Letter of claim: CE LTD response to claimant

Adrian1999

Wow…

Well..

In response to point 1 - it seems the outcome can speak for itself.

Point 2 - Excluding the parking charge (debatable in contrast to PE v Beavis?). Additional sums of money are not prominently displayed

No apologies needed, my floundering definitely became apparent against an open door not for me.

The comments on how strongly Wales seems to be in favour for PPCs, is eye opening.

Now I need to deal with CELs lack of response to me about the payment of claim, and I am in week two post verdict. I have just reached out to their representative too..

Castle

The parking charge actually says "UP TO £100".

Adrian1999

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/81910069#Comment_81910069

My initial reaction when I first saw your response was sarky to the extent of, yes… what are YOU inferring then?!

Upon re-reading my brain cogs turned. I did not notice the specific difference to Beavis signage explicitly stating "Parking charge of: £85". However in my case:

• I specifically highlighted the signage wording of "up to £100" (not in comparison to PEvB)
• Signage prominence of the penalty charge vs the less prominent additional debt recovery fee
• I argued the additional fees, such as the "Debt recovery fees up to £70" in relation to PEvB
• Highlighted no wording of interest applied

The strong sentiment in the response was

• signage was clear at entry to direct motorists to terms and conditions
• T&Cs (regardless of clarity) is available for motorists to read (obviously in full as a good person should do when given T&Cs)
• T&Cs clearly specify all penalties
• tone - what was expected? you can read this sign, this sign tells you to go there, this sign explains t&cs
• Interest (oh man)
  • Interest was ALLOWED which seems to be straight forwardly this
    • Make a court claim for money
    • Late commercial payments
  • Signage T&Cs does not indicate interest (so goes against logic used towards T&Cs, thus relies on statutory interest?)
    • I was unaware of the aspect if money owed is <£5000

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/81906631#Comment_81906631

One of the first things immediately addressed by the judge to me, referring to the claimants evidence of signage at entry - is it clear and could I read its direction. In retrospect, this seems to set the sentiment.