Civil Enforcement Witness Statement

Castle

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/81909813#Comment_81909813

Civil Enforcement Ltd has no employees, (other than a Director).

Jame4ters

CEL and CCPL have the same ultimate parent entity but are different companies and any agreement for one of those companies to manage a site has to be in that company’s name

micramadness

Hi all,

Many thanks for your comments.

A combination of things mean I am much later drafting this than intended. I'd be grateful for your comments - will send tomorrow (Monday) lunchtime.

I wonder if some of my points aren't relevant, but equally I haven't included all of the points raised by other above - maybe I should?

IN THE COUNTY COURT AT xxx (SMALL CLAIMS TRACK) AT xxxx on the 18th March 2026 

CLAIM NUMBER: xxxx

Between

CIVIL ENFORCEMENT LIMITED (Claimant)

V

xxx (Defendant)

Supplementary Witness Statement of Defendant

1. I am xxx of xxx and I am the defendant against whom this claim is made. The facts below are true to the best of my belief and my account has been prepared based upon my own knowledge.

Introduction

2. In paragraph 40 of my original Witness Statement I reserved the right to submit a Supplementary Witness Statement should the Claimant submit new documents and evidence. I received the Claimant Witness Statement of Syed Abbas Ali at 11:44am on the court ordered deadline of 4th March 2026, as I submitted my own.

3. I am submitting this Supplementary Witness Statement to provide additional points relevant to my defence against the claim made against me. This statement serves to support my original Defendant Witness Statement dated 3rd March 2026 and addresses the following key issues:

1. Service of Claimant’s Documents
2. Authorities and inaccuracies in the documents and Witness Statement submitted by the Claimant.
3. Further points considering the evidence submitted

Service of Claimant’s Documents

4. The court deadline for the submission of documents was by 4pm 17th February 2025. At this time only the Claimant’s original Witness Statement of Scott Wilson was submitted, which included a single document for evidence.

5. I therefore request that the Documents submitted with the Witness Statement of Syed Abbas Ali be disallowed. They were submitted outside the timescale and were not part of a Supplementary Witness Statement in response to new evidence or any new submission by myself, the Defendant. 

Authorities and inaccuracies in the documents and Witness Statement submitted by the Claimant

6. The Claimant’s Witness Statement and Documents are not paginated, as directed by the court, and there are misleading and wrong Exhibit references (for example in their paragraph 41).

7. According to the Solicitors Regulation Authority, Syed Abbas Ali is a solicitor for Creative Car Park Ltd, not Civil Enforcement Ltd. Both companies have the same ultimate parent entity but are different companies and any agreement for one of those companies to manage a site has to be in that company’s name.

8. The signatory to the sparse contract in the Claimant’s Exhibit SAA1 (if this is to be allowed) is xxx, who 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.

9. The parking sign in the Claimant’s Exhibit SAA2 (if this is to be allowed) is not the sign at the main vehicular entrance to the car park. It is the Entrance Sign on their Level 1 (Exhibit SAA3) which has no access to the rest of the car park and has different terms and conditions due to its association with a shop on the same floor.

10. In the Claimant’s paragraph 39 they claim that an appeal was possible after my initial appeal, yet in their response to my appeal in Exhibit SAA8 they state I ‘have reached the end of their internal appeals procedure’ and indeed the appeals portal was no longer available when I tried to register a further appeal for the potential keying error.

Further points considering the evidence submitted

11. The Claimant has still not specified which term was breached. However, in page 8 of their Exhibit SAA9, the transaction at 15:54 is for the VRM specified in my Witness Statement as the suspected error (see my Exhibit 008). The submission of the PDT list, despite previous requests, now confirms a major keying error.

12. In the Syed Abbas Ali Witness Statement the reference to ParkingEye v Beavis [2015] UKSC67 (“the Beavis case”) is misleading in this case. In Beavis the penalty rule was engaged given the size of the charge (albeit it was not a penalty). Here where I 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 therefore a charge which is purely punitive. It is wholly disproportionate and inconsistent with the code they say that they subscribe to.

13. Given the unclear authorities of the Claimant’s Witness and contract signatory, the late submission of Documents and various errors or poor attention to the detail of the case, as well as the points raised in my Defence and Witness Statement,  I respectfully request that the case be dismissed.

Costs claimed

14. I request costs for my attendance and Litigant in Person preparation costs (CPR 27.14(2)(g)), revised schedule to follow.

15. I also request a finding of unreasonable conduct by the Claimant, opening up further costs (CPR 46.5).

Statement of Truth

I believe that the facts stated in this witness statement are true. I understand that proceedings for contempt of court may be brought against anyone who makes, or causes to be made, a false statement in a document verified by a statement of truth without an honest belief in its truth.

Coupon-mad

i'd also say that this new WS of Abbas Ali starts with no less than twenty-six paragraphs of prolix, including:

• completely irrelevant commentary about Local Authority bailiff fees;
• words from Vine v Waltham Forest taken out of context. This Claimanthas used this template witness statement for many years, misleading courts by quoting out of context Roch LJ's words which in fact related to a summary of the Respondent’s losing case, and not from the decision. In fact, Miss Vine won because it was held as a fact that she was not afforded a fair opportunity to learn of the terms by which she would be bound.

The so-called witness only finally gets to the point at paragraph 27 and none of the supposed facts are within his knowledge because Abbas Ali only replaced the outgoing (ex-Wonga Head of Legal), Scott Wilson a few weeks ago.

THE WHITE BOOK SAYS:

“Unfortunately, rules, practice directions and guidance as to the content of witness statements appear to be habitually ignored by practitioners. Periodically, the Court of Appeal and individual trial judges have criticised lawyers for overloading witness statements with material that should not be included.”

In JD Wetherspoon plc v Harris and others [2013] EWHC 1088 (Ch), Sir Terence Etherton, the Chancellor of the High Court, stated that the vast majority of a witness statement contained a recitation of facts based on the documents, commentary on those documents, argument, submissions and expressions of opinion; in all those respects the witness statement was an abuse.

Shortly after, in Renaissance Capital Ltd v African Minerals Ltd [2014] EWHC 004 (Comm), Field J considered: ’There has been an increasing trend in Commercial Court trials for factual witness statements to get longer and longer and to indulge in speculation, advocacy and submissions rather than relate concisely what the witness did or heard or observed…This trend to produce over lengthy and argumentative witness statements must stop.’

micramadness

Hi all,

My hearing was adjourned from 17th to 18th March.

I emailed yesterday as still no paper bundle from the claimant as ordered in the court docs (and no electronic one with any of my docs or ws, let alone sws).

Spent an eye watering amount on printing today.

Received an email that the claim has been discontinued!

So.... I'll leave it to coupon-mad to announce.

What do you think my chances are of claiming for costs?

Coupon-mad

Oooh well done - congrats!

ANOTHER CEL ONE BITES THE DUST!

Flipping heck, they discontinued on the original day of the hearing, with you presumably having taken a day off work specially (today or tomorrow?).

Did you travel & attend today as well, only to see it adjourned?

I think you will get your costs. Time off work and printing costs at least.

This is a VERY late discontinuance from CEL and they were in breach of the Hearing Order with a prolix WS of legal argument and irrelevant narrative from a newly-employed CEL lawyer who had nothing about the facts of this case or the car park, in his personal knowledge. Wholly unreasonable.

See the 2 examples in the NEWBIES thread post 2, about getting costs after a very late discontinuance and how to word your email to the court.