Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Thank-you dx, What you have written is certainly helpful to my understanding. The only thing I would say, what I found to be most worrying and led me to start this discussion is, I believe the judge did not merely admonish the defendant in the case in question, but used that point to dismiss the case in the claimants favour. To me, and I don't have your experience or knowledge, that is somewhat troubling. Again, the caveat being that we don't know exactly what went on but I think we can infer the reason for the judgement. Thank-you for your feedback. EDIT: I guess that the case I refer to is only one case and it may never happen again and the strategy not to appeal is still the best strategy even in this event, but I really did find the outcome of that case, not only extremely annoying but also worrying. Let's hope other judges are not quite so narrow minded and don't get fixated on one particular issue as FTMDave alluded to.
    • Indians, traditionally known as avid savers, are now stashing away less money and borrowing more.View the full article
    • the claimant in their WS can refer to whatever previous CC judgements they like, as we do in our WS's, but CC judgements do not set a legal precedence. however, they do often refer to judgements like Bevis, those cases do created a precedence as they were court of appeal rulings. as for if the defendant, prior to the raising of a claim, dobbed themselves in as the driver in writing during any appeal to the PPC, i don't think we've seen one case whereby the claimant referred to such in their WS.. ?? but they certainly typically include said appeal letters in their exhibits. i certainly dont think it's a good idea to 'remind' them of such at the defence stage, even if the defendant did admit such in a written appeal. i would further go as far to say, that could be even more damaging to the whole case than a judge admonishing a defendant for not appealing to the PPC in the 1st place. it sort of blows the defendant out the water before the judge reads anything else. dx  
    • Hi LFI, Your knowledge in this area is greater than I could possibly hope to have and as such I appreciate your feedback. I'm not sure that I agree the reason why a barrister would say that, only to get new customers, I'm sure he must have had professional experience in this area that qualifies him to make that point. 🙂 In your point 1 you mention: 1] there is a real danger that some part of the appeal will point out that the person appealing [the keeper ] is also the driver. I understand the point you are making but I was referring to when the keeper is also the driver and admits it later and only in this circumstance, but I understand what you are saying. I take on board the issues you raise in point 2. Is it possible that a PPC (claimant) could refer back to the case above as proof that the motorist should have appealed, like they refer back to other cases? Thanks once again for the feedback.
    • Well barristers would say that in the hope that motorists would go to them for advice -obviously paid advice.  The problem with appealing is at least twofold. 1] there is a real danger that some part of the appeal will point out that the person appealing [the keeper ] is also the driver.  And in a lot of cases the last thing the keeper wants when they are also the driver is that the parking company knows that. It makes it so much easier for them as the majority  of Judges do not accept that the keeper and the driver are the same person for obvious reasons. Often they are not the same person especially when it is a family car where the husband, wife and children are all insured to drive the same car. On top of that  just about every person who has a valid insurance policy is able to drive another person's vehicle. So there are many possibilities and it should be up to the parking company to prove it to some extent.  Most parking company's do not accept appeals under virtually any circumstances. But insist that you carry on and appeal to their so called impartial jury who are often anything but impartial. By turning down that second appeal, many motorists pay up because they don't know enough about PoFA to argue with those decisions which brings us to the second problem. 2] the major parking companies are mostly unscrupulous, lying cheating scrotes. So when you appeal and your reasons look as if they would have merit in Court, they then go about  concocting a Witness Statement to debunk that challenge. We feel that by leaving what we think are the strongest arguments to our Member's Witness Statements, it leaves insufficient time to be thwarted with their lies etc. And when the motorists defence is good enough to win, it should win regardless of when it is first produced.   
  • 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

Backdoor CCJ - Excel - Broken machine - SA1 car park, Swansea


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 1466 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

Hi all,

Sorry for the lengthy post in advice. A bit of a back story to start.

Last week (18/03/2020) I was working on the hospital wards and the owner of the corner shop near to where I used to live approached me. 

He mentioned that there was a letter in the corner shop for me which had my name on, but his address.

He did not have my up to date contact details so had kept hold of it.

 

I picked up the letter yesterday (23/03/2020).

He apologised and said that he had already opened it as his address was on it.

It was from 'ELMS legal' requesting recovery of 245 pounds.

There was no mention of who their client was.

This morning I rang up ELMS legal and I was told that their client was Excel Parking.

I mentioned on the letter that I was now in receipt of, that it had both my old house number and the corner shop number on.

I also mentioned that they had been delivered to the corner shop.

ELMS said that this was the address they had been given by excel parking.

I then rang up Northampton Court Business Centre and found that a judgement was entered by default on the 13/02/2020.

I now have the court reference number.

This morning, I rang up Excel to find out where and why this PCN was put against me.

It was from the 09/09/2016.

 

The lady on the phone said that I had sent an email to them (Excel) on the 9th September 2016 and the 9th October 2016, explaining that the pay and display machine was broken in the carpark and that the operator had given me a fault code '30410' and that I was instructed to place this on my windscreen (which I now remember I did).

 

However I was still given a ticket by the carpark attendant.

I did not hear anything from excel since I was sent the initial email.

Since then I have moved house, updated the electoral roll, utility bills etc.

I'm preparing to file a N244 form.

Would I have a good shot at setting aside this CCJ?

I'd be very grateful if anyone could help or offer some advice.

Thanks in advance!

*Update* - I have now found the original email I had sent to them (09/09/2016, the same day as the PCN) and the automated response back. I've copied and pasted it below

 

Quote

Dear whom it may concern,

On the 09/09/16 at roughly 1.55 pm I attempted to pay to park at the Swansea SA1 waterfront car park, site number 200. My car is a white fiat 500, with the registration number ******

Upon inserting my change into the machine the machine elicited no response and would not return my money.

I rang the number provided immediately and the operator provided me with a 'faulty machine number' which was 30410. I was told to write the number on a piece of paper and place it in my windscreen.Â*

Upon arriving back to the car at roughly 3.05 pm I was surprised to see I had received a parking ticket. I approached the parking patrol officer (number 1665) who quickly dismissed my problem, showing no empathy or understanding and offered no solution to the problem.

I rang the phone number once more at 3.15 pm and spoke to Sandra in the operations department who instructed me to write this email.

I trust you can listen to all phone conversations made from my mobile number ***** and hear that I followed all instructions and can appreciate my appeal and cancel the parking charge.

Yours sincerely,

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

You have a 100% chance of getting a set aside and of not paying the fleecers a penny. 

 

I see you already have the N244.  Have a read of this thread (sorry, it's a bit lengthy) -

 

 

- and post up your draft before you send it to the court.

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

which car park please?

 

 

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

Oh, and do the DVLA have your real address?  If you don't update that can lead to a grand's fine (a real fine, not the rubbish sent out by Excel).

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

Thanks, will get this sorted tonight and then post everything I've written up! 

1 hour ago, FTMDave said:

Oh, and do the DVLA have your real address?  If you don't update that can lead to a grand's fine (a real fine, not the rubbish sent out by Excel).

 

Yes, all up to date

1 hour ago, dx100uk said:

which car park please?

 

 

 

The SA1 carpark in Swansea, by the Norwegian Church 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually – could you hold off a set-aside application for a day please. The site team are having a discussion about a different approach to this problem.

What you could usefully do immediately is to send Excel an SAR. Please do it today. Make sure that you send it by some kind of recorded delivery – or better still send them an email SAR and then confirm in writing.

After all data they hold on you in any form and in respect of any matter. I suppose there may be a slight problem of identity because they only have your old address on record. Have you any ideas how you would get around that to get the disclosure as quickly as possible?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just seeing this, is there any sort of template for me to follow to send them a SAR?

This is all very new to me, so apologises if I'm a bit slow. 

 

I would be able to do email and recorded delivery today.

Is this something I would need to  send to excel's legal department? 

 

RE identity, I could scan my passport and forward that on also? 

 

Thanks 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks, I'll start formatting this up now.

Just found a council tax bill, which I can also attach to prove identity. 

 

 Should I attach a separate page to the SARS with my old address on, current address and copies of  council tax bill and passport?

 

All sorted. Just sent them an email copy signed, and will go and send them a hard copy via recorded delivery within the next half hour. 

 

Sorry I have had to hide your images its best to post them up as a pdf, then only Logged in and approved Caggers can view them, a direct image can be seen by anyone including the fleecers. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • FTMDave changed the title to Backdoor CCJ - Excel - Broken machine - SA1 car park, Swansea

Hold fire on the N244, for tomorrow,  as BankFodder suggested whilst the alternate approach is  looked at, might be interesting

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

Sorry for keeping you waiting.

There was some discussion – on an issue which I raised and which is maybe not the best idea.

The view that I've taken is that if there is a contract between you and the parking company because you did comply with their parking sign and you put the money in the machine. The fact that the machine was broken is not your fault – but you gave your money. Therefore if there was a contract then you are contractually entitled to park peaceably for the agreed amount of time. The Excel parking company was in breach of contract and you could sue them for breach. I had in mind that at the same time you could ask the judge to set aside the existing judgement – because if you won the case – as I expect you would – then clearly the judgement against you would be completely invalid.

Some of the site team think that it would not be possible to ask for a set-aside during those proceedings. I still have my doubts – but I'm letting you know that there are opinions about this.

So you could apply for a set-aside immediately, or you could pay the money, apply for the set-aside which you would very likely get and once the judgement the set-aside then Excel would be idiots not to return your money immediately under the threat of civil proceedings against them. I would still be interested in the idea of pursuing them for breach of contract and also it may well be that they have breach data protection laws by obtaining your personal data when in fact there was a contract in place.

Unfortunately more than 30 days have expired since the judgement has been given and that means that the judgement will be registered against you and will already have damaged your credit file. Therefore there seems to me to be no point in hurrying and I would suggest that you wait until the results of the SAR – which presumably you have now sent off to them.

You never know your luck, they may not comply with the SAR and in which case I would suggest an immediate action for their statutory breach.

This may sound complicated and may be you are too busy for it.

I'm afraid that your initial post is rather confusing to me as to how come the shop address was used. I imagine that at some point you moved home and you fail to update DVLA with your new address – could this be correct?

When you receive the SAR disclosure then hopefully a lot more will become clear. I'm certainly in a bit of a muddle about it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi, 

 

Thanks so much for the reply. Yes, I sent the SAR off yesterday, both email and recorded delivery. The letter was signed for this morning. 

 

Yes I already have a CCJ by default which was entered on the 13th February, confirmed by a telephone conversation with the court. However when I did a search on the database, I could not yet see one against my name.

I'm guessing it takes a couple of weeks to update. 

 

Yes, you're correct.

I moved house, however I didn't update my details immediately with the DVLA.

This is now rectified.

 

I'm not sure if it clarifies anything but say hypothetically I lived at number 12 Fir Place, on the envelope was '12 15-16 Fir Place'.

So both numbers from my house and the corner shop were on the envelope.

It was then opened by the cornershop owner as it also had his address on it.

My name was on envelope. 

 

What I'm particularly petrified about is the threat from ELMS legal of bailiffs now turning up at my house and clamping my car.

I need it for work.

I've lost a couple of nights sleep over this.

hoping to clear everything up as quickly as possible. 

 

I've read online that the longer you waiting after discovering a CCJ on your record (over 2 weeks) the less likely it will be set aside.

Is this true? 

 

I'm leaning towards getting the forms sent off immediately for the CCJ to be set aside after reading your post. 

 

Following up for a breach of contract definitely sounds interesting, as since my initial post I have found a further a  email that I had sent off to them, providing them with all the details they required. 

 

Whilst work is busy at the moment, I do not want to let them get away with it so happy to follow it through. 

 

Thanks again 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe you would like to put up a scanned copy of the letter from ELMS legal. Unless I'm very badly mistaken, there is no danger of bailiffs coming along for this.

In terms of notifying DVLA of your address I'm afraid that lots of people get into problems because they don't notify DVLA or creditors et cetera of changes of address quickly enough.

Excel would have had 14 days to contact you – and we will see from the SAR whether they did that.

Getting a set-aside is easier if you act with alacrity but at the end of the day the interests of justice must be served and if you can say that you didn't receive the papers and furthermore that the money was paid so that they would have no chance of success at trial, then your judgement will be set-aside – there's no doubt. Of course the best thing to do would be to get Excel to agree. As it is too late to prevent the judgement being registered, I think the best thing to do is wait until the SAR disclosure and then you will have a better idea of what has happened – assuming that what is supplied to you is complete and accurate.

Let's see if someone else comes along with better advice. May we ask what you do on hospital wards? Are you on the "front line" at the moment?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, I'll post a scanned copy. 

 

It was very silly of me not to update things quicker in hindsight. 

 

When you say 'that the money was paid' do you mean to Elms legal or at the Pay and Display machine?

 

At moment I'm a HCSW so doing as many hours as I can to help out.  I'm also a medical student but university has now finished due to the viral outbreak.

 

I'll also post up the automated response I received from Excel back in 2016.

 

Thanks

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I mean that you paid the machine. Hindsight is always very useful – I suppose we will realise that when eventually the virus  crisis is over as well!

Let's have a copy of everything. Well done on keeping these kinds of records – many people don't.

 

Good luck working on the frontline there – and I suppose these kinds of parking ticket distractions are unhelpful. If you're happy to do it I think we may find a way to leverage this in your favour. I think parking companies like Excel are already seen as pariahs – and I can imagine that they might be interested in managing their reputational risk a little.

Link to post
Share on other sites

the first email I sent to them, 09/09/2016 (I've blacked out any identifiable details including the parking ticket number which I put in the subject of the email),

 

the second email 06/10/2016 and

 

the letter off ELMS Legal.

 

You'll also be able to see the automated response I received back off them.

 

I also left the house number on the ELMs Legal so you should be able to see the issue with two number.

 

Thanks

 

 

 

dosc1.pdf

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

ok thread tidied PDF sorted.

 

BRB..

 

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

elms legal are not bailiffs and cant add anything to the CCJ debt

neither can they send any muppet 'field agent' to your door whom has no more legal right than your milkman

 

it would be absolutely marvellous if he did turn up and you could film him

but I see that you are somewhat busy at present to say the least.

 

infact i'd go as far to say that them adding fees for their 'work' is almost contempt of court.

powerless muppets 

forget about them.

 

now the cheap way out of this is to go RING excel and tell them if they don't set aside the CCJ by mutual consent FOC to you immediately you WILL be issuing an N244 set aside and also suing them for the £255 and loss of earning (by the way I work for the NHS covid-19 implications etc etc ) by me having to take time away from work to waste my time on this phone call and my time raising the N244, posting and time to prepare for court, at a rough guess this already runs into several £100's

 

you'd win hands down in court.

 

do the above when you can 

RECORD THE CALL

 

then comeback here please.

 

don't worry about it , it's not urgent and most certainly can go anywhere further nor hurt you further 

you in all truth will be months away for a court hearing if they don't crumble

I think you are quite able to lay it on thick on the phone.

don't bother to get into any debate about if the org PCN is even legal or not.

the address issue is good enough for set aside and your current employment too😉

 

 

  • Like 1

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

Definitely record the call – but also I suggest you follow up in writing confirming exactly what has been said on the phone by both parties whether there is an agreement or not.

Try to get the name of the person you speak to. Read our customer services guide

Link to post
Share on other sites

They also in breach of the civil procedure rules for issuing a claim to an old address without trying to find out the correct one. that was OK a year ago but will lose them money now.

 

That makes the SAR more important.

 

Send one the ELMS as well to see if they have doen the searching for a new address after the jedgement. Check your credit files to see what searches have been done, by whom and when.

 

Now they woudl be obliged to use the address given to them by the DVLA  at the time but as soon as they got a "gone away" letter they should have used due dilligence to find you and your new address. They clearly have done this after the event but  as said, that breaks the rules and can be part of your set aside motion and will make a costs order almost a shoo-in.

 

That is why they might agree to droppping the claim and judgement and if they think they have a chance starting again ( but I doubt that, the rules on broken machines is your friend here as well)

Link to post
Share on other sites

What it means is that as ericsbrother indicates they have broken the rules, so it will cost them money and you will get that setaside, and  more than likely costs.

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

Excel Parking Services Ltd

 

https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/02878122/officers

 

Mr Simon Robert Renshaw-Smith - again - also VCS

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi all

Quick update.

 

Phoned Excel Parking this morning, recorded the call as suggested by you all. I spoke to the operator, managed to get a full name and email.

 

I asked for the CCJ to be set aside by mutual consent, otherwise I would be issuing a N244 set aside and also pursuing the 255 as well as any loss of earnings. The operator replied that the only way that they would agree to the CCJ being set aside by mutual consent was if the CCJ claim showed the wrong address on it.

 

He tried to download the claim from the court website, but the website was down. He then gave me his email (Going to write an email to him confirming what was said online).

 

I asked what the time frame would be for him obtaining a copy of the CCJ to look at the address. He replied that he wasn't sure given the current ongoing situation with the virus but as soon as he had it, he would email it over.

 

If the address is correct on the CCJ claim then they will not agree to a CCJ set aside by mutual consent. To this I replied that I would be left with no other option but to issue a N244 set aside, pursue the 255 and loss of earnings. He said that in order to be successful at having the judgement set aside, I would have to fill one of the three following criteria:

 

1.Was it served at the provided address?

2.Upon finding out about the CCJ did I query it efficiently?

3.Do I have a realistic prospect of success?

 

He then mentioned that if the judge doesn't agree with any of those three points, then I would not have it set aside

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 1466 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

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...