Jump to content



  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Hi.   What reason/s have they given you for declining please?   HB
    • get the FOS done and see. i have a feeling you might not need to do the latter.    
    • Noted, thanks re-draft it is then 🙄    If it does go to FOS and its upheld can I also go for the throat and apply to set aside the suspended judgement (consent order) based  CCA  sections 86E not providing default sum notices 86(5) not entitled to enforce agreement  87(1) and 88(2) leading to unlawful repudiation of the credit agreement. Just an idea. 
    • CB ....this conclusion is true.   as for PB, i can assure you that user most probably ( well i know but shouldn't say} holds the record here for the most reported posts by users as well as from those of the site team concerning his posts. if you hold on someones username further info can be seen.   however , a bit like say vodaphone or virgin media , very large companies with millions of customers will get the most complaints made against them...and that equates to posting levels here too. as for 'royalties account holder' that again merely points, by a default label in the software package we use, to the number of posts made.   one could further this by noting were we to agree with all their posts they would be on the siteteam... i will leave you to understand why not .....       don't think anyone did?    regards  DX
    • Is it just that? Oh I thought it was because of all the effort he and others made to rightly bring DCBL to court. But he just got lucky there I suppose. Lucky he didn't bring his complaint to this forum first because if he had of done, he'd be £10K poorer right now. And for something that Peterbard describes as benefitting from being newsworthy, I am struggling to find all the news reports that refer to it.       Confucius  say "he who backpedals, falls off bike."    I'm not surprised in the least that you, a gold account holder on this forum, would adopt a dismissive attitude to this well deserved victory in court against DCBL, however I'm curious as to why you opted to reduce the issues at stake to being 'simply' about ' the EA fell foul of the regulation which defines "relevant premises".   That certainly wasn't any argument that Iain Gould furthered and he's a civil actions lawyer whom, dare I say it, know a hell of a lot more about trespass and misuse of private information than you do.   The judge never mentioned "relevant premises" either. Not during the hearing or in his judgement. And you never mentioned it either prior to know. In fact, in the original  in the original 2018 thread you even went so far as to suggest that whatever address was on the writ was irrelevant because, "interestingly, if the address is not  a requirement it would not be possible to sue the bailiff for wrong attendance under section 66."   Not that your wrongfully held opinion that non debtors are also subject to the Tribunals Courts and Enforcement Act 2007 matters, because as I had already pointed out in the first video because the claimant wasn't suing for wrong attendance under section 66.   He sued for trespass. Part 66 never applied to him because he was not the debtor and never had been. You and the likes of DCBL can disregard that obvious point as much as you like, but bailiffs do not have a blanket immunity from trespass.   Have a look at the article Iain Gould has written on his blog about the case. It might help you understand the tort of trespass in some small way, and might help you adopt a more balanced approach to those poor sods who owed no debt and have had their homes raided and their privacy breached by EAs, and then - to add insult to injury - they come to you looking for help.   What makes it worse is that your defective understanding of when an Enforcement Agents action can give rise to trespass is backed up by your site team members who think it's their job to echo your mistakes not by justifying what you say - because they can't - but by making defamatory remarks at the expense of those who give the 'correct advice'.   Unlike you and your team members I don't hide behind the protection of anonymity. Nobody can hold you to account if you get it wrong, or heaven forbid, if it turns out you  have been working for a firm of debt collectors all along. To add to this, you don't seem to care much about removing libellous remarks from your forum when a legitimate complaint is raised.   To respond to Bank Fodders comment that "At some point in the video it has screenshots of this forum and the narrative suggests that some people agree that an enforcement agent has the power to enter into a property to check on identity. I think that it is intended that the CAG is associated with this belief."   Seriously? I have to point it out to you.   Maybe it has something to do with key members of this forum smearing me on the original thread by saying how wrong my narrative was and then implying I was a Freeman of the Land.   Maybe it had something to do with Gold Member Peter Bard leaving this comment on the same thread that stated:   "The point I was trying to make is that the EA will not be as interested in paperwork as in physical proof that the debtor does or does not live there.   As said there is no requirement for an address on a warrant, in fact the debtor may live at several addresses and the bailiff may attend to serve at any of them. The warrant is against the debtor, not the debtor at an address. It requires only enough info to identify the person.( see CPR wherever it is).   The bailiff will be much more interested in getting in and checking for clothes in wardrobes, sleeping accommodation, letters etc."   I'm sorry if that wasn't enough for you to justify me bringing that point up in the video. I did consider coming here before I completed it and asking those members if they intended to maintain their position that the Enforcement Agent had acted within the law but strangely the forum account I had used to make my first and only posting on this forum in 2018 - to counter the smears - would not allow me to sign in.   Far be it from me to draw any conclusions about my input not being welcome here, I figured Peterbard and some of the key members here would use their creative skills at providing a blanket immunity from civil liability for all EAs by misinterpreting key legislation in their behalf.    It looks like I was right about that also. Unfortunately I have given in to temptation, and am choosing to respond, even though I know how utterly futile it is.
  • Our picks

    • @curryspcworld @TeamKnowhowUK - Samsung 75 8K TV - completely broken by Currys. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/426151-samsung-75-8k-tv-completely-broken-by-currys/&do=findComment&comment=5069075
      • 5 replies
    • @skinnyfoodco Skinny Foods. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/426130-skinny-foods/&do=findComment&comment=5068996
      • 8 replies
    • I’m in desperate need of help
       
      I bought some clothes online in may through Evans and paid through PayPal
      returned them all seven days later
       
      I waited the 14days for my refund and no refund came
      I put in a dispute through PayPal but I didn’t get any emails to escalate the case - PayPal closed it. 
      evans said they couldn’t refund the money because PayPal have cancelled the refund because of the open dispute
       
      I contacted PayPal
      they said the dispute had been closed but Evans at no point had attempted a refund.
      fast forward to today
       
      I’ve got copies of numerous messages sent to and from twitter messages as it’s the only way I can contact them
      I’ve also contacted their customer service too
      all I get is PayPal have cancelled refund because dispute is still open.
       
      I have proved that the dispute is closed
      I have got an email saying that if Evans sent the refund they would accept it
      but up until the date I got the email they have not once attempted a refund .
       
       I have sent them a letter before court email
      I have even offered to have the full refund as a gift card just to get this sorted !
       
      I’m literally at the end of my tether and don’t know where to turn next !
       
      i suffer with mental health issues and this is affecting my health and I’d saved the money for a year to buy these clothes as I’m on a low income .
    • In desperate need of help. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/425244-in-desperate-need-of-help/&do=findComment&comment=5067040
      • 29 replies

Excel ANPR PCN Claimform - Brewery St car park, Chesterfield on 02.07. 2018


Recommended Posts

No, they haven't covered themselves.  It was the driver of the car who entered into any contract with Excel.  It's got nothing to do with you.  You weren't even there!

 

So in your defence I'd add something like "I was not the driver of the vehicle and so could not enter into any contract with Excel". 

 

Also "The driver of the car effected complete payment of the parking fee".

 

The easiest way to see if the place is covered by bye-laws is to go back there if the place is local to you, or get someone who lives locally to do so.  There are normally signs up about bye-laws.

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
  • 2 weeks later...
  • Replies 56
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

you have till sunday week to AOS   can you not use the lost details link?   https://www.access.service.gov.uk/login/signin/creds   get the CPR off today! do MCOL lat

Sorry, there's just so much to read through and I can never seem to find stuff that's specifically relevant to me.   If it's any consolation, I now know what it's like to be on the other end

If you draft a WS along the lines suggested, include a photocopy of the ticket as Exhibit X related to point about they say you hadn't paid, then say well not displayed so breach of T & Cs, can't

they have abused the law by trying to add 2 different things togethjer as a single point whe they actualkly fail to create the conditions to create a contact by either of them alone.

so your simple defence is

1 the defendant was not the driver at the time and no keeper liability ahs been created under the POFA2012

2 the driver at the time paid the prescribed fee so there was no breach of contract and thus no cause of action against anyone.

 

The defendant requests that the claim be struck out by the court using its management powers under CPR 3.4

 

 

now the last bit probably wont happen but if the court clerks read this properly then the chances are Excel will be forced to show they do have proof of their claim or it will be booted out. Quite often all that happens is the paperwork is filed until later so if you dont hear anmything dont be surprised

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for that, appreciate it. I've not had chance yet to have a good read through those links etc, I've got another couple of weeks yet I think.

 

Should that be enough then, along with a brief explanation of what actually happened on the day?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just file the 4-line defence that EB has suggested.  Nothing more.  That's all that is needed at this stage.

 

If Excel are stupid enough to continue with the case, you will have time later on to expand on what happened at WS stage.

 

I think your deadline is 9 August, whatever you do don't miss it!

 

 

 

 

 

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

didn't need too at this stage 

we hit them with that later so they waste more money on court fees...

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
15 hours ago, Slaughter64 said:

Surely it will help if I explain the ticket was purchased and I still have it etc? They don't know the details as yet.

No, thye are the ones whio have to prove their case so let them waste £100 of their money getting nowhere rather than you spend money on a stamp.

you can have them for breach of the GDPR later if you want becasue they have lied to the DVLA to get your keeper details and then  continued to process your data unfairly. You might have a claim for harassment as well but the bar is set quite high for that.

these parking co's back out of thousands of claims when thye are challenged and if everyone of those sued Simon would be out of business

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

Ok, I filed the short defence and have received a Notice of Proposed Allocation to the small claims track, along with a N180 Directions Questionnaire.

 

I presume this is standard procedure, but what do I put? Do I agree to the case being referred to Mediation? What about the questions referring to the 

potential court hearing etc?

Link to post
Share on other sites

No to  mediation

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

so you've not been reading up here in the 'downtime' between stages?

plenty of pcn claimform threads here on with what to do.

 

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

Sorry, there's just so much to read through and I can never seem to find stuff that's specifically relevant to me.

 

If it's any consolation, I now know what it's like to be on the other end of inane and repetitive questions, from the forum that I frequent regularly, in my own field!

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Narrow your search 

 

Pcn claimform n180

 

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
  • 1 month later...

I just received a Notice of Trial date and a N157 Allocation to Hearing (early Jan).

Bit of a shock tbh, but I guess they may still pull out

and just pay the 25 quid.

All I've had from Excel in the meantime is an offer of reduced fine to £125.

 

I now have a few weeks (early Dec) to prepare my witness statement.

I'm presuming I am the witness in this case, even thought the wife was using the car at the time -

I've not told her this is ongoing as she would worry too much (and would have just paid the original fine).

Any help or guidance or things

I should include in the statement, I  would be extremely grateful.

 

I guess I'll know if they are taking this all the way if I receive a copy of their evidence in due course?

Link to post
Share on other sites

witness statement time then

plenty here use our search.

 

you most certainly don't mention anything about your wife driving.

and ofcourse you having the ticket still will blow them out the water.

esp as their trade body has just stated in the new proposed guidelines 

such issues as yours would not result in a PCN

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

Play this right and you will have a nice claim under GDPR against Excel. the existence of the ticket and its scanned image as an exhibit will be a killer for 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

 

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

Why should I not mention that my wife was driving? Excel already know this, AND that I still have the ticket, from my original letter

to appeal to the fine from two years ago. They still rejected it, just saying it was not clearly displayed. The court don't know any of this,

so surely they'll throw it out once they know all the facts?

 

I'd just like this to go away, I don't want to drag it out any further and appeal against them, I could just do without the hassle.

Link to post
Share on other sites

fine?

 

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

3.At all material times the Defendant was the registered keeper and/or driver.

 

They are suing You as Keeper, saying who was driving at this point is counter productive.  Work up a WS and post it up as PDF then we can help fine tune it If Excel are suing the wrong person as if they knew she was driving at appeal they should have been suing her.  Or have I missed something here?

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

The matter won't just "go away", and was never going to from the moment that you decided, quite rightly, to fight it.

 

You're being taken to court, and you need to prepare for that, in particular you need to prepare a Witness Statement.

 

Simon has a lot of previous of starting cases he knows he has no chance of winning, as a tactic to try to intimidate the motorist into paying, and then withdrawing the claim after WS stage.   This may well happen to you.  But even if you do end up in court, a civil court hearing is no more intimidating than a job interview.

 

Remember that Excel's case is total and utter pants.  You are quite clearly legally in the right.

 

No, you won't find a WS on CAG that perfectly fits your own case, but what you will find is parts of different WSs that you can use.  In particular

   - Excel have no locus standi (that bit should be easy)

   - no planning permission (again, easy)

   - no keeper liability

   - they suffered no loss and are suing over a triviality.

 

 

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

I certainly mentioned in a letter to them that she was driving, but I'm the registered keeper anyway, that's what they're focussing on.

 

I really don't want to go to court, even if it is straightforward and easy, I could just do without wasting the best part of a day, not to mention the hours I'll have to spend putting the WS together.

I still don't see why not telling the Court the whole story at this stage will work against me.

 

I can see it from you guys' point of view - to make him go all the way, but you need to see it from mine.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you draft a WS along the lines suggested, include a photocopy of the ticket as Exhibit X related to point about they say you hadn't paid, then say well not displayed so breach of T & Cs, can't do that to you as keeper as POFA not met.  A robust WS might well make Simple cut and run, he won't want to be tolchocked by a DJ for his rubbish POC and potential abuse of process. If he cries off you can hit him for around £500 for flagrant breach of GDPR.

 

Its either WS and submit, or cough up his "generous" offer (NOT) of a reduced invoice. Or sit on hands and wait for the inevitable Default Judgment, and Simon walks away laughing.

  • Like 1

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

Brassnecked is spot on.

 

You don't seem to understand that courts run to a legal procedure, and there's nothing you, me or any of us can do about that.

 

Excel have decided to sue you.  You have chosen to defend the claim.  The next stage is that both parties have to prepare WSs.  That's how the courts work.

 

The court will give you every opportunity to state your case - in the WS and then later in person in court (if it gets that far).

 

You can of course decide not to prepare a WS.  In that case you will have nothing to rely on in court, the judge will only hear Excel's side and you will lose the case.  Sorry, but if you want to beat Excel you need to put some work in. 

 

 

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

It does say in the small print that I do not have to attend the hearing, and it will be heard in my absence (as long as they have notice), not sure if that is advised.

 

Best get writing that WS then...

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...