Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Russia’s economy has been cut off from the global financial system - but it is still growing. Why?View the full article
    • Well done. Are you able to tell us more about how it went on the day please? HB
    • when mediation call they will ask the same 3 questions that are in their email you had to accept it going forward. simply state 'i do not have enough information from the claimant to make an informed decision upon mediation so i refuse. end of problem.  
    • Food prices, including a $40 chicken, has stoked fury and calls for big foreign supermarket chains to come to Canada.View the full article
    • Which Court have you received the claim from ? Civil National Business CEntre Name of the Claimant ? Lowell Portfolio i Ltd How many defendant's  joint or self ? Self   Date of issue –  15 Feb 2024 Particulars of Claim What is the claim for – the reason they have issued the claim?  The claim is for the sum of £922 due by the Defendant under and agreement regulated by the Consumer Credit Act 1974 for a Capital One account with an account reference of [number with 16 digits] The Defendant failed to maintain contractual payments required by the agreement and a Default Notice was served under s.87(1) of the Consumer Credit ACt 1974 which has not been complied with. The debt was legally assigned to the claimant on 16-06-23, notice of which has been given to the defendant. The claim includes statutory interest under S.69 of the County Courts Act 1984 at a rate of 8% per annum from the date of assignment to the date of the issue of these proceedings in the sum of £49.15 The Claimant claims the sum of £972 What is the total value of the claim? £1112 Have you received prior notice of a claim being issued pursuant to paragraph 3 of the PAPDC (Pre Action Protocol) ? I dont know the details of the PAPDC to know if it was pursuant to paragraph 3, but I did receive a Letter of Claim with a questionaire/form to fill. Have you changed your address since the time at which the debt referred to in the claim was allegedly incurred? No Is the claim for - a Bank Account (Overdraft) or credit card or loan or catalogue or mobile phone account? Credit Card When did you enter into the original agreement before or after April 2007 ? no Do you recall how you entered into the agreement...On line /In branch/By post ? Online Is the debt showing on your credit reference files (Experian/Equifax /Etc...) ? Yes Has the claim been issued by the original creditor or was the account assigned and it is the Debt purchaser who has issued the claim. Assigned/purchaser Were you aware the account had been assigned – did you receive a Notice of Assignment? I was aware, I'm not certain I received a 'Notice of Assignment' from Capital One but may have been informed the account had been sold without such a title on the letter? Did you receive a Default Notice from the original creditor? Yes Have you been receiving statutory notices headed “Notice of Sums in Arrears”  or " Notice of Arrears "– at least once a year ? Not since the debt purchase, and not from Capital One. Why did you cease payments? I can't remember - it was the tail end of the pandemic and I may not have had enough income to keep up payments - I am self-employed and work in the event industry - at that time. I also had a bank account that didn't allow direct debits and may have just forgotten payments and became annoyed at fines for late payments. What was the date of your last payment? Appears to be 20/4/2022 Was there a dispute with the original creditor that remains unresolved? No Did you communicate any financial problems to the original creditor and make any attempt to enter into a debt management plan? No Here is my Defence: Defence - 1. The Defendant contends that the particulars of claim are vague and 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. 2. Paragraph 1 is noted. I have in the past had an agreement with Capital One but do not recognise this specific account number or recollect any outstanding debt and have therefore requested clarification by way of a CPR 31.14 and section 78 request.. 3. Paragraph 2 is denied. I am unaware of having been served with a Default Notice pursuant to the Consumer Credit Act 1974. 4. Paragraph 3 is denied. I am unaware of any legal assignment or Notice of Assignment pursuant to the Law and Property Act 1925 Section 136(1) 5. The Defendant has sent a request by way of a section 78 pursuant to the Consumer Credit Act 1974, for a copy of the agreement, the Claimant has yet to comply and remains in default of said request. 6. A further request has been made via CPR 31.14 to the Claimants solicitor, requesting disclosure of documents on which the Claimant is basing their claim. The Claimant has not complied and to date nothing has been received. 7. It is therefore not accepted with regards to the Defendant owing any monies to the Claimant and the Claimant is put to strict proof to: a) show how the Defendant has entered into an agreement and; b) show how the Claimant has reached the amount claimed for and; c) show the nature of the breach and evidence by way of a Default Notice pursuant to sec 88 CCA1974 d) show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim 8. As per Civil Procedure 16.5 it is expected that the claimants prove the allegation that the money is owed 9. 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 10. 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. .................. Please note that I had to write a defence quite quickly as I hit the deadline. At the time of writing the defence, I hadn't been able to find correspondence from Capital One, but had since found default letter etc. I submitted CCA request and CPR 31.14. However, I didn't get any proof of postage or use registered post for the CPR (an oversight) but did with the CCA request. I received a pack which included a letter from Overdales, going over the defence I'd filed, as well as letters of Lowells and reprints of letters from Capital One. But I have no idea if this pack is in response to the CCA request or the CPR ! I would have expected two separate responses ... although I do know they are both the same company. Looking over the pack today, and looking through old emails .. I find some discrepancies in the Capital One default letters (notice of default and Claim of default). They are both dated *before* an email I have stating that a default can be avoided. The one single page of agreement sent (so not the full agreement) has a 16 digit number at the top in small print, next to 'Capital One' which corresponds to a number called 'PURN' printed at the top of each of the 10 pages of ins and outs of the account (they're not official statements, but a list of monthly goings) yet no mention anywhere on either of the account number. I cant really scan them at the moment - I can later tomorrow, but that will be after the mediation call I'm sure. I guess I may be on my own for this mediation ... I am not certain the CCA request has been satisfied .. or if the CPR has been . And then I appear to have evidence that the Default notices provided are fabricated ? Yet, I do have (elsewhere ... not at home) Default letters from Capital One I can check ..
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like
  • Recommended Topics

Parking Eye claimform - ANPR PCN Lido car park, Cliftonville, Kent BB on Display


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2145 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

your defence is due by 4pm Friday the 17th

 

you'll be using the simple 2 line defence on most claimform threads in this private parking forum.

you don't at this stage put or mention anything else.

 

there a second line to that defence

but you are doing fine

don't worry

yes by 4pm 17 [day 33]

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 92
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

On the claim form all you need to do is put down an outline of what your defence is.

 

Now, if you say for example that there was no breach of contract your witness statement and full details of your defence must be about this point

so you wont be able to raise arguments about something that is completely different.

 

This short defence covers just about everything you may want to say but it would be wise to add an " in any case" and then use a more specific or different point such as the paucity of the signage as that may be interpreted differently by the judge to a breach by being a lack of contract for example

 

one thing missing from your set of pictures is a picture of the payment terminal.

 

Any wording on this is the contract rather than the signs if there are differences.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have this photo of the ticket machine, which is unlit in the dark so I doubt you’d be able to read anything on it part from the actual payment screen. It appears to be solar powered.

 

Do I need to get a better picture of the ticket machine?

 

So far there has been no response to the letter you kindly advised me to send them (it was sent recorded 1st class)

 

Do I wait till next Weds (15 Nov) and then enter a defence?

 

Thank you for all and any help given x

7A4BEED1-F54E-4884-B85C-1B005C56277E.jpeg

Link to post
Share on other sites

defence not due till/by 4pm Friday

post it up here first

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

YES, we need to be able to read anything written on it

 

I have this photo of the ticket machine, which is unlit in the dark so I doubt you’d be able to read anything on it part from the actual payment screen. It appears to be solar powered.

 

Do I need to get a better picture of the ticket machine?

 

So far there has been no response to the letter you kindly advised me to send them (it was sent recorded 1st class)

 

Do I wait till next Weds (15 Nov) and then enter a defence?

 

Thank you for all and any help given x

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just as a side note,

 

I’ve noticed on my local Facebook page a lot of other people are receiving parking charges for the lido.

I hope it’s ok but I have suggested to the Facebook page that they take a look at all the very helpful information on this website and challenge the charges.

 

Sadly it’s too late for some people as they ignored the court papers (many thought they were fake) and now have a CCJ.

 

However they have said that PE haven’t made any further demands about payment since obtaining a CCJ against them.

 

I’ve warned them that they will and it will probably involve baliffs or high court enforcement but many seem to think I’m being over dramatic and PE will drop the matter.

Link to post
Share on other sites

cant use bailiffs esp HCEO's - sum is not high enough in value

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

typically they don't

 

its called a speculative claim

hoping for a non contested default judgement where no human ever goes near it and nothing is ever checked.

 

800'000 claimforms are issued every year

85% are for whatever reason never contested..its a numbers game.

many people simply pay them

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

But if they do get a CCJ why are they not enforcing payment? Why do they bother paying the cost of applying for a CCJ if they don’t do anything with it when it’s granted?

 

I would have thought the whole point of obtaining a CCJ would be to enforce payment?

Link to post
Share on other sites

but it costs them too much money...

its a numbers game.

 

85% of people that get a ccj either ignore it or wet themselves and pay up blindly when they get it.

 

those that don't defend and never wet themselves and pay are not worth the financial outlay to progress things further.

 

eventually, some find the ccj and again blindly pay because they think it will remove it

say if they are going for a mortgage etc.

 

 

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

they can use court bailiffs, whose powers are limited and whose working methods very different to HCEO's.

 

The CCJ will then go on their credit files which is bad news if they apply for a job in the financial sector, the police or even a bookies.

Also it stops them from getting a mortgage, credit cards at a decent rate etc.

 

PE will try and enforce because if they dont then no-one will be paying the £100 in the first place and if you are going to tell a lie make it such a big one no-one will question it.

That is how the parking world works.

 

cant use bailiffs esp HCEO's - sum is not high enough in value
Link to post
Share on other sites

Their behaviour is totally disgusting. It’s a shame that people ignore these charges as if more challenged the companies and charges then perhaps their behaviour would improve. Apart from challenge going them via appeal and in court, is there any other means of challenging PE’s behaviour?

 

I have absolutely no issue with paying for parking, however if you can’t see any signs etc advising that you need to then it just seems as if they are deliberately making it difficult for people to understand when/what/ if parking charges apply. I guess as it’s not profitable to make the motorist aware they aren’t too bothered about illegalities or fairness.

 

It seems that they are in a win win situation with very little negative consequences to them. They aren’t going to change their practice whilst it’s profitable to behave as they are.

 

I refuse to add to their profit margin and will fight this all the way.

Link to post
Share on other sites

go read parking prankster site

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Please do not think I’m being lazy as I have tried but please could you point me towards the defence template.

 

I’ve looked through the sticky posts at the of the forum section but I could only find the 7 part defence. Is this the correct one I should use please.

 

Also PE have not acknowledged or responded to the CPR letter.

 

Should I mention in the defence we have photos evidencing the signs were not visible at night etc?

 

Thank you for all your help. It is always and deeply appreciated.

 

Please could you advise if this the correct defence to use (I know this isn’t formatted properly, I have a word version that is - should I post that version up instead?)

 

1. It is admitted that Defendant is the owner of

 

2. It is admitted that the Defendant parked at the Lido at the times mentioned in the Particulars

 

3. It is denied that the Claimant entered into a contract with the Defendant. As held by the Upper Tax Tribunal in Vehicle Control Services Limited v HMRC [2012] UKUT 129 (TCC), any contract requires offer and acceptance. The Claimant was simply contracted by the landowner to provide car-park management services and is not capable of entering into a contract with the Defendant on its own account, as the carpark is owned by and the terms of entry set by the landowner. Accordingly, it is denied that the Claimant has authority to bring this claim. The proper Claimant is the landowner.

 

4. If there was a contract, it is denied that the penalty charge is incorporated into the contract. As per Thornton v Shoe Lane Parking [1971] 2 QB 163, the relevant term must be made known before a contract was formed. Here, the charge was not incorporated into the contract because:

 

 

a. The defendant entered the car park at approximately 22:00 and the signage at the entrance of the car park was unlit. The defendant could not see the signs advising that parking was chargeable.

 

b. There was no lighting within any part of the car park and therefore the defendant could not see any signs within the car park itself advising there was a charge for parking

 

c. The defendant parked the lower section of the car park and there is no ticket machine or visible signage advising that parking charges where applicable

 

d. The signs that are visible during daylight are not visible and are unreadable at night due to lack of lighting, both to the signs and in the car park itself.

 

e. Security staff at the venue saw the defendant park but did not advise there was a charge for parking

 

 

5. Alternatively, even if there was a contract, the provision requiring payment of [amount] is an unenforceable penalty clause. Following Dunlop Pneumatic Tyre Co Ltd v Selfridge & Co Ltd [1915] AC 847, clauses designed to punish a party for breach of contract may only be upheld if they represent a genuine pre-estimate of loss. The provision is a penalty and not a genuine pre-estimate of loss for the following reasons: (a) as the Claimant is not the landowner and suffers no loss whatsoever as a result of a parking overstay; (b) the amount claimed is evidently disproportionate to any loss suffered by the Claimant; © the penalty bears no relation to the circumstances because it remains the same no matter whether a motorist overstays by ten seconds or ten years; and (d) the clause is specifically expressed to be a penalty on the Claimant's signs.

 

6. Further and alternatively, the provision requiring payment of [amount] is unenforceable as an unfair term contrary to Regulation 5 of The Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999. This is a term which falls within Schedule 1, paragraph (e) of the Regulations being a term "requiring any consumer who fails to fulfil his obligation to pay a disproportionately high sum in compensation". The term was not individually negotiated and causes a significant imbalance in the parties' respective rights and obligations, because the charge is heavily disproportionate in respect of a short overstay and is imposed even where consumers are legitimately using the carpark for its designated purpose.

 

 

7. Save as expressly mentioned above, the Particulars of Claim is denied in its entirety. It is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief at all."

Link to post
Share on other sites

don't use that please its old hat.

 

all you need is the simple 2 line defence with is on nearly every PPC claimform thread here.

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Please may I check this is the correct defence use? They have not responded to the CPR letter.

 

No contract offered at the time so no monies can possibly be due

 

The claimant has failed to show any authority from the landowner to enter into contracts with the public or to make civil claims in their own name. It is the defendants belief that the claimant has no locus standing.

Link to post
Share on other sites

looks like it

let EB check you tomorrow

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

At the risk of sounding pushing is there anybody who could check tonight pretty please?

 

Please accept my sincere apologises if I’m presenting as rude or ungrateful, I honestly do not mean to be and I am very sorry if I’ve offended anybody.

 

I’ve a lot happening at present and it’s a huge challenge keeping all balls in the air (sort of speak)

 

My husband has just undergone major surgery that didn’t go well and has encountered complications.

 

On top of that i’m struggling with my own complex and difficult health issues.

 

I’ve been undergoing weekly treatments and they are incredibly painful and they knock me off my feet for a couple of days after each treatment.

 

I don’t think my hubby and I could make up a half decent healthy person between us!

 

I believe that I need to get the defence entered tomorrow by 4pm and I have to go to work tomorrow as I’ve had too much time off recently due to the above events.

 

As always, thank you very much for any and all help given and I apologise if I am presenting as an ungrateful and demanding moobag.

 

We have just had a letter from Parking Eye (was delivered to next door by mistake but dated 15 Nov so no delay in receiving it).

 

The letter focussed mainly on an appeal request (which was never made it was the CPR letter that was sent.....)

 

Does this change the defence at all?

Blank.pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites

urm looks like they are worried about the signage

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

That was my first thought too.....

 

Perhaps they’ve had this point contested before and lost to it? Or they could be reading this post:oops:

 

Would PE have to respond to a Freedom of Information request? It’s temptig to ask how many cases they took to court

Were withdrawn prior to a hearing

Were won at hearing - not by default

 

I bet that would be some very reading but I’m guessing they’d find a way on supplying the info....

actually won

Link to post
Share on other sites

concentrate on that defence

 

I see this is a BB issue too.

 

if you look on here theres another recent PE BB claimform thread that has a good defence

I'm not able to search as on remote server access at present due to our far north microwave link being down thru high winds

should be back anytime hopefully the winds have died down

we're told its being realigned now

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I’d love to say I uunderstood every word you posted about servers etc but the only thing I really understood was “microwave” but I don’t think it’s the kind of microwave I’m thinking of :oops:

 

I need to put the defence in by 4pm tomorrow. How Do I find the thread you mentioned please?

 

Many thanks for all your help. I will be making a donation to the site on payday xx

Link to post
Share on other sites

gives me the internet where I am..

anyway back up to full speed now to me server

lets go look see..

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...