Jump to content

  • Tweets

  • Posts

  • 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

CEL ANPR PCN PAPLOC now claimform - Morrisons, Butterfly Walk Car Park Denmark Hill Camberwell, London SE5 8RW***Claim Dismissed***

Recommended Posts

Hi All


I read a previous thread on the subject with interest and followed all that advice provided. I have ignored all the threatening letters until the 'letter before action' was received from Civil Enforcement Limited (letter dated 7th July 2022).



Vehicle Reg: XXXXXXX (text not shown in this thread)

PCN Reference: XXXXXXXXXXX (text not shown in this thread)

Date of incident: 24/04/2021 (parking in breach of Terms and Conditions on Notice)


Debt Outstanding: £170.00


Can I have some advice please on how to proceed? The letter states I need to respond to the letter and complete their Reply Form within 30 days of the date of their letter. 

I paid at the ticket machine before entering Morrisons (don't have ticket anymore) but still have the Morrisons receipt where the £2 charge was deducted from the bill (I showed the parking ticket at the time of purchase to the till cashier to get this reduction).


The original PCN was issued on 04/05/2021 and identified the 'from' and 'to' time to be within the 2 hour period paid for.


When the first letter arrived I appealed to POPLA explaining the issue and electronically attaching a copy of the receipt as part of the submission but they rejected the appeal and still stated I had to pay. This is when I started searching for information and came across this excellent forum. I have not corresponded with them since despite receiving probably 5 separate letters.


I did see a proposed wording letter response in the previous locked thread about using 'de minimis'. Post #70 identified some wording in this respect but assume each claim needs to be worded separately. It also advised not to issue too much information too early.


What information would be helpful to post in order to gain some advice? Many thanks in advance. I expect that the CEL lawyers may read these posts out of interest but your help is most appreciated. Thank you. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks All



I do not know why they are chasing me? I did key in the registration number into the ticket machine and paid before entering but it is possible I may have keyed it in incorrectly but it wouldn't have been far wrong?

The company originally were sending the letters to an old address of mine but this was changed after I updated the DVLC info for the car registration details.



I'll look up the wrong registration snotty letter on CAG. I'll post this on here before I look to send. Thanks.



You have asked me to complete a form but I haven't received a court letter so am confused with this?



Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi All

Searched on CAG and drew this letter up. Does it hit the mark?

Dear Civil Enforcement Limited,

Ref: Letter dated 07/07/2022, PCN reference xxxxxxxxxxxxx

Cheers for your Letter before action - Claim for debt. I smirked at the idea you actually expected me to take your tripe seriously and cough up, which are further exacerbated with your extra unicorn tax made up extras thrown into the mix.

You were paid the correct parking charge. You suffered no loss. In fact the driver left early, so you were paid extra! The chance of typing part of a registration number wrong is clearly "de minimis".

Every time a greedy private parking company has taken such cases to court they have received a belta of a kicking from the judge. Getting the registration number wrong is not a reason for pursuing motorists. That was established when Baroness Walmsley v TFL [2005] EWHC 896 in the High Court of Justice won her case.

I would also point out that the new Government Parking Code of Practice due out shortly of which CEL will be only too well aware since it will severely hamper your money grabbing antics, includes the miscuing of registration numbers.

I have of course kept evidence of the parking payment. 

Should this case go to court despite having pointed out the futility of doing so, I will be asking the Court not only for an unreasonable costs order under CPR 27.14(2)(g), but I will also later sue for breach of GDPR as you knew full well your case was totally flawed but still carried on. The standard for breaches of GDPR is now around £750. 

I look forward to your deafening silence.

Yours in mirth


  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Many thanks for the quick responses and support.



I'll amend the letter as recommended and get this posted off this week. Thank you.



I'll follow up with the details requested and will cut and paste into this thread.


Great work back, very much appreciated.




Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

Evening All


I have received this correspondence from CEL this week letter dated 15th August but received on 17th August. Your comments are welcome as this has never been raised before.

Following knowledge of the initial CEL correspondence (sent to the wrong address), I went back to the car park and took photographs of the machine and the surrounding signage. Not sure if this will assist further?

CEL response letter 15_08_22.pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites

See photos and location where the photos were taken from.

I'll add another post about the alleged duration.

On arrival I went to parking machine to key in the details requested.

When doing so it was noticed that the ticket machine did not accept cards for payment. I never carry money and pay for all items electronically. I have not carried any cash for at least 3 years now. Had to cancel process on the machine.

I went back to search the car but did not have any old change to put in the machine.

I had to therefore go into the Morrisons store and went to the confectionery stall. I was advised by the staff that the only way I could obtain change was to buy an item and receive an element of change in the transaction (small cashback request). There was a small queue before I was served.

I then returned outside to the ticket machine and acquired a parking receipt.

Then returned to the Morrisons shop, undertook my shopping and at the till, redeemed the receipt value paid as part of the shopping transaction. Again there was a queue at this till also.

Went to car, loaded up the shopping and left. I have the Morrisons receipt.

Butterfly walk photos taken May 2021.pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites

Q: When are they claiming you entered the car park and when do they say you left? PCN dated 04/05/21

From 24/04/21 11:42:29 To 24/04/21 13:30:09 

Will do, regarding post 11.

The first PCN was included in post #5. Please advise if this isn't sufficient? 

1 Date of the infringement 24/04/2021

2 Date on the NTK [this must have been received within 14 days from the 'offence' date] 04/05/2021 see post #5 for PCN (redacted)

3 Date received Sent to wrong address. Forwarded on and received sometime after 08/05/2021 14:31:40 date of postmark

4 Does the NTK mention schedule 4 of The Protections of Freedoms Act 2012? [Y/N?] Yes

5 Is there any photographic evidence of the event? Yes, seems to be taken from ANPR camera

6 Have you appealed? [Y/N?] post up your appeal] Yes, was online to www.ce-service.co.uk

Have you had a response? [Y/N?] post it up Yes, attached.

7 Who is the parking company? Return address on envelope was: Civil Enforcement Limited, Horton House, Exchange Flags, Liverpool L2 3PF

8. Where exactly [car park name and town] Butterfly Walk Car Park, Denmark Hill, London SE5 8RW

For either option, does it say which appeals body they operate under. Don't believe so, but could appeal only to www.ce-service.co.uk or to the address as noted in point 7 above.

If you have received any other correspondence, please mention it here Appealed to POPLA online but was rejected quickly. Also noticed that there was a person in the exit shot on the ANPR picture which is attached (redacted)

Copy the windscreen or ANPR section to your thread and answer the questions...Included in post #5

Exit photo on PCN issued on 04_05_2021.pdf CEL response letter 11_05_2021.pdf

Edited by dx100uk
unnecessary previous post quote removed
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...
  • dx100uk changed the title to CEL ANPR PCN PAPLOC now claimform - Morrisons, Butterfly Walk Car Park Denmark Hill Camberwell, London SE5 8RW

Hi, will stop rushing. Didn't know I was. 😀 I have therefore not completed the AoS. Didn't see your post, just the previous one from FTMDave.


Info below...


Which Court have you received the claim from ?


MCOL County Court Business Centre, Northampton NN1


Name of the Claimant : Civil Enforcement Limited, Horton House, Exchange Flags, Liverpool L2 3PF


Claimants Solicitors: (if one is stated) None but signed by S Wilson, Head of Legal (Claimant's Legal Representative)


Date of issue – 19th Oct 22


Date for AOS -  4th November 22. I received the letter on 9th November 


Date to submit Defence -   18th November 4pm.


What is the claim for  


1. Claim for money relating to a Parking Charge for breach of contract terms/conditions(TCs) for parking in private car park (CP) managed by Claimant. Drivers may only park pursuant to TCs of use displayed in CP and agreed upon entry/parking. ANPR cameras or manual patrols monitor vehicles entering/exiting the CP and TC breaches.

Charges of GPP 170 claimed. 

Violation date: redacted

Payment due date: redacted

Time in: redacted Time out: redacted

PCN: redacted

Vehicle reg mark: redacted

Car Park: Butterfly Walk


Total due GBP170


The Claimant claims the sum of GBP £190 for the unpaid parking charge inc GBP20 interest under S.69 of the CCA 1984 

Rate: 8% pa from due date to 18/10/22

Same rate to Judgment or sooner payment at daily rate of GBP0.04.

Total debt and interest due GBP190


What is the value of the claim?



Amount Claimed 190

court fees 35

legal rep fees 50

Total Amount 275



Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks FTMDave

Wording taken directly from MCOL


A claim was issued against you on 19/10/2022

Your acknowledgment of service was submitted on 11/11/2022 at 20:46:03

Your acknowledgment of service was received on 14/11/2022 at 01:05:33


The wording states it was received not accepted.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Letter compiled to be sent to Claimants Legal Representative c/o the Claimant


Few quick questions:

1. It is not clear to me that the reference to the date in the wording for The Town and County Planning Act 2007 is correct and has any relevance in England? I could not find this date on a search but did find later dated amendments for specific aspects of the Act. In this case I have omitted the date from the letter and referenced the title of the Act. I'm assuming it can be argued that any proof should have been relevant to the version of the Act at that time. 

2. For my benefit what does CPR acronym reference?

3. CPR31.15 states that information should be not more than 7 days after the date on which he received the request. I'm assuming that the 14 day reference period requested in the letter is to set a date for the potential non-compliance request from the claimant/their solicitor within this period.

4. Assume I would just need a proof of posting for this letter?


Many thanks.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The letter that is going to the Claimant is for the CPR 31.14 request only.

Advised to keep it simple at this point. After looking at the examples the wording proposed for the defence on MCOL is:

*** Start of ***

The Defendant contends that the particulars of claim vague and are generic in nature which fails to comply with CPR 16.4. The Defendant accordingly sets out its case below and relies on CPR r 16.5 (3) in relation to any particular allegation to which a specific response has not been made.

 1.      It is denied that the Defendant entered into a contract with the Claimant.

2.      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 simply 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.

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

 4.      In any case it is denied that the Defendant broke the terms of a contract with the Claimant. There are no contractual costs and interest cannot be accrued on a speculative charge. The Claimant is attempting double recovery by adding an additional sum not included in the original offer.

 5.      Notwithstanding the above on 15th November 2022, I made a request pursuant to CPR 31.14 for the Claimant to disclose its necessary evidence in support of its claim. To this date the claimant has failed to respond to said request.

 6.      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.

*** End Of ***


Are the items below helpful construction points/ amendments to add these now from the basic template and included in the wording above? Or better to omit these at this stage?

Is the Claimant contracted by the landowner to provide car park management services noted in point 2.

Added interest claim in point 4. 

Added the CPR request in point 5.

Is the wording between the asterisks above therefore deemed suitable to submit?

Many thanks again.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks again. Bland it is. Will do.


MCOL website summary status:


A claim was issued against you on 19/10/2022

Your acknowledgment of service was submitted on 11/11/2022 at 20:46:03

Your acknowledgment of service was received on 14/11/2022 at 01:05:33

Your defence was submitted on 15/11/2022 at 14:38:41

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

Evening All


Next stage of correspondence received.


I have received a General Form of Judgement or Order today through the post which claims I have been sent Notice of Proposed Allocation to Track which specified the date by which you were required to return the Direction Questionnaire. This Order is dated 6th January 2023 orders that the Defendant must file the DQ with the CCBC on or before 7 days from service of this Order. It continues that if not complied with your defence will be struck out without further order of the Court and the Claimant will be at liberty to enter judgement. It is now the 18th January.



1. This letter was received via my Royal Mail redirection - First Class set up as I have since moved house since the last round of correspondence in November 2022. The letter was addressed to my previous address.

2. I have not received the items mentioned in the letter.


I will post the letter (redacted) up here shortly.


Comments and direction gratefully received.


Order attached.

Court Order 06_01_23.pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you again. Late night again.


N180 form emailed off to the Court email address tonight, together with new address for correspondence. 


I haven't had anything from the Claimants to identify their solicitors, so do I just post this to them direct as per instruction above? Please advise.


(I had to read a few threads to check that mediation should be NO for this submission and expect that the way the wording above is shown may make people potentially default to the opposite....)


Regarding the vehicle aspects I've already changed driving licence, car insurance but may have to check whether I did the V5C. Thanks for that prompt. 



Link to post
Share on other sites

N180 form emailed off to the (Court) email address on 19/01/23.

Letter of same N180 posted to CEL (proof of delivery received) on 20/01/23.


Both included record of new address for any future correspondence:

1 in body of email to Court 

2 in separate letter to CEL in same envelope with the N180 posted out.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Evening All

Can you advise if I am supposed to be doing something in the interim period since the DQ email submission?

Do I need to prepare anything?

I have heard nothing back from courts on the DQ and there is no update on the MCOL website.

What are the expected next steps and timescales?


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Bad news.


Received an email from CCBC on Sunday stating that my DQ was issued after deadline (stated 18th, response issued on 19th @ 1am) and is therefore considered as not filed and the defence has been struck out.


I now need to complete an N244 Application and N180 Directions Questionnaire together with a fee to CCBC.  Was advised if I disagree with that decision to complete these this before the claimant can issue a CCJ.


I haven't seen the N244 form so any help in completing would be appreciated. I'll look to do that tonight.


Was checking regularly on the MCOL website for an update and nothing was forthcoming and now has the following.


DQ sent to you on 24/11/2022

General sanctions order was made on 06/01/2023

Defence was struck out on 19/02/2023

Your defence was rejected on 19/02/2023


They did receive my correspondence as they have now changed my address which was part of the email submission.

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...