Jump to content



  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Hello, yesterday Barclays Bank put my account under review suddenly just i received a message about that to wait 7 days . I ve been to local branch and they didn't tell me any information saying to me to wait 14 days . The problem is I think they will take longer than they said and I can't wait so much cause I need the money for my own company and to live life daily. This situation its caused me a sever anxiety, I dont know what to do . I can prove that I m a self employed . Can somebody tell me what should I do ?  Some contact numbers or email addresses where can I text about this problem? I m new on this platform and I dont know how to manage this . Thank you
    • Hello yesterday Barclays Bank blocked my account with a substantial amount and I didnt get any reason for this issue why they put my account under review. I m a self employed and all the money blocked are very important to me to open my own company .. Can I get some information about what should I do in this case.  I ve been to the local branch but they didn't give me any information just to wait 14 days and I can t do that .
    • harveys are not the creditor, so them stating you should continue to make payments and you will not receive your payments back is immaterial.   the administrators of harveys are not your target. creation finance are.     these issues should be directed toward creation under p'haps a section 75 claim ....as they are the creditor ...they are equally responsible for the actions or inactions of either harveys or bensons.   we can appreciate you have had the usual run around, we are not indicating you have lied, merely pointing to the fact that you innocently believed what you have been told to date.   go get your moneyback and get the finance agreement cancelled.   dx 
    • you've not moved so until or unless you get a letter of claim via royal mail you ignore them.   as for anything on your credit file it should fall off after 6yrs.   dx    
    • 1st. it is not illegal for you, as the home owner, to open letters addressed to 'others' not resident at your address.   2nd because you did or did not employ the above, ultimately, this has led to a court judgement being handed down. the bailiff company have employed, quite rightly,  the methods that are legally available to them to trace the defendant.   rightly or wrongly they have traced you.   you need to write to the bailiff company concerned briefly explaining the above stating you are not the said person. you also need to write to the judgement court the same. you also need to write to the relevant rail toc    never use the phone.   dx      
  • Our picks

Civil Enforcement Ltd (again!)


Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 3507 days.

If you are trying to post a different story then you should start your own new thread. Posting on this thread is likely to mean that you won't get the help and advice that you need.

If you are trying to post information which is relevant to the story in this thread then please flag it up to the site team and they will allow you to post.

Thank you

Recommended Posts

The usual response then. Anyone who does not agree with the general consensus is branded a troll.

 

It's the blatant undermining of another position in a way that totally lacks credibility and evidenve to substantiate your position.

 

Alternate viewpoints and constructive criticism is welcome.

 

If you want your view to be listened to, start with explaining the legal basis on which PPCs assert that the registered keeper of the vehicle is liable to pay their purported charges.

********************************************

Nothing in this post constitutes "advice" which I may not, in any event, be qualified to provide.

The only interpretation permitted on this post (or any others I may have made) is that this is what I would personally consider doing in the circumstances discussed. Each and every reader of this post or any other I may have made must take responsibility for forming their own view and making their own decision.

I receive an unwieldy number of private messages. I am happy to respond to messages posted on open forum but am unable to respond to private messages, seeking advice, when the substance of that message should properly be on the open forum.

Many thanks for your assistance and understanding on this.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 1.6k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

Guest Julian Fiddlepot

I will never claim that the registered keeper is automatically liable, as this simply is not the case. However, the lack of legislation governing PPCs is a double-edged sword. There is nothing to stop a company lodging a claim against a registered keeper and allowing the judge to decide if they are liable or not. This could change from case to case. The judge must decide on the balance of probabilities. Those who refuse to say who was driving should be prepared to take that chance in court.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I will never claim that the registered keeper is automatically liable, as this simply is not the case. However, the lack of legislation governing PPCs is a double-edged sword. There is nothing to stop a company lodging a claim against a registered keeper and allowing the judge to decide if they are liable or not. This could change from case to case. The judge must decide on the balance of probabilities. Those who refuse to say who was driving should be prepared to take that chance in court.

 

Ah, now we are getting somewhere.

 

Of course there is nothing to stop a PPC lodging such a claim. There is likewise nothing to stop me lodging a claim that I am the rightful heir to the throne.

 

What these two fanciful claims would have in common is that they are both capable of being defended.

 

What the judge decides on the balance of probabilities is whether or not the defendant in a case is liable. Whether the keeper is liable for the alleged debt of an unidentified third party is decided as a matter of law.

********************************************

Nothing in this post constitutes "advice" which I may not, in any event, be qualified to provide.

The only interpretation permitted on this post (or any others I may have made) is that this is what I would personally consider doing in the circumstances discussed. Each and every reader of this post or any other I may have made must take responsibility for forming their own view and making their own decision.

I receive an unwieldy number of private messages. I am happy to respond to messages posted on open forum but am unable to respond to private messages, seeking advice, when the substance of that message should properly be on the open forum.

Many thanks for your assistance and understanding on this.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I am shocked at some of the snide comments in this thread, aimed at companies who only wish to help the motorist by providing less crowded car parks.

 

 

How can you be surprised? the general consesus on this site is that these people are crooks, out to threat and intimidate and make easy money!

 

How can so many people on this site be wrong?

 

If most of their letters to the general public are genuine then why don't they put their so called 'evidence' in with the original correspondence that they send?

 

Also no where on this forum have I seen that C.E.L. have taken anyone to court, again if they have a genuine claim then why are they not doing just that?

 

I think we all know the answer is in the first paragraph.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I am shocked at some of the snide comments in this thread, aimed at companies who only wish to help the motorist by providing less crowded car parks.

 

So leaving aside the enforceability of the PPC schemes, you're saying that they shouldn't be issuing documents in car parks which aren't full...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Had a run in with this firm at McD's Gatwick. October 2007 I parked there with my family, and overstayed my welcome by 6 mins. I wrote letters complained etc, tore a strip of Mcdonalds managers and wrote to their head of customer services. You will come up against a brick wall if you do this. Neither Mcd's or Civil E care - even if you wrote saying that you slipped over in the restaurant on a half eaten burger and broke your legs and couldn't drive - they just, don't, care. All they want is your money. Take the good advice from this website, and just stick to your guns. I wrote about 4 months ago advising I will see them in court and that was the last I heard. My opinion is McD's and Civil E have a good thing going - think about this if they issue 1,000 of these fines and only 80% get paid this is easy money for both involved. This is an unethical operation, but is a sign of the times. Good luck.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Ah, now we are getting somewhere.

 

Of course there is nothing to stop a PPC lodging such a claim. There is likewise nothing to stop me lodging a claim that I am the rightful heir to the throne.

 

What these two fanciful claims would have in common is that they are both capable of being defended.

 

What the judge decides on the balance of probabilities is whether or not the defendant in a case is liable. Whether the keeper is liable for the alleged debt of an unidentified third party is decided as a matter of law.

 

 

Well said Bernie :)

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 1 month later...

Civil Enforcement's "parking contravention enforcement notice" really does look like it was made on a home computer. I was pleased to have found this website which confirmed my suspicions asto the dubious nature of this vulgar parking enforcement operator. The notice was given on a car park that I've been using for years quite legitimately, but which had just changed ownership. And it was sent so late that the 14 day time limit had already expired.

 

Although I obviously won't hand over any cash to an outfit with Civil Enfortment's credentials, I can't express how much this government's data protection attitude disgusts me. Those two gangs of profiteers are equivalent in their sleaze. Now some dubious company with no branch offices and questionable legitimacy has my personal details!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've received a 'parking contravention enforcement notice' from CEL today. I particularly like the little picture of a scales of justice in the corner, trying to make it look all legal and everything. My offence was that I parked for 12 whole minutes in a KFC private car park. However, I was parking so I could visit a new store opposite the car park that had just opened. The store's car park was full and there was a sign saying that their customers were free to use the KFC car park. I posted on a local web forum and have several people come forward to say they also saw the sign.

 

The question is this: do I write back to CEL saying that I won't be paying the charge because of the sign, or would that be admitting that I was the driver? Would I be better off ignoring the letter or writing to say that they should take the matter up with the driver (though the car park was not staffed so presumably they have video evidence). Any advice?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Well, we received one, and yep, we parked in a KFC car park too, in Sheffield...

Overparked by 16mins, however we were customers eating on Zinger meals...

 

I'm also in Sheffield so it sounds like we might have been parked in the same one!

 

I have been in touch with the store where I was shopping and they said that they had permission from the KFC manager to put the sign up saying that it was OK for their customers to park there, but then later that day, the manager came over and asked them to take the sign down, and said that some of their customers might be receiving fines. He mentioned that they might take action against the KFC. He is going to send me a cheque to cover the fine.

 

Question is, what do I do? Do I a) pay the fine and be done with it, and let the store take it up with the KFC or b) keep the cheque (or donate it to charity) and consider it compensation for the inevitable barrage of letters and legal-looking documents that I am going to be receiving from CEL?

 

Part of me doesn't want to give these charlatans any money, whether it's mine or the store's, and as I work in the law (not parking law sadly) I'm reasonably confident in writing deflecting letters in response to any correspondence from CEL. Question is, if the store have pretty much admitted liability and agreed to pay me the money, would this weaken my case in the unlikely event that it did go to court?

Link to post
Share on other sites

ContainsMildPeril,

 

It is accepted that you have a moral dilemma here. You know the issues, it is between you and your conscience.

 

Whatever the eventual outcome, I implore you to discount any notion of handing any monies [yours or the store] to CEL. There are simply not entitled either in pronciple or in law.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I am shocked at some of the snide comments in this thread, aimed at companies who only wish to help the motorist by providing less crowded car parks.

 

Do you seriously believe these companies wish to help anybody but themselves? It is simply a cash generator. It is not lawful, as they portray, and is "sold" to the likes of KFC and McDonalds as a cheap and effective way of stopping non customers parking on their premises (they will not need to Police their own car parks, simply out source the job).

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello,

Please accept my apologies for high jacking this thread. However, it is the most up to date one I can find on this subject.

I have recently been served with a "Civil traffic enforcement notice" by a company called G24 Ltd for exceeding the free parking time in an ALDI car park by 1 minute and 10 seconds.

Twas the wife not me :) so I plan to go down the route of replying to them suggesting they take the matter up with the driver of the car not the registered keeper.

I was wondering if any of you guys have any advice for me in this matter.

Have you heard of anyone beating this particular company?

Thanks in advance.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi

I have just received one of these notices for £150 / £75 if paid early for overstaying time on a car park in Warrington.

 

I didn't realise and thought it was free as it had no pay and display - I am going to go back tomorrow to see where the signs are!

 

Firstly - I don't mind paying if I know I have done wrong.

Secondly - I have no intention of paying such ridiculous amounts of money.

 

Help?

 

Shall I send the letter as stated and note this is a company car and it was me driving.

 

Thanks

Mrs Marple:???:

Link to post
Share on other sites
Hi

I have just received one of these notices for £150 / £75 if paid early for overstaying time on a car park in Warrington.

 

Shall I send the letter as stated and note this is a company car and it was me driving.

 

Thanks

Mrs Marple:???:

Hi Mrs Marple

 

Welcome to the forums.

 

What you have is an invoice for damages for an alleged breach of contract.

 

The standard advice is to admit nothing. They have no authority to compel you or your company to name the driver.

 

You haven't done wrong. You've broken no laws. Have a read of the Private Parking Companies/Charges guide you'll see this is a [problem].

 

If you don't pay this notice the PPC will obtain the Registered Keeper (RK) details from the DVLA and present a demand for money with them. Is the RK of the vehicle your company or a lease firm. You should advise whoever is the RK of the vehicle of this [problem] and say that you will contest this. That will stop them paying up on your behalf and then seeking reimbursement from you.

 

BTW the RK cannot be made party to any contract without their knowledge and authorisation.

 

When you get the letter then you send the template letter from "what to do if you wrote first" which you will find in the stickies.

 

Any questions post back.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This does not constitute legal advice and is not represented as a substitute for legal advice from an appropriately qualified person or firm.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi everyone, new to all this and found this site after receiving a 'Parking Contravention Enforcement Notice' from CEL on the 14th June.

 

I have read the sticky by Peter (which is very good btw)

 

However on the notice it says 'Failure to pay the amount due within 28 days of the issue date will result in CEL forwarding your account to a debt recovery agency and you will incurr aditional costs'

 

In the sticky it says that ballifs can not act other then on the request of a court ..... is this still the case??

 

I am planning on sending them a letter with the following wording, would be greatful if you could comment / advise on it for me??

 

To whome it may concern:

 

Thank you for your Enforcement Notice which was received on the 14th June 08.

 

As the registered keeper of the vehicle I am not liable under the (quote act), the notice will need to be re-sent by yourselves to the driver of the vehicle on the day in question.

 

Contacting me again on this matter will result in a complaint being made under the (quote harressment act)

 

What do you think?? Please feel free to butcher as you see fit :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Debt collection agents are not bailiffs (although they are happy for you to draw that inference), and they do not have any powers.

Post by me are intended as a discussion of the issues involved, as these are of general interest to me and others on the forum. Although it is hoped such discussion will be of use to readers, before exposing yourself to risk of loss you should not rely on any principles discussed without confirming the situation with a qualified person.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Hi everyone, new to all this and found this site after receiving a 'Parking Contravention Enforcement Notice' from CEL on the 14th June.

 

I have read the sticky by Peter (which is very good btw)

 

However on the notice it says 'Failure to pay the amount due within 28 days of the issue date will result in CEL forwarding your account to a debt recovery agency and you will incurr aditional costs'

If you have disputed the debt then under the OFT guidelines they are not supposed to refer to a Debt Collection Agency (DCA).

 

In the sticky it says that ballifs can not act other then on the request of a court ..... is this still the case??

Yes. Bailiffs, as Zamzara has said, are different beasts from DCAs. The matter would only be referred to Bailiffs if you went to court, lost the case and then failed to pay the amount set in the judgement in the time specified. This is extremely unlikely to occur as CEL will need to enforce the contract against the driver and, as they don't know who this is, they are up the proverbial creek without a paddle.

I am planning on sending them a letter with the following wording, would be greatful if you could comment / advise on it for me??

 

To whome it may concern:

 

Thank you for your Enforcement Notice which was received on the 14th June 08.

 

As the registered keeper of the vehicle I am not liable under the (quote act), the notice will need to be re-sent by yourselves to the driver of the vehicle on the day in question.

 

Contacting me again on this matter will result in a complaint being made under the (quote harressment act)

 

What do you think?? Please feel free to butcher as you see fit :)

 

It looks OK. Have a look at the template letters in the stickies section. They cover pretty much every eventuality.

 

BTW the harrassment act is The Prevention of Harassment Act 1997.

 

Alternately you could just ignore everything.

Edited by pin1onu

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This does not constitute legal advice and is not represented as a substitute for legal advice from an appropriately qualified person or firm.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have not disputed as yet - the enforcement notice with the statement about the debt collection is the first correspondance that I have received from them.

 

As it says about the debt collection I don't feel that I can ignore it - I don't want any black marks against my name ;-)

 

Will take another look at the templates to make sure all is covered and send a letter to them.

 

Thanks for your help and advise on this

Link to post
Share on other sites

With respect to costs / administration fees, would it not be worth making an application under the Data Protection Act 1998 to ensure that information obtained by this company is held securely, and not for a period longer than necessary. If you can afford it, send a letter of complaint to the OFT when you send the "contact the RK" letter. These will soon add up and will help spotlight these companies.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Have been doing some research on CEL ..... not only are they not putting their registered address on their correspondance (no change there then) but they have also changed their registered address four times (yes four times) in the last 16 months!!!!

 

Twice this month!

 

So if you were wavering and thinking of giving in and paying up I hope that little snippet has strengthend your resolve ...... I know it has mine!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 3507 days.

If you are trying to post a different story then you should start your own new thread. Posting on this thread is likely to mean that you won't get the help and advice that you need.

If you are trying to post information which is relevant to the story in this thread then please flag it up to the site team and they will allow you to post.

Thank you

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...