Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Thank-you dx, What you have written is certainly helpful to my understanding. The only thing I would say, what I found to be most worrying and led me to start this discussion is, I believe the judge did not merely admonish the defendant in the case in question, but used that point to dismiss the case in the claimants favour. To me, and I don't have your experience or knowledge, that is somewhat troubling. Again, the caveat being that we don't know exactly what went on but I think we can infer the reason for the judgement. Thank-you for your feedback. EDIT: I guess that the case I refer to is only one case and it may never happen again and the strategy not to appeal is still the best strategy even in this event, but I really did find the outcome of that case, not only extremely annoying but also worrying. Let's hope other judges are not quite so narrow minded and don't get fixated on one particular issue as FTMDave alluded to.
    • Indians, traditionally known as avid savers, are now stashing away less money and borrowing more.View the full article
    • the claimant in their WS can refer to whatever previous CC judgements they like, as we do in our WS's, but CC judgements do not set a legal precedence. however, they do often refer to judgements like Bevis, those cases do created a precedence as they were court of appeal rulings. as for if the defendant, prior to the raising of a claim, dobbed themselves in as the driver in writing during any appeal to the PPC, i don't think we've seen one case whereby the claimant referred to such in their WS.. ?? but they certainly typically include said appeal letters in their exhibits. i certainly dont think it's a good idea to 'remind' them of such at the defence stage, even if the defendant did admit such in a written appeal. i would further go as far to say, that could be even more damaging to the whole case than a judge admonishing a defendant for not appealing to the PPC in the 1st place. it sort of blows the defendant out the water before the judge reads anything else. dx  
    • Hi LFI, Your knowledge in this area is greater than I could possibly hope to have and as such I appreciate your feedback. I'm not sure that I agree the reason why a barrister would say that, only to get new customers, I'm sure he must have had professional experience in this area that qualifies him to make that point. 🙂 In your point 1 you mention: 1] there is a real danger that some part of the appeal will point out that the person appealing [the keeper ] is also the driver. I understand the point you are making but I was referring to when the keeper is also the driver and admits it later and only in this circumstance, but I understand what you are saying. I take on board the issues you raise in point 2. Is it possible that a PPC (claimant) could refer back to the case above as proof that the motorist should have appealed, like they refer back to other cases? Thanks once again for the feedback.
    • Well barristers would say that in the hope that motorists would go to them for advice -obviously paid advice.  The problem with appealing is at least twofold. 1] there is a real danger that some part of the appeal will point out that the person appealing [the keeper ] is also the driver.  And in a lot of cases the last thing the keeper wants when they are also the driver is that the parking company knows that. It makes it so much easier for them as the majority  of Judges do not accept that the keeper and the driver are the same person for obvious reasons. Often they are not the same person especially when it is a family car where the husband, wife and children are all insured to drive the same car. On top of that  just about every person who has a valid insurance policy is able to drive another person's vehicle. So there are many possibilities and it should be up to the parking company to prove it to some extent.  Most parking company's do not accept appeals under virtually any circumstances. But insist that you carry on and appeal to their so called impartial jury who are often anything but impartial. By turning down that second appeal, many motorists pay up because they don't know enough about PoFA to argue with those decisions which brings us to the second problem. 2] the major parking companies are mostly unscrupulous, lying cheating scrotes. So when you appeal and your reasons look as if they would have merit in Court, they then go about  concocting a Witness Statement to debunk that challenge. We feel that by leaving what we think are the strongest arguments to our Member's Witness Statements, it leaves insufficient time to be thwarted with their lies etc. And when the motorists defence is good enough to win, it should win regardless of when it is first produced.   
  • 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

Civil Enforcement Ltd (again!)


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4747 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

  • Replies 1.6k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

I'm acting on behalf of my friend, so it's whatever I decided to but yes I'll let you know gladly.

 

The last letter I sent Newlyn I requested them to hand back the file to CEL as the debt was in dispute. So if that's what Newlyn do I guess it's a partial victory in a sense.

 

CEL have threatened court action several times in their letters but never gone through with it, the chances are they wont issue court proceedings when the file is handed back to them (or at least that's what I'm hoping).

Link to post
Share on other sites

Another one here....received a letter denying any reply from me to their first letter. But I sent it registered posts and the Royal Mail website says it was delivered the day before the second letter was typed.

 

I've just phoned them to find out why I've had this letter, true to form they denied receiving in.

 

Interestingly they asked for my telephone number, which was refused (more harassment opportunities?) and when I reinforced the debt was in dispute they demanded to know why and were persistent with the demands. I refused to give details saying I was in dispute with CEL, not Newlyn.

 

I then politely put the phone down :lol:

 

I'm now going to back this up with another registered letter so they can no longer deny I've had contact...and any further contact will result in a harassment complaint.

 

wrinx

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well guys, recieved another letter from CEL today stating 'cessation of correspondence' and that file will be sent to a debt collector. This is the second letter in 5 days, the first was a replica of an earlier letter.

 

They apparently don't much like to know, that their dispite is with the driver and not the Registered Keeper, and that the R.K. has no contractual relations with them or their client. It will be fun to see what the debt collectors say given that I have already told CEL that they will breach the OFT code of practice if they pass-on my details to a third party. I have callanged CEL to take me to court, and nothing has transpired to date.

Passing-on my file to a debt collector is harrassment, and recognised as harassment by the OFT code of practice, given that CEL have not made any effort to substantiate any evidence in support of the charges demanded whilst the alleged debt is disputed. Secondly, given the debt is a penalty, the case for harassment (be it psychological or agressive) can be heard within the Civil Courts. Thus, any of you legal eagles want to hone your skills.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Good evening comrades! I have just received the second leter from CEL saying that I have been given another 7 days to pay a the reduced rate. I saed that Ionly ever received a final demand so hat is their reason for the extended period.

I have a had a read through he post again but I cannot seem to find the best letter to send back to CEL (also with so much advice pouring into this forum everyday I thought that maybe there would be a revised response that would be beter to send

 

Has anyone ever requested he "photographic proof" and sent them £10?? Does it exist?

 

It seems that the press are all over this now, was even on Have i got news for you tonight.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've now received three love letters from CEL demanding £90/£45 for an alleged overstay of 10 mins over the 3 hours of free parking offered by a Co-op supermarket to store & 'other town centre users'.

 

With the great advice & information offered by contributors to this, and I must say other sites, I feel supremely confident in taking on these toerags all the way. My thanks go to you all.

 

I'm in a pretty strong position in as much that I can so easily prove I wasn't at the scene of this alleged horrendeous crime at any time on the day in question, so even in the unlikely event this matter ever got to court, I'm sure the judge would not be best pleased in having the courts time wasted & throw the case out in milliseconds.

 

So 'bring it on' CEL, Newlyn,- get that bladder problem sorted and either p*ss or get off the potty and stop conning & harassing me & other good people with your little scheme.

 

I've complained to the DVLA about their divulging my personal details to a private company and requested they inform me to whom exactly they made the disclosure (NB - I didn't mention CEL at this time)

 

I quickly received a lengthy reply, loads of blurb....DVLA takes very seriously its duty under the Data Protection Act.. blah blah.... Regulation 27 of the Road Vehicles (Registration & Licensing) Regulations 2002 .......

requires DVLA to release information..blah blah....to anyone who can demonstrate 'reasonable cause'...blah....etc etc.

 

The interesting and curious thing is they disclosed my details to the aptly named Creative Car Park Ltd (Huh???). They only gave me the name of the company & no other details.

 

Needless to say, I swiftly emailed back requiring full details of this company and full details of their original application to the DVLA, being information to which I am perfectly entitled.

I have also asked them to explain how & why as a consequence of their disclosure to Creative Car Park Ltd my details have found their way into the hands of CEL, a company with a track record of alleged dubious and unscrupulous methods of operation.

Despite 3 reminders, I am still awaiting a reply.

I would like to think that the delay in replying is due to someone at the DVLA having developed a sudden problem with their sphincter muscle.

 

I have lots more to tell you, but will save it for another day and keep you posted with developments.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Wrinx, in response to you request at posting 256,

The OFT Code of Practice at Section 2.6 (i), states (Physical/ Psychological Harassment) (quote)Examples of unfair practices are,.

 

"Disclosing or threating to disclose debt details to a third party unless legally entitled to do so." (end of quote)

 

Every letter I sent to CEL I have disputed the alleged parking charge (debt), in that I am the registered keeper, not the driver. and that no contractual relations whatsoever exist between Mcdonalds, CEL or any other principal landowner and myself in respect to the gatwick site. Given the debt is disputed, CEL have no legal authority to pass-on the debt to anyone, insofar as their charge has not been 'legally proven' to be a legally enforceable debt.

 

CEL have threatened litigation against me in their correspondence, That means, in regard to the OFT code, that the only people they can pass the file-on to are their lawyers for actioning. I have challanged them to take legal action, but they ignore all reasonable requests for evidence of the alledged debt (as you well know.)

Lastly , the OFT Code of Practice i(IE debt colection guidance) is a free download from the OFT website. or give them a call and they will give you details.....

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Well guys, recieved another letter from CEL today stating 'cessation of correspondence' and that file will be sent to a debt collector. This is the second letter in 5 days, the first was a replica of an earlier letter.

 

They apparently don't much like to know, that their dispite is with the driver and not the Registered Keeper, and that the R.K. has no contractual relations with them or their client. It will be fun to see what the debt collectors say given that I have already told CEL that they will breach the OFT code of practice if they pass-on my details to a third party. I have callanged CEL to take me to court, and nothing has transpired to date.

Passing-on my file to a debt collector is harrassment, and recognised as harassment by the OFT code of practice, given that CEL have not made any effort to substantiate any evidence in support of the charges demanded whilst the alleged debt is disputed. Secondly, given the debt is a penalty, the case for harassment (be it psychological or agressive) can be heard within the Civil Courts. Thus, any of you legal eagles want to hone your skills.

 

Feralcat,

 

I agree with what you say, but to add a bit of value, and as there is no contract in place:-

 

Unless you provide your express permission (or sign a contract and fail to exclude any terms allowing a third party to do so), CEL are acting illegally if they pass your information to any third party.

 

They have a duty to keep your information securely, and must not divulge it unless for legal reasons (and national security, Police etc)

 

If they process personal data they must be registered with the Information Commissioners Office. If not they should be reported, complaint form here

 

http://www.ico.gov.uk/complaints/data_protection.aspx

 

ICO Helpline: Our helpline is open between the hours of 9.00am and 5.00pm, Monday to Friday.

08456 30 60 60

01625 54 57 45

Fax: 01625 524510

 

The Information Commissioner's Office

Wycliffe House

Water Lane

Wilmslow

Cheshire

SK9 5AF

 

They can only keep the information for a period necessary for the purposes it was provided.

 

As you have not signed a contract, I would question their ability to obtain your information in the first place, and I will be contacting the DVLA in the morning and telling them they must not make my personal information available to anybody except the security services and police:mad: :mad: .

 

I would write to CEL and insist they provide confirmation that they have ceased to store or process my personal information in the next 14 days, else, you will report them to the ICO, OFT, DVLA and the Police (harrassment falls under criminal not civil law).

 

Vehicle Record Enquiries,

Vehicle Customer Services,

(Data Protection Queries),

DVLA,

Swansea

SA99 1AJ

 

quote your full name, address and the registration number of your vehicle

 

From experience, the only way to get the ICO or the OFT to listen is by sheer volume of complaints.

 

Good Luck

 

Tide

Link to post
Share on other sites

Another point here,

 

If you have mistakingly given them your telephone number in the past, or they have obtained it, they cannot discuss your case with you unless you answer a 'security question' such as what is the first line of your address, postcode or DOB etc.

 

You should NEVER provide this info over the phone, therefore, they cannot discuss your case with you.

 

When you write to them, tell them all communication should be in writing.

 

Tide

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've just thought, now Newlyn are apparently passing back the file to CEL to action court proceedings. Surely proceedings are now more likely to happen given CEL enlisted the services of Newlyn to chase the "debt" and as a result Newlyn will be charging CEL for their services. Therefore would it be right to think CEL will try to recover this cost?

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Has anyone ever requested he "photographic proof" and sent them £10?? Does it exist?

 

Requested twice but not by paying the tenner, that's just taking the EDITED...paying to incriminate oneself???

 

wrinx

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Wrinx, in response to you request at posting 256,

The OFT Code of Practice at Section 2.6 (i), states (Physical/ Psychological Harassment) (quote)Examples of unfair practices are,.

 

"Disclosing or threating to disclose debt details to a third party unless legally entitled to do so." (end of quote)

 

Every letter I sent to CEL I have disputed the alleged parking charge (debt), in that I am the registered keeper, not the driver. and that no contractual relations whatsoever exist between Mcdonalds, CEL or any other principal landowner and myself in respect to the gatwick site. Given the debt is disputed, CEL have no legal authority to pass-on the debt to anyone, insofar as their charge has not been 'legally proven' to be a legally enforceable debt.

 

CEL have threatened litigation against me in their correspondence, That means, in regard to the OFT code, that the only people they can pass the file-on to are their lawyers for actioning. I have challanged them to take legal action, but they ignore all reasonable requests for evidence of the alledged debt (as you well know.)

Lastly , the OFT Code of Practice i(IE debt colection guidance) is a free download from the OFT website. or give them a call and they will give you details.....

 

Excellent, thank you. Some good information on this thread :D

 

wrinx

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've just thought, now Newlyn are apparently passing back the file to CEL to action court proceedings. Surely proceedings are now more likely to happen given CEL enlisted the services of Newlyn to chase the "debt" and as a result Newlyn will be charging CEL for their services. Therefore would it be right to think CEL will try to recover this cost?

 

Yes, under normal circumstances, where the "debt" is far more certain, this is exactly what would happen. This is not the case with CEL / Newlyn - they know the "debt" is well dodgy based on dubious contract law. Any case, properly defended would cost them money and they would lose. Look at the hundreds of postings and thousands of viewings about CEL gatwick on this and other forums. If CEL were successfully prosecuting people we would have heard of it by now.

 

CEL would much prefer the present situation whereby say 50% of the punters pay up without a murmer rather than risk the whole [problem] with a few well publicised court defeats.

 

What will probably happen, if the course follows form is that Newlyn will write yet another letter giving a final opportunity to pay. It is nothing less than harrassment and should be reported as such.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you can, let me know what action they take and how they get on.

I'm still deciding whether to send any kind of response at all.

I think we should all send the same letter on the same day.

That should confuse them!

 

In all seriousness though, i'm still open to help and advice on this one.

 

 

Hi all, I have also got the same letter as Wrinx, creativesolution (friend) and Lilo. Passing back the file to our client. They will take court action.

 

I intend to do absoluetly nothing and wait for the court procedings from CEL. Which i think will never happen.

I would love to have my day in court and put asleep this cash cow of a harrassing bussinrss that they are running.

 

Please CEL bring on the date in court soon.

 

Keep up this joint effort.

All the best

Hatari

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've just thought, now Newlyn are apparently passing back the file to CEL to action court proceedings. Surely proceedings are now more likely to happen given CEL enlisted the services of Newlyn to chase the "debt" and as a result Newlyn will be charging CEL for their services. Therefore would it be right to think CEL will try to recover this cost?

 

In the majority of cases, DCA's are paid on a commission basis and are paid a percentage of what they recover. Some of the bigger ones will "purchase" the debt at a much reduced rate and then try to recover what they can., although this has become much less fashionable since sites like this popped up and people started fighting back.

 

CEL would do well to cut their losses and concentrate on the frail, easily intimidated little old ladies of this world.

Link to post
Share on other sites

My friend has received a two page letter from CEL replying to a letter I sent them some four weeks ago, stating why they believe the parking ticket is valid and how they are registered with various different bodies etc...

 

Finally they have offered her to the opportunity to pay with the original amount of the ticket, in this case £60. Against all advice she has decided to pay this amount and in her opinion have done with it once and for all.

Link to post
Share on other sites

My friend has received a two page letter from CEL replying to a letter I sent them some four weeks ago, stating why they believe the parking ticket is valid and how they are registered with various different bodies etc...

 

Finally they have offered her to the opportunity to pay with the original amount of the ticket, in this case £60. Against all advice she has decided to pay this amount and in her opinion have done with it once and for all.

 

We are all individuals but...... I can't help feeling that paying these guys is immoral, it will only encourage them.

Link to post
Share on other sites

That's a shame as it reads like they were beginning to crumble.

 

wrinx

 

Having now read the letter I thought it was CEL's last throw of the dice before giving up.

 

Obviously I've expressed this to my friend but she's had enough and wants it sorted once and for all. In fairness to her, she's under an extreme amount of pressure with work and personal things so in the end something had to give.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well i'll add my latest letter to the pile. The standard "Our records show you havent paid, we need this payment from you, failure to do so will result in court action" etc..followed with another chance to pay.

 

Court action? with absolutely no case...good luck. I'll see them in court.

Link to post
Share on other sites

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4747 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

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...