 2021.

Hopefully you've emailed the SAR today with ID so they reply quickly. Did you send it to:

dataprotectionofficer@ce-service.co.uk

The POC reveal that this looks like a 'double dip' 24 hour ANPR error because it says the 'time of exit' was earlier than the time of entry!

I think the PCN in the SAR will reveal that they are accusing you of leaving the car there overnight because they haven't bothered with the human checks that the BPA says are mandatory to find what they call the 'orphan images' in the muddle of the 24 hour period and avoid double dip errors:

XXXXX

Basically CEL should never have had your data at all.

I would email CEL again (not to the DPO this time).  These have proved useful for Civil Enforcement in the past: -

office@ce-service.co.uk

Legal3@ce-service.co.uk

Tell them that you've never received any letters or claim form but have learnt of a CCJ.  You will be applying to set this aside and have obtained the Particulars of Claim from the CCBC.

This reveals what looks like a classic 'double dip' ANPR error across a 24 hour period where two short visits have been paired to appear to be an overnight stay.  This did not happen and is wholly CEL's fault who failed to check for orphan images and never had 'reasonable cause'  to apply for DVLA data at all.

As such, you've applied for a SAR to reveal the data held and to see the letters that were never received.

To apply to set aside the CCJ with a hearing will cost £275 (or. £108 without a hearing) and the Defendant will not only hold the liable for full costs but will also (once allowed to defend) counterclaim for not less than £300 for misuse of DVLA data and will use the authority if Simon Clay v Civil Enforcement Ltd, where he was awarded a three figure sum. Transcript available.

Given the above, the Defendant suggests an alternative that has better value for CEL:

- that their Legal Team acknowledges that this was ANPR 'double dip' error with no checks done for the orphan images where the vehicle left & returned each of the two mornings;

- that their LegalTeam draw up a Consent Order to set the CCJ aside under CPR 13.3 and (once agreed) CEL will submit it to the CCBC at their own expense to set aside the CCJ and dismiss the claim;

- if the CCBC charge a fee that will be paid by CEL;

- the Defendant will pay nothing;

- this Consent Order will be filed in July 2023 by CEL and not delayed;

- if the Consent Order is accepted by the court and the claim dismissed at no cost to the Defendant, both parties will 'drop hands' and there will be no Counterclaim or claim made for damages (or otherwise) for the Claimant's DVLA data abuse;

- if the CCBC refuses the Consent order at first, CEL will swiftly adjust the wording and resubmit immediately to ensure the rationale falls within CPR 13.3;

- if the Consent order remains refused, CEL accept liability for the £275 fee the Defendant will need to pay in order to set this CCJ aside at a hearing and will be 'on notice' of the planned counterclaim.

I'm really sorry coupon-mad - my typo above where I couldn't copy and paste obviously makes it not what you call a double dip event. I understand what you say above, and that your approach makes complete sense. I presume in any case I should still contact CEL directly?

winks3

I ended up speaking to the legal team (via email) - they offered me a 'reduction' to £95 and will provide me a draft consent order once I have paid that. From my understanding, it would better the chances of a successful set aside by not paying the £95 directly to them now and actually stating in the N244 that we have reached a settlement and part of that settlement would be to pay the £95 (providing I am happy to go down that route to better my chances at removing this CCJ):

UPON THE PARTIES having agreed terms of settlement

AND UPON the Defendant not receiving the claim form and had no knowledge of proceedings

AND UPON the above constituting service of the claim form was defective and therefore the default judgement is agreed to be set aside under ‘some other good reason why’ further to CPR 13.3(b).

1. The default judgment entered on XXXXXX 2023 (Claim no. XXXXXX) be set aside.

2. The Claim is withdrawn.

3. The Defendant shall pay the Claimant £95 as costs within 14 days of the date of this Consent Order being sealed."

KeithP

Taking that stance makes it look very much like credit cleansing to me.