Letter of claim: CE LTD response to claimant

Adrian1999

Fair enough - I will amend the defence and remove paragraph 3.2. At which point, does the defence seem suitable for submission?

My attempt with paragraph 3.2 was to highlight the POC, which is made difficult by the lack of numbering, does not indicate what the specific T&C violation is, and does not indicate the defendant's role in the violation (driver or keeper). The latter merely makes a statement of what is deemed as conduct of agreement of a driver.

Le_Kirk

Agreed, the POC are sparse and so you should follow the guidance already given here by @Coupon-mad: -
22 July at 11:11PM <<<<LINK

Coupon-mad

Adrian1999 said:

Fair enough - I will amend the defence and remove paragraph 3.2. At which point, does the defence seem suitable for submission?

My attempt with paragraph 3.2 was to highlight the POC, which is made difficult by the lack of numbering, does not indicate what the specific T&C violation is, and does not indicate the defendant's role in the violation (driver or keeper). The latter merely makes a statement of what is deemed as conduct of agreement of a driver.

Use the Costco one with its extra additions suggested. Here it is:

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/81579635/#Comment_81579635

Then once your defence is in, please read this message and do the vital,  current Public Consultation:

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/81552148/#Comment_81552148

It's important that the Government hears from people with unfair charges who are facing horrific, scary court claims.

The link shows the two vital points to concentrate on, IMHO:

- banning DRA fee add-ons completely

- making sure a new SINGLE appeals service replaces POPLA and the IAS which are seen as not fully independent and involved in a 'race to the bottom'.

Click through to the main thread about the Consultation, Do not be deterred by the fact that some questions are for the parking industry only.

We are currently discussing how to respond. Please join us in doing this Consultation. This is your one chance to make a difference re the proper regulation of private parking.

Adrian1999

Update:
Completed Mediation - Came across as good cop, as opposed to CE LTD bad cop scary letters. Eye opening to say the least.
Now allocated to the small claims track with a confirmed date to submit my WS (just over two weeks from now) and the date of hearing (late February). 

In regards to the witness statement:

• I will await the claimants WS to examine
• Would the court WS be mostly what was used in the MCOL defence? in addition to exhibits where needed.
• Submit costs assessment 

I think I know what the response to this question will be - should I and if so, how should I consider if questioned on why I did not engage or communicate with with the PCN or the dispute pathway?

Regarding additional evidence. A FOI email to my GP has had no response or acknowledgement. I intend to follow-up on this to make them sweat. Otherwise I have email historical correspondence in relation to the PCN incident. They had said I had attended an appointment a week before, and I remember not registering my car, and no PCN notice was received.. However the GP has indicated ANPR came into force at the start of the month.

edit: corrected wording

Gr1pr

Wait for the court order from your local civil court 

Do not assume that there will be a hearing,  it won't happen unless they pay the hearing fee,  by the deadline in the court order 

The WS bundles are probably due by the same subsequent deadline,  but study the order,  dont assume anything 

Your WS backs up your defence with statements plus Exhibits,  it does NOT repeat your defence 

Study the what happens after this point in the 2nd post in the newbies sticky thread in because you dont appear to have read it 

Adrian1999

Gr1pr said:

Wait for the court order from your local civil court 

Do not assume that there will be a hearing,  it won't happen unless they pay the hearing fee,  by the deadline in the court order 

The WS bundles are probably due by the same subsequent deadline,  but study the order,  dont assume anything 

Your WS backs up your defence with statements plus Exhibits,  it does NOT repeat your defence 

Study the what happens after this point in the 2nd post in the newbies sticky thread in because you dont appear to have read it 

Thanks! I've gone through several 'success' threads. I'll go back over, because at initial glance they looked very similar to the submitted MCOL defence.

Sorry I just re-read my post and realised my wording was a mess. I have my N157 form of "Notice of allocation to the small claims track", confirming the date to submit my WS and of my hearing (I have corrected my previous post).

It feels like the time is tight to await the 'court order' document and claimant WS, before the need to submit my own WS. BUT obviously, mine should be written ready!

Umkomaas

It feels like the time is tight to await the 'court order' document and claimant WS, before the need to submit my own WS. BUT obviously, mine should be written ready!

You need to crack on with your WS. Private parking sector Claimants tend to submit their WS at the eleventh hour, thus leaving the Defendant likely to miss their same deadline if they want time to study before responding. 

As a general rule of thumb in private parking, if you’ve received the Claimant’s WS and not submitted yours, you’ve missed the deadline. 

Adrian1999

Umkomaas said:

It feels like the time is tight to await the 'court order' document and claimant WS, before the need to submit my own WS. BUT obviously, mine should be written ready!

You need to crack on with your WS. Private parking sector Claimants tend to submit their WS at the eleventh hour, thus leaving the Defendant likely to miss their same deadline if they want time to study before responding. 

As a general rule of thumb in private parking, if you’ve received the Claimant’s WS and not submitted yours, you’ve missed the deadline. 

Okay I will have mine ready to submit, and hold out for theirs in the possibility of cross examine - if not, I will just submit.

Adrian1999

Just drafting my WS. A Couple of points on my mind:

As part of my evidence exhibits

Email chain with GP practice (presumed land owner) - I have indicated I contacted the GP, however how do I refer to the GPs POV in these emails of, "We do not get involved with the company to negotiate PCN’s as a general rule, they are entitled to charge you if you have not followed the rules. I am sorry that on this occasion I am unable to help as you will need to appeal the decision."

Secondly, the GP indicated parking enforcement began on the 1st of the month, however I had previously parked in-between this and the contravention date, without registering my car or receiving a PCN.

Follow-up FOI email - I asked for information on initial signage, changes to signage, when the active enforcement began and a contractual agreement of CEL role to enforce, pursue charges as a creditor, and take legal action on behalf of CEL and not the GP practice.

• I have had no response to this FOI - is my contact here suitable to be reference as evidenced, as CEL WS do not provide their relationship to the landowner.

Claimants witness statements

Witness and signatory - Is this correct/acceptable the way the witness have presented themselves? (see images). I have found the wording confusing, as it goes between "SW of CEL (the claimant)", "Authorised by the claimant", "Barrister and general counsel at CEL", "SW General counsel on behalf of CEL", etc.

• Does this present issues to having direct knowledge of facts
• Is this an acceptable statement from the claimant party and proper for SW to present themselves as counsel to CEL and act as a witness?

Witness statement date - this is dated before the court notice of allocation to the small claims track.

No indication of landowner - The witness statement does no show who contracts CEL or if CEL owns the land. No indication of lawful entitlement to demand money from driver or keeper, or to further pursue further charges as a creditor or through the court system.

PCN in Witness statement bundle - T&Cs indicate payment not made / permit not obtained in accordance with notified terms - is this wording acceptable? Furthermore, parking requires logging of vehicle registration within the GP - as there is not permit to obtain.

Adrian1999

Update

Adding to my confusing - By email, I have just received a second, alternative statement by a different witness/signatory. The first witness statement pack was received as a physical letter.

This version now provides minimal information regarding their right to manage as per a written agreement (see exhibit etc.). Respective evidence exhibit:

• indicates enforcement policy is permit holder or pay to park
• Commencement date: TBC

• The practice manager here - is the GP member of staff that I have had communication from regarding this PCN.

"Defendants denial of liability for PCN" - they have indicated and I quote, "the failure to either pay for a session or register a vehicle for an electronic parking permit."

• this is the first instance that indicates electronic registration - The PCN's do not indicate electronic registration.

• This differs to the PCN T&Cs

Is no signature acceptable on the reference claim form statement of truth