Civil Enforcement Ltd (again!)

[creativesolution]

Now on the Daily Mail's website - McDonald's drive-through customers face £125 fine for taking too long to eat | the Daily Mail

[Nemeses]

Thanks for helping out guys (Sidewinder, MikeBigg, creativesolution),

 

Was unsure how to create a link to the online newspaper - still got a lot to learn

[RoverP6]

Have had problems with CEL since April over a PCN at Gatwick. Have now received a letter from Newlyn. Here is my reply to them.......

 

Re: Your letter dated 5/12/07.

 

This alleged debt is in dispute. I have written to your client CEL on a number of occasions (see copies enclosed) and they have failed to substantiate their claim.

 

In the circumstances please refer this matter back to your client.

Further research by myself and others show that yourself and CEL are gaining quite an unenviable reputation on the internet in various forums (details of which I will gladly provide should you require them), the national press and television due to your dubious business methods. This, on your part, may be due to you being mislead by CEL.

I have spoken to two members of your staff who admit that CEL only inform you that they are owed money by myself or others. You have no details of the circumstances and no copies of correspondence from me to them.

One member of your staff even informed me that your company are licensed bailiffs, which is plainly untrue as you are a debt collection agency. You have to employ bailiffs to carry out any CCJ’s you may be awarded. In this instance I think you will find that CEL are responsible for obtaining any CCJ and then they would employ bailiffs to carry out their business so I fail to see how you become involved in this matter.

 

Any further correspondence from you in relation to this matter may result in a complaint to the authorities under the Protection From Harassment Act 1997, Sect.40 of The Administration of Justice Act 1970 and Sect.21 of The Theft Act 1968.

[wagon23]

Hi, had the same issue with Civil Enforcement Ltd at Gatwick. Though I had eaten in Mcdonalds, they said I had over stayed by 11 mins the free stay allowance. I contacted the restaurant but had no joy. Unfortunately I wrote to CEL before seeing this web site. Have I left myself open to them taking the matter further?

The basis of the letter was that I found it outrageous that they were trying to charge me for eating in the venue.

Any help would be welcomed.\

Thanks Neil.

[RoverP6]

wagon23......follow this link.......Private PCN / Parking Ticket - Wild Bean Cafe BP Gatwick Connect Petrol Station! - FightBack Forums excellent articles on CEL.

Do NOT pay them.

[wagon23]

RoverP6, thank you, that was a great help, a superb letter. Much appreciated.

Neil

[bradis]

Firstly hello to everyone that is in the same boat as I am! I overstayed in January at Aldi Car Park by 22 minutes and then after two months out of the blue my husband (registered keeper) received a letter he had to pay £30 within 14 days £60 thereafter. I wrote to them an appeal against this decision saying it was me who parked there (I wish I had found this website earlier) but received no reply. Then my husband got Final Reminder saying to pay £60. I called the number they provided and gave my credit card details and forgot all about the matter.

Last week my husband received a letter from Newlyn asking to pay £149. This made me really angry as I thought I had already paid but funny enough payment had not gone throughJ I started looking for any info on CEL and found this website. Ever thankful for this forum! My husband sent two letters, one to CEL leeches saying he’s not going to pay as a registered keeper and they need to find a driver and asking not contact him again, and the other letter to Newlyn the ticket is in dispute. The only thing I’m concerned about is that even though they did not reply to my letter, where I admit I was the driver, they may still have it and will start chasing me now. Any advice anyone on what to do if they send an invoice to me this time?

[battyboomboom]

Basically, until you receive court papers then you have nothing to worry about, if you don't pay and they don't take you to court (and then win, which is very unlikely) then they won't get any of your hard earned cash.

[bradis]

I can ignore them it's just I don't want get scared every time someone unexpected knocks on my door.

[TideTurner]

Bradis,

 

Anybody who knocks on your door, unless appointed by a Court and without invitation is doing so unlawfully (with respect to menace or harrassment). They have no rights of entry, and you should simply turn them away, and then contact those who instructed them for an explanation.

 

Make a note of their name, company they work for, who instructed them, ID, date, time and everything that was said.

 

That is, IF they ever attend.

 

Keep an eye on your account in case they take out any payment.

 

You have not given your permission for your private or personal information to be communicated by any party, so you should also ask for a copy of the 'letter of instruction' provided to any acting party.

 

The only problem here is with them - how are they going to get money they aren't entitled to out of you?

 

Tide

[sophiaverloren]

Hi, I have been following these threads with interest because, as you can guess, I was also caught out at McDs in Gatwick.

 

 

I've sent my standard letter back and have now received the pretty red invoice as well as a letter saying my representation failed and the charge could not be cancelled - I suspect you may know the wording.

 

I had intended to reply and just to repeat the same as in my previous letter, possibly saying more specifically that I was disputing the charge.

 

However, reading all this makes me wonder: on the day I parked unwittingly to get a cup of tea, we were handed a flyer which mentioned the time limit. It mentioned no charges for overstaying, just that this was to enable other customers. Clearly we did not look for signs proving all the terms and conditions of parking in McDonalds car park. I've not seen anyone else mention this - not that it matters in the grand scheme of things I guess.

 

Now I see that new signs are in place, extending the period. As my "PCN" claims that I "overstayed" and gives the times (less than one hour), but does not say how long the limit was - how does that work now that the times have changed?

 

I have no intention of going into this with them and will stick to my standard letter, if anything at all - it's a busy time of year - but I find it curious. Does anyone else get the impression that they are moving the goalposts and trying different tactics - perhaps just to muddy the waters?

[bradis]

Thanks Tide. Much appreciated.

[Lilo72]

*removed*

[firstwithit]

Report them to Trading Standards for Harrassment!

 

Whatever you do, DONT PHONE THEM they will be rude and tell you anything to try and get money out of you.

 

Dont do it!!!!!

[Lilo72]

*removed*

[TideTurner]

This is not my area, but if it helps and hasn't come up before, take a look at Section 40 of the Administration of Justice Act 1970.

The Administration of Justice Act 1970.

Section 40 of the act provides that a person commits an offence if, with the object of coercing another person to pay money claimed from the other as a debt due under contract, he or she:

(a) harasses the other with demands for payment which by their frequency, or the manner or occasion of their making, or any accompanying threat or publicity are calculated to subject him or his family or household to alarm, distress or humiliation;

(b) falsely represents, in relation to the money claimed, that criminal proceedings lie for failure to pay it;

© falsely represent themselves to be authorised in some official capacity to claim or enforce payment;

(d) utters a document falsely represented by him to have some official character or purporting to have some official character which he knows it has not.

Paragraph (a) above does not apply to anything done by a person which is reasonable (and otherwise legal) for the purpose of :

(1) of securing the discharge of an obligation due, or believed by him to be due, to himself or to persons for whom he acts, or protecting himself or them from future loss; or

(2) of the enforcement of any liability by legal process.

It is also provided that a person may be guilty of an offence under paragraph (a) above if he concerts with others in the taking of such action as is described in that paragraph, notwithstanding that his own course of conduct does not by itself amount to harassment.

Sorry if this has been raised before. If you are being continuously bombarded with these threats, DO NOT ignore them, keep hold of all correspondence, and make a note of all contact you have with the other side, including dates, times, what was said and any other details you think may be relevant. This will help with the above and they will back off.

However, as I can see from the latest posts on this thread, simplicity is best - they have no business with the registered owner, and it is doubtful that any contract exists with the driver, so keep it simple, state your case clearly 'that they should contact the driver, not the registered keeper'. Well done to the guys who came up with that one!

Hope this helps.

Tide

[Lilo72]

*removed*

[creativesolution]

Lilo72, my friend has today received the same letter as you have. It would appear it's yet another mass mailing.

[TideTurner]

There are several threads with standard letters on them, save re-inventing the wheel.

 

Points to make are: -

 

i) Any claim they have made is wholly disputed

ii) They should contact the driver not yourself as the registered keeper

iii) You consider their actions thus far contravene the Administration of Justice Act and the Protection from Harrassment Act

iv) If they contact you again, you will make a complaint to the OFT and / or the relevant authorities

v) You have grave concerns as to their ability to obtain, store and process your information

vi) Given the above, you do not expect to hear further from them

 

Interestingly, Newlyn are not registered with Companies House.

 

Stand tall

 

Tide

[firstwithit]

I'm beginning to think that the more people that report them to their local TS and copy to the TS wherever the address of these parasites originate from, they might because of the bulk of complaints do something about them.

 

Also wouldnt hurt to bombard the Crawley one as well as most of these stem from their patch.

 

For others with same problem in their area also copy to locall TS where parking was done.

[creativesolution]

Interestingly, Newlyn are not registered with Companies House.

 

They are registered as Newlyn PLC with Companies House but to an address in Rickmansworth and not the registered address in Northampton which appears on their letters. Tut tut Newlyn!

[battyboomboom]

I would assume that Newlyn will only become involved again in the future if CEL win the claim in court, and Newlyn are the bailiffs appointed to the case to recover the debt.

 

Would you (or anyone else) suggest writing to CEL (and ONLY CEL, not Newlyn), and if so, what content should i include or exclude!... from the letter?

 

The 4 words I would put in a letter would be:

 

See you in court.

 

If you, or anyone here for that matter receives genuine* court papers, then post here again - more advice and help with your defence (probably from the two lawyers on here) will be given to beat them.

 

* I emphasise stamped as there has been instances of PPCs sending out papers proporting to be officially from a court, when in fact it has just been to continue the harrassment. If you are in any doubt, ring the court and ask, and if it can't be confirmed present your case to the police.

[TideTurner]

They are registered as Newlyn PLC with Companies House but to an address in Rickmansworth and not the registered address in Northampton which appears on their letters. Tut tut Newlyn!

 

So how are the two companies related (old boys club, not yellow pages)?

 

Name & Registered Office:

CIVIL ENFORCEMENT LTD

DBH HOUSE, CARLTON SQUARE

CARLTON

NOTTINGHAM

NG4 3BP

Company No. 05645677

 

There must be a link.

[creativesolution]

Well ermmm another "parking company" G4 Ltd have the same address registered with Companies House that Newlyn do. The address of an accountant so I'm told. But surely it's a bit too co-incidental that two of these parking companies use the same accountant?

[TideTurner]

Same guys, national business. Wouldn't surprise me if it was franchised. In the North (Yorkshire) there are several businesses with different addresses, but similar tickets and procedures. All different addresses though, and different phone no's, but too many similarities not to be the same firm.