Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • "We suffer more in imagination than in reality" - really pleased this all happened. Settled by TO, full amount save as to costs and without interest claimed. I consider this a success but feel free to move this thread to wherever it's appropriate. I say it's a success because when I started this journey I was in a position of looking to pay interest on all these accounts, allowing them to default stopped that and so even though I am paying the full amount, it is without a doubt reduced from my position 3 years ago and I feel knowing this outcome was possible, happy to gotten this far, defended myself in person and left with a loan with terms I could only dream of, written into law as interest free! I will make better decisions in the future on other accounts, knowing key stages of this whole process. We had the opportunity to speak in court, Judge (feels like just before a ruling) was clear in such that he 'had all the relevant paperwork to make a judgement'. He wasn't pleased I hadn't settled before Court.. but then stated due to WS and verbal arguments on why I haven't settled, from my WS conclusion as follows: "11. The Defendant was not given ample evidence to prove the debt and therefore was not required to enter settlement negotiations. Should the debt be proved in the future, the Defendant is willing to enter such negotiations with the Claimant. "  He offered to stand down the case to give us chance to settle and that that was for my benefit specifically - their Sols didn't want to, he asked me whether I wanted to proceed to judgement or be given the opportunity to settle. Naturally, I snapped his hand off and we entered negotiations (took about 45 minutes). He added I should get legal advice for matters such as these. They were unwilling to agree to a TO unless it was full amount claimed, plus costs, plus interest. Which I rejected as I felt that was unfair in light of the circumstances and the judges comments, I then countered with full amount minus all costs and interest over 84 months. They accepted that. I believe the Judge wouldn't have been happy if they didn't accept a payment plan for the full amount, at this late stage. The judge was very impressed by my articulate defence and WS (Thanks CAG!) he respected that I was wiling to engage with the process but commented only I  can know whether this debt is mine, but stated that Civil cases were based on balance of probabilities, not without shadow of a doubt, and all he needs to determine is whether the account existed. Verbal arguments aside; he has enough evidence in paperwork for that. He clarified that a copy of a DN and NOA is sufficient proof based on balance of probabilities that they were served. I still disagree, but hey, I'm just me.. It's definitely not strict proof as basically I have to prove the negative (I didn't receive them/they were not served), which is impossible. Overall, a great result I think! BT  
    • Seeking further advice now. The 33 days in which the defendant has to submit a defence expires at 16:00 tomorrow. The defendant has submitted an acknowledgement of service but looking to get the claim awarded by default in failure to submit the defence. This is MoneyClaim Online and can see an option to request a default judgement but believe that is for failure to acknowledge the claim within 14 days??  So being MoneyClaim Online, how do I request the claim be awarded in my favour?
    • Have to agree with the above Health and safety legislation is specific in that the service provider in so far as is reasonably practicable, the health, safety and welfare at work of all his employees and those not in the employ of the business. You claim is like saying you slipped in the swimming pool area while taking a dip. As rightly stated by by the leisure centre, a sports hall has dedicated equipment and you yourself personally have a legal obligation in mitigating danger or injury to yourself by taking account of your immediate surroundings. Where your claim will fail is if it is reasonable and proportionate to impose liability of the Leisure Centre? The answer has to be no.
  • 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

CEL 2017 ANPR PCN PAPLOC Now Claimform - Burger King, West Forest Gate, Wokingham, RG40 2AT *** Claim Discontinued***


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 917 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

Thanks for all your help so far. 

 

I've completed the MCOL acknowledgement and I've prepared the CPR 31.14 Request, which I will post via recorded deliver tomorrow.

 

So my fundamentals for my defense are that I overstayed by 13minutes whilst I was feeding my daughter in the BurgerKing of which this CEL carpark is solely used for. Their is no planning permission to the councils knowledge and the signature is not clear. Also, the costs incurred are ludacris.

 

Is there any links which can help me build this defense?

 

Should I wait to submit defense or get it in early?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've reread the thread and so far we have

   - no planning permission for signs

   - pants signage, bent and obscured by trees (when you went back there, did you get photos?  If so, please upload them)

   - an overstay of 2 minutes and 57 seconds, given the 10 minute minimum grace period: if 10 minutes is fine for anyone, I think 13 minutes is OK when you have young children

   - the NTK sent out after eight months, slightly longer than the 14 days to create keeper liability (can you please redact this of your details, and upload?)

   - unlikely the planning permission for the car park gave a 1-hour limit (as you're so hot on planning permission, another one to look up)

   - £82 Unicorn Food Tax.

 

No harm in drafting a defence now, although you have plenty of time.  It only needs to be generic and a few lines.  If you look in any thread with "claimform" in the title, there will be examples you can tweak.

 

 

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

No need for recorded.

1st class with free proof of posting from any po counter will do.

they dont respond anyway

 

Pcn claimform

Use our search.

 

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 are not on a good ground there, and the Unicorn feed tax added to a claim against keeper even if POFA satisfied and it rarely is cannot be demanded from the keeper, add in they have no course of action as the Trade Bodies stipulate 10 minutes grace. period

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

Thanks for all your consistent help so far. You must be busy with people asking for help and as so I am grateful.

 

So to confirm my only two tasks are:
1. Send the CPR13.41 request via post

2. Prepare and upload defence.

 

Do I have to attend the court hearing in person/via zoom or is it decided behind closed doors?

Link to post
Share on other sites

twill be phone or video zoom like thingy. IF IF it gets that far...

 

defence due by 4pm 12th feb regardless to CPR 31:14 or not!!

 

our usual 3 - 5 line generic defence in most PCN claimform threads here already  - use our search top right.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

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

hehe obv not.

yes march..

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

  • 2 weeks later...

Hello, is this a good start?

 

1. It is admitted that Defendant is the recorded keeper of [motor vehicle].

 

2. It is denied that the Claimant has complied with Schedule 4, Protection of Freedoms Act 2012; see paragraph 5.1a. The car park signs are owned by Civil Enforcement Limited. Under CPR 31.14 I have requested evidence of the claimants contract between Civil Enforcement Limited and the landowner that assigns the right to enter into contracts with the public and make claims in their own name, and proof of planning permission granted for signage etc under the Town and Country Planning Act 2007.

 

3. It is denied that the Claimant entered 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 not 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. The terms of the Claimant's signage are displayed in a font which is too small to be read, in poor condition and is in such a position of easy vehicle obstruction. In addition to this anyone attempting to read the tiny font at dusk would not be able to due to being placed in a poorly lit area. It is, therefore, denied that the Claimant's signage is capable of creating a legally binding contract.

 

5. After investigation by the local borough council, there was no identified planning permission for Civil Enforcement Limited or any past business or individual for any erection of signage or ANPR usage of which Civil Enforcement Limited are relying on.

 

6. According to the Parking Act 2019 private car parks must give motorists a 10-minute grace period. As this car park solely server Burger King, I was a paying customer who overstayed by 2 minutes 57 seconds I would argue that this overstay should be extended in good will.

 

 

4. 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

Well done on all the research you've done, which will be vital when you draw up a Witness Statement further down the line (if the fleecers don't give up first) - but what you have drafted is not for now.

 

We have a case at the moment where the motorist drew up a long list of defence points - so the fleecers' solicitor knew what he/she was going to say and therefore prepared to counter every point.  Keep the other side guessing!

 

You only need a few lines.  For example, simply saying "It is denied that the Claimant entered into a contract with the Defendant" covers all of the reasons why no contract was formed - non-use of POFA, carp signage, no planning permission, no locus standi, etc.  Points 2, 4, 5 & 6 need to go.

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

Yes slim it down to 3 main points max that can be fleshed out later Less is More at this stage, don't give them stuff they can try to rebut with waffle in a WS.

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

I wouldn't submit at the very last minute as MCOL can play up, plus it's not like a Witness Statement where you're trying to outguess the fleecers.  Submit it at the start of March, which also gives the fleecers the chance to reply to the CPR request and for other regulars to comment.

 

How about -

 

 

1  The Defendant is the recorded keeper of [motor vehicle].

 

2.  The Claimant was not 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 car park 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.


3.  In any case it is denied that the Claimant entered into a contract with the Defendant.

 

 

4. 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.

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

Thank you so much. I'll submit this tomorrow. I also visited the location yesterday, its 100 miles from my home. They've changed the signage, there's now a lot more small signs. There is an erected sign on entrance, damaged and the ANPR is actually fixed to the side of the burger king building.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Try to remember what the signs were like when you were ticketed. CEL are supposed to show the signage existing when you were there not the current signs. When signage is changed it is sometimes after they have lost in Court as a result of poor signage. Also if they state in their WS that the signs were as at the time of your incident, that calls into question the veracity of their WS as well as being perjurious. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

you mean they have 28 days to do something else it gets autostayed

 

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

  • 4 weeks later...

Quite correct...

Claim Status

A claim was issued against you on 09/02/2021

Your acknowledgment of service was submitted on 10/02/2021 at 14:39:35

Your acknowledgment of service was received on 10/02/2021 at 16:05:21

Your defence was submitted on 01/03/2021 at 09:53:49

Your defence was received on 01/03/2021 at 12:05:48

Still haven't heard anything as of yet. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Keep all evidence safe in case they decide to lift any Stay.

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

Would it be a false assumption to assume that as 28 days have passed and MCOL is not stating anything else then they did not pursue the claim? Would MCOL not state that or update accordingly? Are you able to kindly explain how long they have to lift a stay and what's involved for them?

 

Actually just received a response to the CPR13.41 request.

24.03.21

We refer to your recent correspondence.

 

The agreement with our client is confidential, business sensitive document and we are not under any obligation to disclose it. We have full and valid legal authority to manage and enforce the terms and conditions of parking at this cr park and will adduce evidence of the same should the matter proceed to a claim in the small claims court.

Link to post
Share on other sites

i would not assume the claim is autostayed, it's not +28 plus there are always delays esp with covid.

should nothing further be entered into MCOL then they have 6yrs to lift the stay.

simply don't ever move without informing the court.

  • Thanks 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

  • 2 weeks later...

3 copies

court

sols

your file

 

no to mediation

1 wit you

 

the rest is obv.

 

on the copy to CEL or their sols if they state one

do not give them email/sig/phone.

  • Thanks 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

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...