Civil Enforcement Ltd (again!)

[FrazzledMum]

But in a Court of Law the main facts CEL have in their favour being the Management of the Parking Area to charge you are:-

Video Camara Evidance (usually placed at the entrance and Exit with the times you Enter and Leave)

Signs (Clearly Displaying the Terms and Conditions of Parking)

The £10 Charge for the Camara Evidance is Classed as a "Service"

 

 

so are you saying that basically in a court of law, CEL could win because they have this evidence. they say they have the camera evidence and i am sure they have because I am guilty of overstaying. There were signs and I knew about them.

 

My husband just says if you can't do the time, don't do the crime, which is not very supportive really. Yes, I did do it and i can stick my hand up to that but I think £40 is over the top for what i did. So that being my defence, is it the case that we are just relying on CEL not taking this to court. If they did, they could win but just hope a judge agrees that the charge is excessive. I just want to get this straight in my head!!!

 

Thank you for your patience.

[emsgeorge]

Frazzledmum - they are trying to charge you a PENALTY. They can only charge you for the losses they have incurred. No charge for using the car park = no losses. £1 charge for parking = £1 loss. And Im sure it wouldnt cost you £40 to park there, now would it.

 

Any 'video camera' evidence (called ANPR) relies on infra red cameras, which are zoomed in to catch the number plate area - so usually no driver shots. Some systems capture an 'overview' shot on a different camera - again, usually really bad quality.

 

When you pull into a car park, how many signs do you take notice of - most people simply don't !.

 

this £10 charge for evidence is the maximum they can charge for release under Data Protection Act - I dont remember this being a 'service'

[Al27]

I think this talk of court is confusing matters. I think the guy taking that company to court is challenging the idea that they can sell you camera footage for £10.

 

It doesn't alter the fact that a private company has no legal right to demand a financial penalty for breach of contract.

 

To summerise:

 

• A sign saying "if you stay over three hours, you agree to pay £40" is an attempt to form a contract. Say the driver saw it, read it, considered it and appeared to accept it by leaving their car there but then stayed four hours. He has breached the agreed contract, but the £40 is a punative penalty charge and is unenforceable [Dunlop Pneumatic Tyre Co. Ltd. v. New Garage and Motor Co. Ltd [1915]]. The landowner is only allowed to sue for damages incurred, and the vast distance between what he wants (£40) and what he has lost (£0) means the contract is null and void.

 

If that wasn't the case, people could put up signs saying "if you stay over 3 hours, you agree to pay £10,000" and they'd be hundreds of court cases every day with people cashing in!

 

Could I put a sign on my drive saying "No paperboys. If you cross this line holding a newspaper, you agree to pay me £500 a day for 33 years". Of course not.

 

It is due to this legislation that companies can't enforce a cancellation charge. If I cancel my broadband after 6 months and I'm on a 12 month contract, the ISP can demand I pay up the remainder of the 6 months ie. they are entitled to what they would have lost. They cannot impose a cancellation charge.

 

All the parking companies know this. Which is why they only chance a couple of court cases a year. Every now and again they take a punt, just on the chance they'll get a braindead judge or a dim defendant, just so they can test the water. They have not been successful so far (far from it) and remember that of probably 500,000 of these tickets issued every year, we see one or two cases per annum.

 

• a court case also depends on them identifying the driver and taking them to court. How can they do that if they only have the keeper's address? CCTV proves nothing. One of the two cases that went to court this year lasted about 5 minutes because the idiots had taken the registered keeper to court, not the driver. The judge asked "how do you know the defendant was the driver." The parking company replied "we just do".

 

Unsurprisingly, it didn't go any further and the parking company made themselves look like complete morons.

[FrazzledMum]

thanks A127 that is really helpful. I will try to stick it out!!

 

Only other thing i wanted to know was can the debt collection agency register you as a bad debtor so that it shows on credit history or is that only if they have taken you to court first? Is it possible for this info to get onto your credit history without a court case?

 

Need to remortgage next year so don't want any more hassles in addition to difficulties obtaining mortgages at the moment due to economic climate.

 

Folks on here are great, really helpful and patient. Cheers

[letshelp]

Nothing will go on your credit record unless they get a ccj, and they are at least 10,000,000 miles away from that. Relax forget them, have a drink.

regards

[pin1onu]

My husband just says if you can't do the time, don't do the crime.

The whole point is that you didn't commit a crime. Have the police been around? No - why? Because this is a civil matter.

 

As Al27 has so eloquently explained the only ones breaching any laws are the PPC in attempting to make you pay an unlawful penalty.

 

If the PPC had made a reasonable charge say £1 or £2 then they might have a case against you. But £40 is taking the P*** which ever way you look at.

 

Stand firm against these merchant bankers - they have no case and are just trying to intimidate.

 

Have a read of the Private Parking Charges guide in the stickies section of this forum (and get hubby to look at it as well) - it's a really well researched piece of work that exposes the legality of the claims made against you. You have the law on your side in this matter.

 

Can I just add that in the extremely unlikely event that this ever goes to court you just need to post up here and there will be no shortage of volunteers to help you prepare a defense.

 

The most likely outcome is that they will send you a load of paper for your recycling bin and then drop the matter. Contained on their letters will be all manner of threats - including Court Action, Bailiffs, County Court Judgements and Debt Collectors. All standard - all bluff. Read back through this thread if you want further reassurance.

 

In answer to your question - your credit record cannot be affected without a court case. You need to be taken to court, lose, and then not pay the judgement in the time allowed before any adverse credit rating is entered.

[crem]

FrazzledMum, I have noticed something about your letter that requires urgent attention before sending:

 

You should print it out immediately and delete any computer record still on your computer. Then take this only copy and fold it neatly in 2 before placing it in the nearest shreader*.

 

* If no shreader is available then tearing it into at least 412 pieces will be a suitable alternative.

[Bernie_the_Bolt]

Signs saying "if you do x, you agree to pay £x" are legal rubbish.

 

I think that this statement as it stands is misleading.

 

Signs stipulating the terms of a contract are perfectly legal.

 

The counterparty to the contract must be able to show that the terms were reasonable and that they were reasonably on display and visible to be read.

 

As far as PPCs are concerned, the bit that is rubbish is that the contractual terms can be enforced on the keeper of a vehicle rather than the driver.

[Al27]

Yep, I think that needs some clarifying!

A more accurate way of saying it would be that "if you do x, you agree to pay £5" (a charge), whereas "if you do x, you agree to pay £85" is a penalty.

 

Depending on the situation. But a £40 punishment for a parking 'infringement' is unenforceable.

Edited August 1, 2008 by Al27

[FrazzledMum]

thanks guys, will be standing firm against these bullies and will keep you posted. On a wider note, is there any campaign (other than us) to get these parasites outlawed?

[Al27]

Hi

 

Google 'fightback forums' and click on the first result.

[Bernie_the_Bolt]

Yep, I think that needs some clarifying!

A more accurate way of saying it would be that "if you do x, you agree to pay £5" (a charge), whereas "if you do x, you agree to pay £85" is a penalty.

 

Depending on the situation. But a £40 punishment for a parking 'infringement' is unenforceable.

 

It depends on what the prevailing rate for parking is in that area.

 

For example, if a shopping area close to an airport believes it is being used as free airport parking it would be perfectly reasonable for it to erect prominent signs (especially at the entrance) to the effect of:

 

"Parking is provided for the sole purpose of using these shops, if we have reason to believe that the parking facilities are being used for any other purpose, irrespective of whether use of these shops is part of that purpose, a charge of £x per day or part thereof will be levied and enforced using all legal means if necessary.

 

Use of these parking facilities is acceptance of this and acceptance of the use of CCTV for enforcement.

 

£x is determined by reference to the daily charge for short-term parking at x airport car-park."

 

Whather an amount is a penalty can only be decided on facts not on amount alone.

[Al27]

Ok, so the airport charges £15 a day, say.

 

I fail to see how the shopping centre sign would be enforceable if the 'charge' was in the £40 / £80 / £120 region.

 

Not to mention that CCTV would just show a random person, whereas the company only has access to the keeper's address , who is under no obligation to respond at all.

[adamh]

I received a fine today for the sum of £150 , for a car park in east sussex, polegate train station, yes £150, you can forget half because i cant afford to pay either in time. I visited the post office there at 1pm 10 weeks ago, and also returned 5 hours later at 6pm that day to pick up my partner from work from the train, not quite sure why the system thinks i sat in my car for five hours, while i was actually at work 1.5 miles away some 30 minutes later at 1.30pm (with my car of course or did i decide to stroll back 1.5 miles!?), who knows.

 

I have researched some articles this evening, the most chilling to which I found on the CREATIVE CAR PARK MANAGEMENT brochure (ccpm).

 

Funnily enough my letter / enforcement notice, was marked to be sent from 'civil enforcement ltd' / liverpool. But the post mark was NW9, frighteningly close to NW7 i thought, and also close to CCPM contact company in NW7, coincidence?.

w.... creative car park co uk

 

i was amazed with their statements on ANPR ticketing, all so spine chillingly 'polite' about robbing the public blindly, with technology. what can you say!. I cannot see how two businesses can work together without exchanging revenue in some way shape or form,

 

to conclude, for the average supermarket, robbing the customer is seen as a way of increasing the chances of a customer returning? oh, and do not forget the free access to useful database information the supermarket is receiving on 'shopping trends' and profit generation, I ask to the supermarkets, what type of company do you employ? a parking enforcement company? or a profiteering company quite plainly using you as a tool to lever cash from your customers, just to think, if we did not have robbers taking our money on the street, we may have a little more money to be able to afford the extravegant prices of your shops, you know instill a little faith back into the shops we once used to love.

Edited August 18, 2008 by adamh

[robin9342]

I received a fine today for the sum of £150 , for a car park in east sussex, polegate, yes £150, you can forget half because i cant afford to pay either in time. I visited the post office there at 1pm, and also returned 5 hours later at 6pm to pick up my partner from work from the train station, not quite sure why the system thinks i sat in my car for five hours, while i was actually at work 1.5 miles away some 30 minutes later (with my car ). who knows!, all i do know is i will be using a solicitor.

 

I have researched many articles this evening, the most chilling to which I found on the CREATIVE CAR PARK MANAGEMENT brochure (ccpm).

 

Funnily enough my letter was marked to be sent from 'civil enforcement ltd' / liverpool. But the post mark was NW9, frighteningly close to NW7 i thought, and also close to CCPM contact company in NW7, coincidence?.

www creative car park management

 

i was amazed with thier statements on ANPR ticketing, profit generation and the likes, all so spine chillingly 'polite' about robbing the public blindly, with technology. what can you say!

 

You didn't receive a fine, you received an unenforceable invoice. You won't need a solicitor. Just ignore all correspondence from the PPC and they will go away after 5 or 6 letters. You might wan't to watch out for the plague of locusts that will hit your garden though

[letshelp]

Hi Adamh and welcome,

 

Why on earth would you use a solicitor, that would probably cost you more than the penalty these parking [problematic] wish to impose.

Just ignore them its totally unenforceable and they will go away eventully, wont even cost you a stamp.

regards

[adamh]

thanks for the advice, and welcome. i did get a bit ott, stress related i think. I saw a fee for £25, i thought it would be a better option than parting with the bigger sums. why then, If it is something to ignore and it will go away, how come the dvla is providing details to a private company as such that has no law to enforce and fishes for the vulnerable to bite? how can such practice be allowed?! its worse than an email phising [problem]!

[letshelp]

The DVLA are not in the slightest bit interested in what the private company does with your details that it sells for, £2.50p It is just interested in the £2.50p

Its allowed because the government want to obtain as much money as possible!!!!

Ignore all the threatograms that you will receive, but file them away to give yourself a laugh when feeling down, they will theaten everything from ccj's, to sending the' boys round', probably even throw in killing your cat, anything that will make you panic and pay them money. Remember its not about justice or even the law, its aboutgetting your money anyway possible.

regards

[robin9342]

One other thing: Even though you didn't actually break their "parking rules", don't bother trying to appeal. PPCs "appeal" processes are just another part of the [problem] - they never cancel tickets: they just want your money!

[sameagle]

Good Morning,

 

Sam the Eagle here, a new subscriber, I found this site last night whilst looking for articles about “Euro Car Parks”

I thought I’d chuck my two’pennorth in, although I wish I’d found this forum earlier.

 

A friend, a disabled lady, who is also deaf, visited her local “Tesco” in Stoke-on-Trent, last month; she had a friend with her, who is also disabled, they each hold a “Blue Badge".

 

Whilst parking in a bay marked for the disabled, the passenger complained of feeling ill.

 

My friend assisted her passenger into the store, and they went to the cafe/toilet area, where the passenger had a drink, and took medication.

 

My friend then went back to her car, buying a couple of items on the way.

She intended to drive near to the door of the shop, pick up her passenger, and leave.

 

She arrived at the car to find that a ticket was being issued by the attendant, from “Euro”, because she had forgotten to display her badge.

 

He was sympathetic, but was unable to cancel the ticket for her.

 

She wrote to “Euro” explaining, but they said that the charge, fifty quid reduced to thirty if paid within so many days blah blah, must stand.

 

They said the “intent” of the sign is very clear, etcetera.

 

I could not understand how a user of a bay can possibly be expected to interpret the "intent" of a sign, so I entered into the fray!

 

I went to the site, with the intention oft photographing the signs, and then I noticed the following.

The words on the signs are...

 

“Parking limited to 3 hours.

No return within 2 hours.”

 

“Park only within marked bays”

 

“Disabled badge holders only in disabled bays”

 

“Parent and child parking only within marked bays”

 

Paragraphs 1, 2 and 4 seem OK, but paragraph three seems a bit odd.

If I were composing it, I would have versed it in the manner as the others, a clear command, “Display your badge and clock, or else!”

 

So [before I was aware of this sites’ existence], I wrote and told them that there is no “debt” as they put it, because my friend was, and still is, in possession of a valid “Blue Badge”.

 

I posted their letter, last Friday, told them that I am dealing with the matter, and that if I don’t receive a letter of cancellation by this Wednesday, then I shall consider the matter is finished, and that there will be no further communication from me.

I welcome your comments.

[Al27]

You've probably put too much effort into it already. They are unlikely to 'cancel' your ticket because no private company wants to do themselves out of £50 or whatever.

 

Two points:

 

• a blue disabled badge is not necessary on private land

• no company can 'fine' you for not following their rules. I could drive to Tesco today and park my car horizontally over two disabled bays. It would be inconsiderate, but legally Euro Car Parks couldn't do a thing

 

Just ignore any further letters you receive and eventually they will go away. Don't be intimidated by their debt collection letters or lie abouts court and CCJs. It's all a big [problem] to scare you into paying.

[Yay4UKPC]

The DVLA are not in the slightest bit interested in what the private company does with your details that it sells for, £2.50p It is just interested in the £2.50p

Its allowed because the government want to obtain as much money as possible!!!!

 

We could help our country by purposely parking over lines, and driving through no entry signs. DVLA will get £2.50 each time to help enforce tax evaders, possibly raise enough to actually fix some of UKs roads (ha), and these [problem] companies would have to finally give up.. Everyone wins

[princess esmerelda]

One other thing: Even though you didn't actually break their "parking rules", don't bother trying to appeal. PPCs "appeal" processes are just another part of the [problem] - they never cancel tickets: they just want your money!

 

 

Hello All.

 

I posted on here sometime ago and I have been keeping track of what is going on Re: CEL

 

I have received the odd 'Threatogram' from Newlyn plc the last one took them 4 months to put together, that one threatned 'Court Action' and so I decided to write to Watchgdog and WHICH? Watchdog were not helpful at all and said they would keep me on file.

 

WHICH? were better and reccomended that I write to the 'Traffic Penalty Tribunal' office in Manchester, this I did, however they have written back and said that as it is a 'Private Contractor' I am referring to they have 'no jurisdiction to hear appeals against private contractors' They reccomend going through CEL's own appeals process ( LOL!) If on doing so I remain dissatisfied with the outcome I may wish to contact the SECURITY INDUSTRY AUTHORITY ON 0870 2430 100 or alterantively contact Trading Standards Or Consumer Direct. They also say it might be worth contacting the company/Individuals that own the piece of land on which the company is operating.

 

I am going to write to the company who allow CEL to operate on their land and voice my disgust at them allowing these kind's of rogues to threaten and intimidate law abiding citizens.

 

I will then just ignore any more correspondence from CEL or Newlyn and just wait to see if an invitation to attend court arrives as I am getting very bored with all of this now.

 

I get the impression that these kinds of companies are just given the green light to opererate exactly as they wish, goverment and any local or legal body have no jurisdication over them or it is a case of 'It's just not my job mate to help you sort it out, you are on your own with this one mate!'

[Yay4UKPC]

It's HIGHLY HIGHLY unlikely they will actually take you to court. They can't win, so won't bother. At the end of the day, they just want you to pay them, and will say anything to you that will get you to pay up. It's all words and no action.

 

The thing is that no one is breaking any enforceable law, them or you. You can send a letter to anyone and ask for money. If they pay you, that's their choice. It's just the same here, but they are trying to make out that you have to pay them.. At the end of the day, they are just asking, and there is no legal reason that you have to.

[letshelp]

quote=princess esmerelda

 

'WHICH? were better and reccomended that I write to the 'Traffic Penalty Tribunal' office in Manchester, this I did, however they have written back and said that as it is a 'Private Contractor' I am referring to they have 'no jurisdiction to hear appeals against private contractors' They reccomend going through CEL's own appeals process ( LOL!) If on doing so I remain dissatisfied with the outcome I may wish to contact the SECURITY INDUSTRY AUTHORITY ON 0870 2430 100 or alterantively contact Trading Standards Or Consumer Direct. They also say it might be worth contacting the company/Individuals that own the piece of land on which the company is operating.'

 

Hi Princess,

Notice the theme from the quote, its nothing to do with us suggest you call someone else. I personally wouldn't even waste a stamp writing to the owner of the land because they will probably be less interested than the organisations above.

regards