CEL PCN Claimform - Tenerife Buildings, Station Road, South Gosforth, Newcastle NE3 1QD *** Claim Discontinued***

[FTMDave]

1 hour ago, laluna88 said:

Thank you for your patience with me! My husband is just wanting to pay this now as he doesn't fancy ending up in Court but you guys are keeping me going! 

 

I've been to civil court.  It's no more intimidating than a job interview.  You just sit at a table with a well-dressed person (the judge) and give your side of the story.

[FTMDave]

Well, sort of, they don't really want to do court because they're likely to lose.

 

However, what a bunch of con artists.  How has £100 suddenly become £267?  'Cos they've added on a load of fictitious made-up charges, that's why.

 

As you actually owe them £00.00 go to court and smash them.

 

Though I suppose, just for once, you could offer them £0.05 as a settlement

[FTMDave]

Your wife is damn right to want to fight these fleecers - kudos to her!  Hope the pregnancy goes well BTW.

 

CEL are one of the worst and most dishonest PPCs.  Their MO is to start court action (although they have no intention of carrying it through) in order to intimidate motorists in the hope that lots will be terrified of the idea of court and will cough up.  However, when a defendant files a decent WS they invariably discontinue the case and crawl back under their stone.  It's a disgraceful abuse of the court system but good news for you if you get the WS right.  Of course there's no guarantee they will give up, but that's how it generally goes.

 

I've had a hunt for a good WS in a CEL case, but haven't had much joy.  However, have a look at the WS in post 229  

 

Huge chunks of this will be inapplicable, but also huge chunks will be useful (especially the bit about them making up extra charges) so at least it's a start.

Edited May 27, 2020 by FTMDave
Typo

[FTMDave]

As you have till Friday, there is time for people who are experts in these cases to pop in and answer your questions, so you can fine tune your WS.

 

Regarding your point (2), yes, lack of planning permission is illegal (not unlawful) and therefore a contract can't be formed.  This is covered in point 21 of the WS above.  If you substitute your wife's evidence in that paragraph for that OP's evidence, that is one part covered.

 

Regarding (3), yes, these con artists make up additional charges that have no basis in law.  Covered by points 35-42 in above WS.

 

Yes, lay it on thick that you were not the driver on the day and so they are suing the wrong person.  Any evidence you have would be excellent.  You need to show why their pants paperwork doesn't establish keeper liability under the POFA.  There is some stuff about the POFA again in above WS but I don't know how much is applicable to you. 

[FTMDave]

I'm knackered too but promise to have a proper look tomorrow, as I'm sure others will.

 

A few quick things.

 

In the first part you immediately point out that they are suing the wrong person, but then you have a second section SIGNAGE and then a third part on KEEPER LIABILITY/POFA.  It seems to me that the first & third parts are essentially the same, you should stick them together.  Make the paragraph "The only way the Claimant has a legal right to pursue the registered keeper is ..." paragraph 6 of the introduction.  

 

What time did the fleecers ticket your wife?  I'm just thinking they could claim you parked and then walked the short distance to work.  Make sure your evidence shows you were already at work at that time and couldn't have been the driver. 

 

In CONTRACT, para 4, you've left in "VCS" from ABM's WS.

 

The entire last section "GOVERNMENT LEGISLATION 2019/DATA PROTECTION" needs to go.  You're telling the court that the industry is a disgrace, which of course is true, but that's irrelevant to the facts of your case.

 

Have CEL sent you their WS yet?

 

All just IMO of course, others may disagree.

 

BTW, apologies if I seem hyper-critical.  It's just the nature of the beast that the dodgy bits get commented on, not the rest.  What you've prepared is superb overall.  Your wife will be proud of you.  As you should be of her for refusing to give in to the fleecers! 

Edited May 27, 2020 by FTMDave

[FTMDave]

OK, I've had a good read through your final draft.  It looks damn good to me and you should be feeling very confident - you've successfully attacked CEL's claim on multiple fronts.

 

I'm afraid the POFA is not one of my strong points and maybe you should wait for Ericsbrother to pop in and okay that part.  Nothing will change if you send it off one day late tomorrow morning.  As dx says, you're a LiP and the court will be flexible with you.  Also CEL who are supposedly experts in the field (ho! ho!) still haven't managed to get off their dishonest backsides and do their WS.

 

BTW, have you looked up who the landowner is?  "Medburn Estates" are shown on the bit of bog paper CEL sent, but I bet they're some sort of property agent and not the landowner.  If you still have time, look into this.

 

Also, in post 84, dx suggested looking at the original planning permission as it is highly unlikely the council agreed to a 20-minute limit.  Did you look into this?

 

Your WS is still excellent, just thinking of adding even more ammo if time permits.   

 

[FTMDave]

Well done on your victory! 

 

Just to be absolutely sure, give the court a ring to check the case has been discontinued.  CEL are well known for using every dirty trick possible.