Civil Enforcement Witness Statement

Coupon-mad

Yes, sufficient detail of the term / breach has to be pleaded.

micramadness

Well I've submitted my docs, but not had anything from CE. Deadline was 4pm today.

I'm hoping this means they're not invested in this case and will let it go... Any idea how I can check if they've paid the fee (also due today)?

Le_Kirk

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/81888595#Comment_81888595

You can phone the court to which your case was allocated.

micramadness

Well they did pay on the last day possible, but they didn't submit evidence or a WS (yet). Deadline for WS is 4pm on the 4th so I'm looking through mine again now. Is this usual for CE? From what I have seen they sometimes turn up, sometimes don't…

micramadness

Hi all,

So at about 12:30 today I received a new WS from CE. I was about to, and did, submit mine as I have other unavoidable commitments this afternoon and can't review my statement appropriately. However, I did include in my WS (largely as previously posted above) that if a new WS was submitted by the claimant I will submit a supplementary WS, which I will do asap.

I have a few questions about their WS, and of course welcome comments and advice.

• they have included exhibits, but my understanding is that all documents has to be submitted by 17th Feb - see previous post with court deadlines. Witness statement deadline is today 4pm but I thought exhibits had to be submitted in advance?
• the entrance signage they have submitted is not from the main car entrance - I will do a circuit of the car park later to see where it is from. Their signage is also almost a year later than the incident and has increased charges (I have evidence I paid 1.70).
• In their covering letter they state that the witness will not be attending but a counsel representative and they have informed the court.
• They have also offered £135 to cancel it, sorely tempted at this stage but I've got this far...
• I haven't had a chance to look through the WS in detail but there are a few things I'd challenge (that I couldn't submit another appeal which they say is possible but internal appeals was closed after my first one about the 14 days)

I will draft a response asap and post here for comment.

I was hoping for a brief reprieve until the hearing date but it will be another late night tonight.

I will upload their exhibits when I have a chance later.

micramadness

These are the exhibits, no idea where the entrance sign is, it's not the main entrance.

The exhibits don't have page numbers as the court specified and, as I said above, they have only been submitted today, not the 17th Feb, does this mean they can't be considered?

What follows is a PDT printout from the day which DOES include our other vehicle at the expected time, as suspected and mentioned in my WS, confirming this as a major keying error.

I'll start drafting a supplemental WS later. All advice v welcome.

Gr1pr

The standard deadline for Exhibits is the same deadline as the WS , unless the judge has specified differently in your court order, so check ALL deadlines and dates in that court order, because its the same deadlines for CEL, as well as the defendant

micramadness

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/81909647#Comment_81909647

I interpreted documents as exhibits? So 17th February?

kryten3000

I don't see a contract in that bundle. Their "authority" document is no better than a self-penned note to a teacher: "Johnny is excused games today because he's hurt his foot, signed my Mum".

It's usually enough to keep POPLA happy but it's not sufficient. The contract is missing because they don't have one in the name of Civil Enforcement Limited.

Johnersh

If Syed Abbas Ali is a solicitor, his regulator doesn't think he works for Civil Enforcement Ltd, but Creative Car Park Ltd, so which is it? None of this appears to be from within his own knowledge but is recitation from the contents of a company computer system. It is commentary not evidence.

Vine v Waltham has been quoted in a misleading fashion, omitting the operative part of the paragraph - namely that the lower court was perfectly entitled to make a factual finding that bad signage can lead to no contract. It's probably irrelevant if D paid for parking.

As indeed it is irrelevant what local authorities charge for parking and which, I might hasten to add, is probably not within the witnesses own knowledge in any event. He is neither an expert witness nor a local authority employee. Since ppcs cannot tow or immobilise one wanders what the value of that narrative is at all, other than perhaps an attempt to try and make their opaque additional fees appear reasonable.

In Beavis the penalty rule was engaged given the size of the charge (albeit it was not a penalty). Here where D can show a payment and departure within the hour, there is no commercial loss - the required fees and departure was made. That is different to Beavis since he did not vacate parking in time for other customers, which impinges the traders on site. This is a charge which is purely punitive. His witness evidence describes anpr and manual cross referencing, sho why not simply manually do the reconciliation? It is wholly disproportionate and inconsistent with the code if practice they say that they subscribe to.

The signatory to the contract, such as it is, Mehdi Parry Williams, was not in 2020 and never has been a company director of the relevant company. There's no evidence she was properly authorised to bind the company.

The interest is claimed from the parking event, but there are numerous additional charges imposed and no attempt to reflect the correct periods of interest. Interest is discretionary. The bolt on sums are not specified or broken down but generic sums equivalent to a liquidated damages sum imposed in addition to the proposed penalty. Said to be contractual, they are in fact entirely unspecified.