Claim Form Ibis budget hounslow

Swedishcabbie

Hi all. 

I’ve recently been sent a claim form from the Civil National Business Centre, claimant is Civil Enforcement Ltd from Liverpool, re an unpaid parking charge at Ibis Budget Hounslow. funny thing is I did not use or enter the car park at any point, I simply carried out a U turn on the main public road, and during that manoeuvre the rear of my vehicle briefly faced the car park exit, which appears to be when the camera captured my registration. I appealed the charge but it was rejected, and the claim form has now arrived. Should I ignore it or formally acknowledge and defend it. 

Cheers.

SC

Coupon-mad

Show us their photos of this event, and the Particulars of Claim too (redact your VRM).

Was your car still on the public highway when the image was captured?! 

You should consider a counterclaim because this is data abuse. They had no 'reasonable cause' to get your DVLA data therefore you have a remedy in law for their breach of the Data Protection Act 2018.

Did you ever appeal to point this error out?

Gr1pr

Swedishcabbie said:

Hi all. 

I’ve recently been sent a claim form from the Civil National Business Centre, claimant is Civil Enforcement Ltd from Liverpool, and the claim form has now arrived. 

1)Should I ignore it 

2) or formally acknowledge and defend it. 

Cheers.

SC

1) Definitely not. 

2) Correct 

James_Poisson

You are dealing with a firm of scammers that are trying it on hoping you will fold under threats they use the Small Claims Process as a final push in their bullying but usually back out if it's defended.

I assume you backed into the area below in front of the gates, they usually use ANPR cameras to log time on site, from entrance to exit, in your case they won't have this only one image.

Show the POC it must be very vague about not conforming to the terms clearly displayed on site.

If it was here I would bet that area is council owned at least up to that gulley anyway.

Swedishcabbie

Yes, I did appeal and flagged the error, but they rejected it. I have just logged into their website using the reference number and VRM, and the photo evidence has disappeared. When I first got the PCN, I checked the footage and the entry photo showed a black vehicle similar to mine but with a different number plate. I mentioned this in the appeal, but no luck and it was rejected.

1505grandad

You have left the password in the highlighted box marked "Important Note".

Castle

1505grandad said:

You have left the password in the highlighted box marked "Important Note".

And the PCN reference showing!

Le_Kirk

With an issue date of 06/01/26 and providing you complete(d) the AoS after 11/01/26 and before or on 25/01/26 your defence deadline date is 4.00 p.m. on 09/02/26

Use the template defence for CEL in house.

Car1980

Personally I wouldn't use the template defence as you're defending thin air with it. If you over-defend it sounds like they have some sort
of case.

I'd use something brief and major on the strikeout e.g.

1. The Defendant did not enter the car park the Claimant purports to manage and merely performed a U turn on the public highway just outside the entrance.

2. The evidence on the Claimant's website contained photographs of a different vehicle with a different numberplate.

3. It appears the Claimant's ANPR cameras are poorly positioned and are capturing number plates outside their jurisdiction AND their computer system is clearly faulty, cross referencing completely different vehicles.

3. This was communicated to the Claimant, yet they refused to acknowledge that there was no merit to their demands for payment.

4. No contract whatsoever exists between the two parties.

5. It is submitted that the claim be struck out as having no cause of action under CPR 3.4(2)(a) (where a statement of case discloses no reasonable grounds for bringing a claim) or
a claim falling under rule 3.4(2)(b) - where it is vexatious, scurrilous or obviously ill-founded.

James_Poisson

Swedishcabbie said:

Yes, I did appeal and flagged the error, but they rejected it. I have just logged into their website using the reference number and VRM, and the photo evidence has disappeared. When I first got the PCN, I checked the footage and the entry photo showed a black vehicle similar to mine but with a different number plate. I mentioned this in the appeal, but no luck and it was rejected.

But they are claiming your vehicle was on site for 35 minutes, the reason that there are no photos now on the website is because it had been handed over to debt collectors.

Surely the NTK had the photos on it, I wouldn't put it past these scammers to falsify evidence as a trap.

Swedishcabbie

Car1980 said:

Personally I wouldn't use the template defence as you're defending thin air with it. If you over-defend it sounds like they have some sort
of case.

I'd use something brief and major on the strikeout e.g.

1. The Defendant did not enter the car park the Claimant purports to manage and merely performed a U turn on the public highway just outside the entrance.

2. The evidence on the Claimant's website contained photographs of a different vehicle with a different numberplate.

3. It appears the Claimant's ANPR cameras are poorly positioned and are capturing number plates outside their jurisdiction AND their computer system is clearly faulty, cross referencing completely different vehicles.

3. This was communicated to the Claimant, yet they refused to acknowledge that there was no merit to their demands for payment.

4. No contract whatsoever exists between the two parties.

5. It is submitted that the claim be struck out as having no cause of action under CPR 3.4(2)(a) (where a statement of case discloses no reasonable grounds for bringing a claim) or
a claim falling under rule 3.4(2)(b) - where it is vexatious, scurrilous or obviously ill-founded.

Agreed, that was my thinking too, will crack on as suggested. Thanks all for the replies!!

Regards

SC