CEL ANPR PCN Claimform - Tily Carpentry Yate Bristol ***Discontinued***

[lookinforinfo]

Could you please fill in the questions below. They do like to add on the charges don't they-though it does work in your favour if they ever go to court.  I notice they haven't said how you breached their stupid rules-did they tell you on their PCN? 

 

 

[lookinforinfo]

Excellent that was quick. As it was one of your children driving it is important not to let CEL know who was driving and hopefully CEL has messed up their documentation so there is no keeper liability. So if you could please fill out the following questions we will find out-

 

 

[lookinforinfo]

The idea is not to reveal who was driving but to create doubt who was driving. CEL are particularly poor with their PCNs at creating keeper liability which is a shame if your son has thrown away what could be vital evidence. [CEL frequently don't adhere to the correct wording necessary in PoFA to allow keeper liability or they send off the NTK to late to comply with the Act] It is not fatal since they will have to include all correspondence in their WS or perhaps with their CPR request.

[lookinforinfo]

If scanning is a problem you can always photograph them, convert to pdf and upload on to your thread.

[lookinforinfo]

Could you please show the back of the first PCN you received round about 17th January. Was there a WS included or just the PE v Beavis case?

[lookinforinfo]

The reason I asked for a look at the back of the PCN was because there was nothing on the front that allowed them to transfer the liability from the driver to the keeper as there should be to comply with PoFA.

As it was one of your sons who was driving you are in the clear and cannot be liable for this PCN. All you have to do is not to divulge who the driver was.

[lookinforinfo]

As you are not liable for this PCN I think that we could try and head this off at the pass to coin an old wetern film cliche.

To save the time of yourself,  CEL and the Court you could send a Cease and Desist letter to CEL. basically saying that you are not responsible for paying the PCN as you were not the driver and there is no keeper liability involved. You are not prepared to divulge who was driving so if they want continue to go to Court not only do you have a complete defence to their claim but you will be expecting the Court to add exemplary damages to your costs.

[lookinforinfo]

No Problem. If your son has not revealed who was driving it does make their case more difficult.

[lookinforinfo]

They haven't complied with PoFA as far as keeper liability is concerned.

This part of what the NTK should say 

"

warn the keeper that if, at the end of the period of 28 days beginning with the day after that on which the notice to keeper is given—

(i)the amount of the unpaid parking charges (as specified under paragraph (c) or (d)) has not been paid in full, and

(ii)the creditor does not know both the name of the driver and a current address for service for the driver,

the creditor will (if all the applicable conditions under this Schedule are met) have the right to recover from the keeper so much of that amount as remains unpaid;

 

Instead they just said this.........................so absolutely there was no notice of them transferring the liability from the driver to the keeper.

                                                 "

[lookinforinfo]

It would help if it was possible to read the signage at the entrance and the signs inside the carpark. Just about the only thing I can read is "Important Message" but I have no idea what the message is.

 

I do see see a sign that says  Permit Holders Only. But I cannot read the sign beneath it. If the car did not have a permit then the driver was trespassing which only the landowner can pursue not CEL. 

 

Is it possible to get photos of the signs that we can read please. The signs at the entrance, their terms and Conditions and whether there are different T&Cs within the carpark.

 

The font size seems too small on the notices that can be seen, but the small font sizes does  make a contract with drivers difficult to claim.

 

 

[lookinforinfo]

There doesn't seem to be any signs for Grooms house but the others appear to require permits to park there.

If you are 100% sure that the parking was at grooms house then providing you are also 100% sure that CEL does not cover that area then you are fine.

 

However the car shown on the PCN was driving past the sign that said CEL had parking rights there and gave 20 minutes allowance to stay without a permit.  The time stayed on the PCN was about 37 minutes , from memory.

 

What we have not seen is the car park sign at the entrance to any car park and do you have to go through CEL areas to get to Grooms House car park.

[lookinforinfo]

You didn't answer any of my questions.

 

Do you have to drive through any CEL areas to get to Grooms House.

Are there any signs for Grooms house-parking or permits

How many times are quoted on the PCN

what are the times [if any] on all the photographs of the car

 

[lookinforinfo]

Well done. That is good news. Not quite sure why they have cancelled the PCN-they haven't got the brains to work it out by themselves what they did  wrong. I suspect there may have been a court case where the same mistake was made and they have decided not to risk another kicking in Court.