Parking solve [Civil Enforcement Ltd] claimform 3yrs later!!

[Timpg]

Hi guys .

 

I received a parking ticket from 'civil parking enforcement' after my partner overstayed in a local retail park in Ipswich

(im the registered owner by the way)

 

 

they want £75 now or £150 after two weeks.

 

 

I know the advice is to ignore but I can't help but be bit concerned of bailiffs turning up at my house and court threats.

 

 

in all seriousness,

 

 

what do you think I should do and what do you think will happen if I was to ignore?

 

 

alot of the advice iv found in previous threads has been 3-4 yrs old

 

 

so wondered if anything has changed?

 

 

many thanks

[DBC]

Nothing has changed. Just ignore. As for "bailiffs turning up at your door". For that to happen the case would have to go to court , you lose and then you fail to pay whatever the judge orders within 28 days. As this is never going to go to court, then you have nothing to worry about.

[Timpg]

Hi thankyou for the reply!

 

 

okay then,ignore it is lol!i

 

 

just wanted to be sure that I wouldn't get any grief such as me car being taken away

or harassed by bailiffs or nothing,

 

 

iv got far more important things in life to worry about than a parking ticket

 

 

that I didn't even wrongly park myself to incur lol,cheers again

[ericsbrother]

Dont bin the letters, file them away nicely but dont be tempted to read them otherwise you might start believing in the tooth fairy, father christmas, etc. No-one can take your car away or send certified bailiffs to your house because there is no debt.

[Timpg]

Hi guys.

 

 

Well nearly 3 years since I originally received this 'invoice' and

 

 

today, I received through the post, a four page letter from civil enforcement

saying they still haven't received anything.

 

 

They say Iv got one last opportunity to pay up otherwise I'm being taken to court.

 

 

It then has a dodgy looking draft copy of the supposed conflict between myself and civil enforcement Ltd

( some sort of scare tactic ).

 

 

Then the rear two pages are an account of some made up story

where someone got taken to Supreme Court over a parking ticket and lost

ending up paying loads of money!!!

 

 

thought I'd heard the last of this lot!!

 

 

Seems they're well desperate, or has the law changed on parking tickets in the last 3 years???

[Bazooka Boo]

They are well and truly out of time for any legal action to take place, I believe they are hoping that they may be able to resurrect this on the back of the Beavis v PE case. You can still ignore them due to the age of it.

 

New PPC cases the advice has now changed, whereby you should wait for the NTK before you appeal.

 

But the Beavis v P.E. case isn't retrospective so they fail.

[Timpg]

Cheers mate.

 

 

As you can see I originally posted this thread back in Feb 2013.

 

 

So it's been a while haha!

 

 

I never contacted them at all either.

 

 

Sorry for my inexperience with these sort of things, but what's an NTK?

 

 

I shall continue to ignore, the letter seems to resemble something that was thrown together in a hurry,

 

 

no coat of arms emblem in the corner as was on previous letters from them, looks very diy!

 

 

As soon as I saw it I thought [problem]!

[Bazooka Boo]

Sorry NTK = Notice to keeper

[ericsbrother]

CEL dont like the inside of courts,

they dislike them so much they dont even turn up when they have been charged with criminal offences

so I wouldnt be too worried by this latest threat.

 

 

They are hoping that you will cough up as they desperately need the money

having lost nearly all of their income streams.

 

 

You could do a little search of Companies House

where you will see that the relationship between CEL and Parksolve isnt registered as required by law.

 

 

A minor matter for them, they continually claim they are linked and then they aren't so take your pick.

 

 

However, the upshot is they MAY issue court papers but they wont follow it to the end if you file a defence.

The most likely outcome is they will knock it on the head a day before the hearing date

and save themselves a bundle for wasting the court's time but putting you to a lot of inconvenience.

[Timpg]

Hi guys me again!!

 

 

Well after a recent house move,

I have just received some redirected post from my previous address,

in which includes a letter from the court with a claim from civil parking enforcement.

 

 

So what now then guys?

 

 

Do I fill out the defence?

 

 

And what would you suggest I state?

 

 

Bare in mind I wasn't the driver, and the supposed offence was commited a few years ago in a free car park!!

 

 

Cheers

[honeybee13]

Hello there.

 

I expect more knowledgeable people will be along later. Could you type of the POCs [Particulars of Claim] please, without identifying info.

 

While you're waiting, here's a link to the forum stikky about claim forms.

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?395511-Received-Court-Papers-From-A-Private-parking-Speculative-invoice-How-To-Deal-With-It-HERE***

 

HB

[ericsbrother]

You must acknowledge the claim and say you intend to defend in full.

 

If you want a simple skeleton defence you can say that you were not the driver at the time

and that the event precedes the Protection of Freedoms Act of Nov 2012

and so there is no keeper liability.

 

 

In any case Park Solve and CEL have nothing to do with each other legally speaking

so there has been no assignment from Park Solve to CEL to create a cause of action so CEL have no locus standi.

 

If they dont drop the claim when it comes to having to pay the allocation fee

there are more things you can write to make a full defence but this will do.

 

 

They normally give up at this point as 75% of people receiving one of their dodgy claims pay up

as they think it is the end of the world if they dont.

[Bazooka Boo]

Jeezus wept!! They just don't know when to give up do they!

 

BBC Watchdog might like your story too? Be a good laugh to see them ridiculed in the media.

[ericsbrother]

BB,

they are doing this in a fit of pique as their clients rumble them and give them the boot

and I think they will just wind up the company and carry on with on of their alter egos.

 

 

They have told the SRA and several courts that the mulitude of companies

the leading players are involved in are related or subsidiaries.

 

 

They just failed to tell Companies House or list the correct directors for that to be true

so they are either crooks or liars but possibly both.

 

The regulation of their activities seems to fall between 2 stools so they carry on with apparent impunity.

 

But hey, I bet they give a lot of money to charity.

[Bazooka Boo]

Well only a matter of time IMO before they are go the same way as their previous employment, clamping cars!

[Timpg]

You must acknowledge the claim and say you intend to defend in full.

If you want a simple skeleton defence you can say that you were not the driver at the time and that the event precedes the Protection of Freedoms Act of Nov 2012 and so there is no keeper liability. In any case Park Solve and CEL have nothing to do with each other legally speaking so there has been no assignment from Park Solve to CEL to create a cause of action so CEL have no locus standi.

If they dont drop the claim when it comes to having to pay the allocation fee there are more things you can write to make a full defence but this will do. They normally give up at this point as 75% of people receiving one of their dodgy claims pay up as they think it is the end of the world if they dont.

 

So in simple terms ( you'll have to excuse me, I'm not very clued up on these things ).

 

 

I acknowledge the claim, fill out the form stating I defend the claim.

 

 

Then go on to say I was not the driver at the time of the supposed offence.

 

 

Should I also mention that the car park was a free carpal to park in?

 

 

Just kinda need to know the correct info to state in the defence section.

 

 

Cheers guys

[ericsbrother]

just use the words in my post in the section of the form that is for your defence.

 

 

Dont mention anything else at this juncture.

 

 

I bet they then give up.

 

 

If use use the moneyclaimonline portal you can keep an eye on the dates they have to take the next step

by nad whack in a motion to strike out if they are late with the allocation fee etc.

 

you were not the driver at the time and that the event precedes the Protection of Freedoms Act of Nov 2012

and so there is no keeper liability.

 

 

In any case Park Solve and CEL have nothing to do with each other legally speaking

so there has been no assignment from Park Solve to CEL to create a cause of action so CEL have no locus standi.

[Timpg]

just use the words in my post in the section of the form that is for your defence.

 

 

Dont mention anything else at this juncture.

 

 

I bet they then give up.

 

 

 

 

If use use the moneyclaimonline portal you can keep an eye on the dates they have to take the next step

by nad whack in a motion to strike out if they are late with the allocation fee etc.

 

you were not the driver at the time and that the event precedes the Protection of Freedoms Act of Nov 2012

and so there is no keeper liability.

 

 

In any case Park Solve and CEL have nothing to do with each other legally speaking

so there has been no assignment from Park Solve to CEL to create a cause of action so CEL have no locus standi.

 

Well my defence has been submitted. I had to do it online, as I received the court summons as redirected post from my previous address ( recently moved house ), I had like 1 day to get the forms to court!!! But all done now. I stated what you posted, let's wait and see what the outcome is! Cheers guys!!

[ericsbrother]

OK, beware that they may try sending things to your old addy in an attempt to get one over on you, as the courts have your current address this wont do them any good but doesnt stop them being dishonest