Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I've inserted their poc re:your.. 1 ..they did send 2 paploc's  3. neither the agreement nor default is mentioned in their 2.        
    • Hi Guys, i read a fair few threads and saw a lot of similar templates being used. i liked this one below and although i could elaborate on certain things (they ignored my CCA and sent 2 PAPs etc etc) , am i right in that at this stage keep it short? If thats the case i cant see what i need to add/change about this one   1)   the defendant entered into a consumer credit act 1974 regulated agreements vanquis under account reference xxxxxxx 2)   The defendant failed to maintain the required payment, arrears began to accrue 3)   The agreement was later assigned to the claimant on 29 September 2017 and notice given to the defendant 4)   Despite repeated requests for payment, the sum of 2247.91 remains due outstanding And the claimant claims a)The said sum of £2247.91 b)The interest pursuant to S 69 county courts act 1984 at the rate of 8% per annum from the date of issue, accruing at a daily rate of £xxxx, but limited to one year,  being £xxxx c)Costs   Defence:   The Defendant contends that the particulars of claim vague and are generic in nature. The Defendant accordingly sets out its case below and relies on CPR r 16.5 (3) in relation to any particular allegation to which a specific response has not been made.   1. The Claimant has not complied with paragraph 3 of the PAPDC ( Pre Action Protocol) Failed to serve a letter of claim pre claim pursuant to PAPDC changes of the 1st October 2017.It is respectfully requested that the court take this into consideration pursuant to 7.1 PAPDC.   2. The Claimant claims £2247.91 is owed under a regulated consumer credit account under reference xxxxxxx. I do not recall the precise details or agreement and have sought verification from the claimant and the claimants solicitor by way of a CPR 31.14 and section 78 request who are yet to fully comply.   3. Paragraph 2 is denied. I am unable to recall the precise details of the alleged agreement or any default notice served in breach of any defaulted payments. 4. Paragraph 3 is denied.The Defendant contends that no notice of assignment pursuant to s.136 of the Law of Property Act & s.82 A of the CCA1974 has ever been served by the Claimant as alleged or at all.   5. It is therefore denied with regards to the Defendant owing any monies to the Claimant, the Claimant has failed to provide any evidence of assignment/balance/breach requested by CPR 31. 14, therefore the Claimant is put to strict proof to:   (a) show how the Defendant has entered into an agreement; and (b) show and evidence any cause of action and service of a Default Notice or termination notice; and © show how the Defendant has reached the amount claimed for; and (d) show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim;   6. After receiving this claim I requested by way of a CPR 31.14 request and a section 78 request for copies of any documents referred to within the Claimants' particulars to establish what the claim is for. To date they have failed to comply to my CPR 31.14 request and also my section 78 request and remain in default with regards to this request.   7. As per Civil Procedure Rule 16.5(4), it is expected that the Claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed.   8. On the alternative, as the Claimant is an assignee of a debt, it is denied that the Claimant has the right to lay a claim due to contraventions of Section 136 of the Law of Property Act and Section 82A of the consumer credit Act 1974.   9. By reasons of the facts and matters set out above, it is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief.  
    • i understand. Just be aware I am prepared to take some risks 😉
    • Thanks Tnook,   Bear with us while we discuss this behind the scenes - we want you to win just as much as you do but we want to find the right balance between maximising your claim without risking too much in court fees, and in possible court costs awarded to the defendant bank.
    • Tell your son and think on this. He can pay the £160  and have no further worries from them. If he read POFA  Scedule 4 he would find out that if he went to Court and lost which is unlikely on two counts at least [1] they don't do Court and 2] they know they would lose in Court] the most he would be liable to pay them is £100 or whatever the amount on the sign says. He is not liable for the admin charges as that only applies to the driver-perhaps.If he kept his nerve, he would find out that he does not owe them a penny and that applies to the driver as well. But we do need to see the signage at the entrance to the car park and around the car park as well as any T&Cs on the payment meter if there is one. He alone has to work out whether it is worth taking a few photographs to help avoid paying a single penny to these crooks as well as receiving letters threatening him with Court , bailiffs  etc trying to scare him into paying money he does not owe. They know they cannot take him to Court. They know he does not owe them a penny. But they are hoping he does not know so he pays them. If he does decide to pay, tell him to wait as eventually as a last throw of the dice they play Mister Nice Guy and offer a reduction. Great. Whatever he pays them it will be far more than he owes as their original PCN is worthless. Read other threads where our members have been ticketed for not having a permit. [We know so little about the situation that we do not know if he has a permit and forgot to display it. ]
  • Our picks

style="text-align:center;"> Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 1084 days.

If you are trying to post a different story then you should start your own new thread. Posting on this thread is likely to mean that you won't get the help and advice that you need.

If you are trying to post information which is relevant to the story in this thread then please flag it up to the site team and they will allow you to post.

Thank you

Recommended Posts

You've helped me once before (post4830039) with a 'parking charge notice'. I don't think I actually need help this time, but wanted to post on this site for general awareness in case there's a pattern in how this firm operates.

 

I parked in a car park where controls are effective 08:00-18:30. The PCN shows I entered the car park at 18:08:25. I purchased a ticket (which I still have) at 18:12, paying £2 for 20 minutes as I didn't have anything smaller. The ticket I purchased shows the expiry time as 18:32 (ie, 2 minutes after parking controls ceased to be effective).

 

 

Today I received a PCN from CEL citing 'Payment not made in accordance with the terms displayed on the signage'. I've gone back and checked the sign and I can't see any term that I failed to comply with:

- I paid the fee

- the ticket was purchased within 10 minutes of entering the car park

- I didn't exceed the maximum stay

 

Although I said I don't think I need help on this, any offered would be appreciated especially if you spot something I've missed. Otherwise I will email CEL advising the above facts and that if they don't withdraw the charge they must stipulate exactly which term or terms they believe I contravened, with the effective date of the charge being the date they reply.

 

Incidentally, I only received notification of the supposed offence 3 weeks later and it's pure luck that I still have the ticket. What does anyone do in the situation where no parking notice was issued at the time and the ticket has been discarded? It seems pretty outrageous to me that these parking cowboys have the law on their side in cases like this...

Car Park Signage.jpg

PCN2.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You are right about the fact they are the least honest of a buch of chancers.

 

 

Also note that the car park sign says Star park, which according to Companies House is nothing to do with CEL (in reality the same bandit runs both) so no contract with them can be formed anyway.

 

You could send them a letter denying any breach of contract by the driver (most important not to say that was you) and invite them to cut to the quick and sue you as you ahve your patment receipt in your hand as you write and will be happy to go for a costs order under CPR27 as their claim is vexatious and malicious.

 

Also let the landowners know that you are suffering from an attempted fraud by their agents and you hold them responsible and will name them as a co-respondent in any legal action brought about.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi

In the small print of the first sign it states CEL's name and address however this should make no difference to the 'charge'

 

My suspicion is that they have started the timer at 18:08 and although your ticket shows 18:32, they will see it as having expired at 18:28.

 

So, no grace period at the end of the parking period as prescribed in the BPA rules.

You paid £2 and although the ticket only said 20 minutes, you could have bought two sets of 20 minutes. I remember a case a while back where a guy got a ticket for overstaying but had purchased two tickets to cover the entire time on site. He won his case at court. While yours is slightly similar, I doubt it will ever get that far as POPLA should cancel this.

 

I would send the letter EB has suggested however I would just state that no breach has occurred thereby either cancel the ticket or issue a POPLA code. Don't give them any ammunition to bash you with.


If you are asked to deal with any matter via private message, PLEASE report it.

Everything I say is opinion only. If you are unsure on any comment made, you should see a qualified solicitor

Please help CAG. Order this ebook. Now available on Amazon. Please click HERE

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, thanks for the advice. Below is the email I sent them:

 

"Dear Civil Enforcement Ltd

 

I was mystified to receive the above vexatious claim which was bereft of any specific detail relating to the alleged parking incident.

 

I have the ticket that was purchased and have checked the sign for the car park, and there is clearly no breach of contract with you or anyone else. You should either cancel the ‘charge’ or issue a POPLA code."

I received an automated reply saying they will reply in writing within 28 days (!) & will update here when I receive it.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

dont

invite them to offer a POPLA code,

they get into trouble if they dont

so let them do the running and offer you one.

 

Never use email,

always send letter in post with POP from post office.

 

They now have a method of harassing you for free.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I now have a letter informing me that my appeal was unsuccessful. The only clarification on the reason for the ticket is that it was issued "for exceeding the parking time paid for". The letter also states that "further details as to why the appeal was unsuccessful can be found on the attached pages". None of the 36 generic FAQ type responses offer any explanation relevant for this case. They've kindly reset the clock on the 14 days to pay at the reduced rate, which is a nice touch, and given me a POPLA code. They've also explained that I have the right to apply via POPLA to the Ombudsman Services (who administer POPLA...)

 

 

To recap, there are 4 relevant terms on the car park sign:

 

 

1. "£1 - 20 minutes": I paid for 20 minutes

2. "Payment must be made within 10 minutes of arrival". Arrived at 18:08:25 (as per the parking charge notice) and paid at 18:12 (as per ticket), well within 10 minutes.

3. "These terms apply Monday to Sunday 8AM - 6:30PM": Ticket purchased at 18:12, expired at 18:32.

4. "Maximum Stay 4 Hours": I entered at 18:08:25 and left at 20:18:17, ie 2hrs 10mins

 

 

I'll lodge an appeal with POPLA today & all being equal expect that they will just cancel CEL's parking charge notice (which they refer to as an "Enforcement Notice" in their rejection letter).

 

 

If anyone wants to offer any advice on how I can lodge the POPLA appeal in such a way that it helps flag problems with the legislation that allows companies like CEL to harass and generate revenue I'm happy to include that and pursue it further.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

yep, go to POPLA because it will cost them money anyway. Their rejection letter gave you the details of how to appeal? If not that is a breach in itself.

POPLA are paid for by the parking companies and have a very limited remit inasmuch as to what they can and cant do the old POLA applied the law, OmbudsmanServices Ltd dances to the tune of those who pay them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

POPLA replied today advising that CEL doesn't wish to contest my appeal, which really wasn't a surprise as they had no grounds for rejecting my initial appeal to them in the first place.

 

 

Given that they really do seem to be a bunch of rogues, I may just become a serial 'offender' and follow exactly the same scenario a few more times...

 

 

Thanks for the advice EB & SF. Donation on it's way...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Glad we could help. CEL knew they hadn't a leg to stand on. I will update this thread to show the result.


If you are asked to deal with any matter via private message, PLEASE report it.

Everything I say is opinion only. If you are unsure on any comment made, you should see a qualified solicitor

Please help CAG. Order this ebook. Now available on Amazon. Please click HERE

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

glad it panned out OK. If you do get another demand for the same type of thing it might well be worth considering suing them for breaches of the DPA but for the moment by happy with your result.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...