Your browser isn't supported
It looks like you're using an old web browser. To get the most out of the site and to ensure guides display correctly, we suggest upgrading your browser now. Download the latest:

Welcome to the MSE Forums

We're home to a fantastic community of MoneySavers but anyone can post. Please exercise caution & report spam, illegal, offensive or libellous posts/messages: click "report" or email forumteam@.

Search
  • FIRST POST
    • Laurha31
    • By Laurha31 16th Dec 17, 11:01 AM
    • 8Posts
    • 1Thanks
    Laurha31
    County court claim form received!
    • #1
    • 16th Dec 17, 11:01 AM
    County court claim form received! 16th Dec 17 at 11:01 AM
    Can anyone help? I moved house in January and updated my driving licence but not my log book for my car as I didnít realise I had to do that. My ex partner has today dropped off a load of post and in it is some parking charges (private land not council) from October November and a county court claim form because I havenít responded.
    What should I do at this point I obviously canít not reply to the claim form but I didnít receive the letters?
    Thanks in advance.
Page 1
    • Quentin
    • By Quentin 16th Dec 17, 11:19 AM
    • 35,887 Posts
    • 20,111 Thanks
    Quentin
    • #2
    • 16th Dec 17, 11:19 AM
    • #2
    • 16th Dec 17, 11:19 AM
    Everyone is politely asked to read up on this in the Newbies FAQ thread near the top of the forum before starting a new thread

    Court claim is covered comprehensively in #2
    • KeithP
    • By KeithP 16th Dec 17, 1:11 PM
    • 7,683 Posts
    • 7,395 Thanks
    KeithP
    • #3
    • 16th Dec 17, 1:11 PM
    • #3
    • 16th Dec 17, 1:11 PM
    What is the date of issue of the claim form?
    .
    • pappa golf
    • By pappa golf 16th Dec 17, 1:15 PM
    • 8,706 Posts
    • 9,308 Thanks
    pappa golf
    • #4
    • 16th Dec 17, 1:15 PM
    • #4
    • 16th Dec 17, 1:15 PM
    Can anyone help? I moved house in January and updated my driving licence but not my log book for my car as I didnít realise I had to do that. My ex partner has today dropped off a load of post and in it is some parking charges (private land not council) from October November and a county court claim form because I havenít responded.
    What should I do at this point I obviously canít not reply to the claim form but I didnít receive the letters?
    Thanks in advance.
    Originally posted by Laurha31

    some parking charges (private land not council) from October November



    ok , so they start court action after no more than 8 weeks?


    now go and ask the ex for the origional letters , from a long time back
    • Laurha31
    • By Laurha31 17th Dec 17, 11:28 AM
    • 8 Posts
    • 1 Thanks
    Laurha31
    • #5
    • 17th Dec 17, 11:28 AM
    • #5
    • 17th Dec 17, 11:28 AM
    Itís the 13th December on the claim form. There was one parking charge and then two letters from solicitors which I didnít see. I got them all together yesterday. Iíve read the stickies it said if you get a claim form do a thread. Should I just pay it before it goes any further. Already up to £200 ish with costs
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 17th Dec 17, 3:42 PM
    • 58,434 Posts
    • 71,945 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    • #6
    • 17th Dec 17, 3:42 PM
    • #6
    • 17th Dec 17, 3:42 PM
    Also it!!!8217;s worth me pointing out....
    Originally posted by Laurha31
    No it isn't your fault, delete that post now.


    Should I just pay it before it goes any further. Already up to £200 ish with costs
    No. We win 99% of cases, and an odd case lost at a hearing, is less than £200! It doesn't go up.


    It!!!8217;s the 13th December on the claim form.
    Tell us when you've done the AOS online, as per the pictorial walk-through link in the Newbies sticky thread, then (after Christmas) show us your draft defence based on any other recent ones.
    Last edited by Coupon-mad; 17-12-2017 at 3:46 PM.
    PRIVATE PCN? DON'T PAY BUT DO NOT IGNORE IT TWO Clicks needed for advice:
    Top of the page: Home>>Forums>Household & Travel>Motoring>Parking Tickets, Fines & Parking - read the 'NEWBIES' FAQS thread!
    Advice to ignore is WRONG, unless in Scotland/NI.

    • Laurha31
    • By Laurha31 5th Jan 18, 11:04 AM
    • 8 Posts
    • 1 Thanks
    Laurha31
    • #7
    • 5th Jan 18, 11:04 AM
    • #7
    • 5th Jan 18, 11:04 AM
    CLAIM FORM DEFENCE ( I have no idea what I'm doing, can't make head nor tail of the stickies) Its a Gladstones as well.

    In the County Court Business Centre
    Claim Number: ___

    Between:

    Civil Enforcement Limited v ___

    Defence!Statement

    I am ---- the defendant in this matter and registered keeper of vehicle ___. I currently reside at ____.

    I deny I am liable for the entirety of the claim for each of the following reasons:

    1. The Claim Form issued on the ____ by Civil Enforcement Limited was not
    correctly filed under The Practice Direction as it was not signed by a legal person but signed by !!!8220;Civil Enforcement Limited (Claimant!!!8217;s Legal Representative)!!!8221;.

    2. This Claimant has not complied with pre-court protocol. And as an example as to why this prevents a full defence being filed at this time, a parking charge can be for trespass, breach of contract or a contractual charge. All these are treated differently in law and require a different defence. The wording of any contract will naturally be a key element in this matter, and a copy of the alleged contract has never been provided to the Defendant.

    a) There was no compliant !!!8216;Letter before County Court Claim!!!8217;, under the Practice Direction.

    b) This is a speculative serial litigant, issuing a large number of identical 'draft particulars'. The badly mail-merged documents contain very little information.

    c) The Schedule of information is sparse of detailed information.

    d) The Claim form Particulars were extremely sparse and divulged no cause of action nor sufficient detail. The Defendant has no idea what the claim is about - why the charge arose, what the alleged contract was; nothing that could be considered a fair exchange of information. The Claim form Particulars did not contain any evidence of contravention or photographs.

    e) The Defence therefore asks the Court to strike out the claim as having no reasonable prospect of success as currently drafted.

    f) Alternatively, the Defendant asks that the Claimant is required to file Particulars which comply with Practice Directions and include at least the following information;

    (i) Whether the matter is being brought for trespass, breach of contract or a contractual charge, and an explanation as to the exact nature of the charge
    (ii) A copy of any contract it is alleged was in place (e.g. copies of signage)
    (iii) How any contract was concluded (if by performance, then copies of signage maps in place at the time)
    (iv) Whether keeper liability is being claimed, and if so copies of any Notice to Driver / Notice to Keeper
    (v) Whether the Claimant is acting as Agent or Principal, together with a list of documents they will rely on in this matter
    (vi) If charges over and above the initial charge are being claimed, the basis on which this is being claimed
    (vii) If Interest charges are being claimed, the basis on which this is being claimed

    g) Once these Particulars have been filed, the Defendant asks for reasonable time to file another defence.

    3. The Claimant failed to meet the Notice to Keeper obligations of Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012. Absent such a notice served within 14 days of the parking event and with fully compliant statutory wording, this Claimant is unable to hold me liable under the strict !!!8216;keeper liability!!!8217; provisions.!

    Schedule 4 also states that the only sum a keeper can be pursued for (if Schedule 4 is fully complied with, which it was not, and if there was a 'relevant obligation' and relevant contract' fairly and adequately communicated, which there was not as there was no clear, transparent information about how to obtain a permit either inside or outside the site) is the sum on the Notice to Keeper. They cannot pluck another sum from thin air and bolt that on as well when neither the signs, nor the NTK, nor the permit information mentioned a possible £323.26 for outstanding debt and damages.

    4. The Claimant has added unrecoverable sums to the original parking charge. It is believed that the employee who drew up the paperwork is remunerated and the particulars of claim are templates, so it is simply not credible that £50 'legal representative!!!8217;s (or even admin) costs' were incurred. I deny the Claimant is entitled to any interest whatsoever.!

    5. This case can be distinguished from ParkingEye v Beavis [2015] UKSC 67 (the Beavis case) which was dependent upon an undenied contract, formed by unusually prominent signage forming a clear offer and which turned on unique facts regarding the location and the interests of the landowner. Strict compliance with the BPA Code of Practice (CoP) was paramount and Mr. Beavis was the driver who saw the signs and entered into a contract to pay £85 after exceeding a licence to park free. None of this applies in this material case.

    6. In the absence of any proof of adequate signage that contractually bound the Defendant then there can have been no contract and the Claimant has no case.

    a) The Claimant is put to strict proof that at the time of the alleged event they had both advertisement consent and the permission from the site owner to display the signs.

    b) In the absence of strict proof I submit that the Claimant was committing an offence by displaying their signs and therefore no contract could have been entered into between the driver and the Claimant.!

    c) Inadequate signs incapable of binding the driver - this distinguishes this case from the Beavis case:

    (i) Sporadic and illegible (charge not prominent nor large lettering) of site/entrance signage - breach of the POFA 2012 Schedule 4 and the BPA Code of Practice and no contract formed to pay any clearly stated sum.
    (ii) Non existent ANPR 'data use' signage - breach of ICO rules and the BPA Code of Practice.
    (iii) It is believed the signage and any terms were not transparent or legible; this is an unfair contract, not agreed by the driver and contrary to the Consumer Rights Act 2015 in requiring a huge inflated sum as 'compensation' from by an authorised party using the premises as intended.
    (iv) No promise was made by the driver that could constitute consideration because there was no offer known nor accepted. No consideration flowed from the Claimant.
    (v) The signs are believed to have no mention of any debt collection additional charge, which cannot form part of any alleged contract.

    d) BPA CoP breaches - this distinguishes this case from the Beavis case:!
    (i) the signs were not compliant in terms of the!font!size, lighting or positioning.
    (ii) the sum pursued exceeds £100.
    (iii) there is / was no compliant landowner contract.

    7. No standing - this distinguishes this case from the Beavis case:
    It is believed Civil Enforcement do not hold a legitimate contract at this car park. As an agent, the Claimant has no legal right to bring such a claim in their name which should be in the name of the landowner.

    8. No legitimate interest - this distinguishes this case from the Beavis case:
    This Claimant files serial claims regarding sites where they have lost the contract, known as revenge claims and it believed this is one such case. This is not a legitimate reason to pursue a charge out of proportion with any loss or damages the true landowner could pursue.!

    9. The Beavis case confirmed the fact that, if it is a matter of trespass (not breach of any contract), a parking firm has no standing as a non-landowner to pursue even nominal damages.

    10. The charge is an unenforceable penalty based upon a lack of commercial justification. The Beavis case confirmed that the penalty rule is certainly engaged in any case of a private parking charge and was only disengaged due to the unique circumstances of that case, which do not resemble this claim.

    The Defendant denies any liability whatsoever to the Claimant in any matter and asks the Court to note that the Claimant has:

    (a) Failed to disclose any cause of action in the incorrectly filed Claim Form issued on 12th June 2017.

    (b) Sent a template, well-known to be generic cut and paste 'Particulars' of claim relying on irrelevant case law (Beavis) which ignores the fact that this Claimant cannot hold registered keepers liable in law, due to their own choice of non-POFA documentation.

    The vague Particulars of Claim disclose no clear cause of action. The court is invited to strike out the claim of its own volition as having no merit and no reasonable prospects of success.

    I confirm that the above facts and statements are true to the best of my knowledge and recollection.

    Signed
    Date
    • Quentin
    • By Quentin 5th Jan 18, 11:58 AM
    • 35,887 Posts
    • 20,111 Thanks
    Quentin
    • #8
    • 5th Jan 18, 11:58 AM
    • #8
    • 5th Jan 18, 11:58 AM
    You are wanting to use pofa arguments yet have ignored the advice in #7 to delete #6

    The ppcs monitor this forum and can use your posts against you
    • The Deep
    • By The Deep 5th Jan 18, 12:21 PM
    • 9,499 Posts
    • 9,255 Thanks
    The Deep
    • #9
    • 5th Jan 18, 12:21 PM
    • #9
    • 5th Jan 18, 12:21 PM
    Have they mentioned Elliot v Loake?
    You never know how far you can go until you go too far.
    • Laurha31
    • By Laurha31 11th Jan 18, 12:42 PM
    • 8 Posts
    • 1 Thanks
    Laurha31
    whats that?!
    • Laurha31
    • By Laurha31 11th Jan 18, 12:48 PM
    • 8 Posts
    • 1 Thanks
    Laurha31
    Anyone any advice on my defence? Also do I need to request to change the court to my local court? many thanks
    • KeithP
    • By KeithP 11th Jan 18, 12:51 PM
    • 7,683 Posts
    • 7,395 Thanks
    KeithP
    whats that?!
    Originally posted by Laurha31
    I would've thought that sometime in the last six days you would've been able to find a moment to answer that question yourself.

    Anyway, whatever it is, have they mentioned Elliot v Loake?

    Do not miss any deadlines.
    .
    • KeithP
    • By KeithP 11th Jan 18, 12:54 PM
    • 7,683 Posts
    • 7,395 Thanks
    KeithP
    Also do I need to request to change the court to my local court? many thanks
    Originally posted by Laurha31
    That will be addressed after you defence has been sent to the court.

    Have another read of post #2 of the NEWBIES FAQ sticky thread which will guide you through this process.
    .
    • Laurha31
    • By Laurha31 11th Jan 18, 12:57 PM
    • 8 Posts
    • 1 Thanks
    Laurha31
    thank you. No they haven't.
    • KeithP
    • By KeithP 11th Jan 18, 1:09 PM
    • 7,683 Posts
    • 7,395 Thanks
    KeithP
    Have you checked that all the facts in your defence are relevant to your situation?

    The reason I ask is that in post #5 you tell us "Already up to £200 ish with costs".
    Yet in your defence statement you mention a figure of £323.26.
    .
    • Laurha31
    • By Laurha31 11th Jan 18, 1:18 PM
    • 8 Posts
    • 1 Thanks
    Laurha31
    its £162.35 amount claimed, £25 court fee and legal rep costs £50 total amount £237.35.
    I'm going to go through it and change this, just wanted to know if this is the most general one for a parking charge? thanks for your help
Welcome to our new Forum!

Our aim is to save you money quickly and easily. We hope you like it!

Forum Team Contact us

Live Stats

2,144Posts Today

7,843Users online

Martin's Twitter