Jump to content



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


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 118
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

I am bound to say that their alleged contract is probably the weirdest I have seen. Considering it is supposed to be a serious legal contract to set out the conditions under which CEL manage the

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 w

Boots or whoever just rent the shop, they ahve no interest in the land. The ontract CEL have MUST be with the landowner so that is why you ask to see the contract between them and the landowner  If th

slow down stop panicking

 

you are a litigant in person..that gives you certain leeway...a day or 2 late won't hurt you..better to get it at it's best.

 

 

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

Final draft here guys. Will be submitting it around 3:30pm if anyone is around over the next few hours.

 

No worries if not, ill keep you all updated on the progress.

 

Cheers

 

final WS .pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites

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.   

 

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

Cheers guys, appreciate the positivity right now.

 

All valid points @FTMDave cheers.

Pretty certain unfortunately that "Medburn Estates" are the landowner,

my wife bought the attached from Land Registry a few months ago.

 

Waiting on the planning officer to get back to me re. looking at the original planning permission.

 

Found this with relation to the buildings going up but no detail so hope he can provide it form e: 

https://portal.newcastle.gov.uk/planning/index.html?fa=getApplication&id=16184 

but struggled to find anything about general policy around commercial land and parking permissions. 

 

Will keep researching!

RegisterTY79684.pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites

WS is OK,

I would have tried to say why the sign at entrance is an invitation to treat and that the small signs would be the contract but you dont need to consider them as the bare licence to park existed by that point.

 

same with the 20 mins max stay not offering anything extra, see if you can find examples from other court reports to take with you to help illustarte these points ( shouldnt need them but better to ahve than to not have)

 

also talk abotu the lack of any indication as to what patches of land CEL have so called management rights over as their is no contiguous land that is obviously belonging to one landlord.

 

As for planning, CEL should have applied for PP for their cameras and signs under 2 pieces of legislation.

The are not exempt as they arent CCTV attached to a building and nor are the signs informational, they are advertisements of a unilateral contact ( well supposed to be)

 

Take copies of POFA with you as well so you can quiote the relevant paragraphs you refer to in point 13.

It is an absolute and the judgement of DDJ Harvey at Lewes has confirmed there are limits to costs that would apply IF the driver  was the defendant and the additioanl costs were specifically mentioned in the contract.

 

Looking at the accounts of Melbourn Estates it looks like they have a lease on the property and not the freehold

( they could own the freehold and lease it out but their income and assets doesnt reflect that)

 

so who signed the contract on behalf of the landowner?

Can we see the signatures when you get sight of this from CEL

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just to let everyone know that ive submitted all of the paperwork and so please dont spend anytime reviewing any documents as i dont want to waste anyones time. I did think of leaving it and working on it more this eve but i mustve racked up over 25 hours on this now and its causing my already-in-a-state wife far more stress than i can put on her.

 

Hopefully they were ok (still havent received CELs WS so hopefully thats a good sign) and ill keep you updated. Fingers are firmly crossed. Than you for all of your help, wisdom and encouragement over the last few days too.

 

@ericsbrother ill review your feedback as i imagine therell be useful things in there if it goes to court.

 

Enjoy the sunny weekend everyone, cheers

LLH

Link to post
Share on other sites

it will be having paperwork to show firm examples of your argument.

In an ideal world these go in your bundle

but if you take copies on the day to hand out you will usually be allowed as they arent actually part of your WS, j

ust save the courts time having to look up stuff ( judges dont like having to do this, after all that si the litigants job other than arguments over points of law)

 

Info about Melbourn Estates is not somehting to get bogged down on other than to see who signed off the contact as they have only 2 employees, the 2 directors who are married to each other.

 

Seeing the sig will help us determine if Ashley Cohen is playing one of his fantasy games where he pretends to work for the Co-Op or is a solicitor and so forth.

 

I recognise his moniker even when he tries to disguise it

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 months later...

Just to update you all (and so sorry it has taken me an age to get back on here) - we received a letter from CEL to say they weren't pursuing this case due to 'the current situation' 😂 and they dropped it back in May! Woohoo!

 

Huge huge thank you to everyone for your help and patience with this - my husband and I really appreciated it! We definitely wouldn't have carried it on to the extent that we did without the support and encouragement from you.  

 

Keep fighting the good fight 😀

La Luna 

Link to post
Share on other sites

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.  

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • FTMDave changed the title to CEL PCN Claimform - Tenerife Buildings, Station Road, South Gosforth, Newcastle NE3 1QD ***DISCONTINUED***

Topic title updated...

 

Quote

Keep fighting the good fight

 

Please consider making a donation to help us continue doing that for others.

 

Andy

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group The National Consumer Service

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Andyorch changed the title to CEL PCN Claimform - Tenerife Buildings, Station Road, South Gosforth, Newcastle NE3 1QD *** Claim Discontinued***

They would have been very silly to have tried to argue any case after your WS Well Done You😁

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

 

The bailiff: A 12th Century solution re-branded as Enforcement Agents for the 21st Century to seize and sell debtors goods as before Oh so Dickensian!

Link to post
Share on other sites

:yo:

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

you can ask the court for your costs under the unreasonable behaviour protocol.

A simple letter to the court asking for 5 hours of litigant in person research costs @£19.50 per hour ad whatever it cost you to copy paperwork etc. Ask for this under CPR 27.14.2(g)

The worst that can happen is that your request is ignored so worth the price of a stamp.

 

You also have a case for suing CEL for breach of the GDPR ( several things they got wrong).

Write to tham and and ask for £500 damages under Vihal Hall v Google and VCS v Phillip and then you have another 6 years to think about whether to sue them or not.

 

again, just the price of a stamp and you don't have to carry on if you dont want to but parking co's have been known to pay out to avoid court again and a proper costs order inc damages. A solicitor sued and got £1500

Link to post
Share on other sites

That's a brilliant idea and definitely worth the trouble.

Parking companies should be held accountable for their frivolous claims.

I know only too well how much time and effort goes into defending them, especially when you have no relevant experience and are starting from scratch.

Even if they decide to withdraw, there's still been massive disruption in your life.

Go for it!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

The more people who go after the ppC after spanking them in court with the GDPR is a good way to eventually kill their pig completely.

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

 

The bailiff: A 12th Century solution re-branded as Enforcement Agents for the 21st Century to seize and sell debtors goods as before Oh so Dickensian!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...