Received County Court Claim: Excel Parking Services

[marnis09]

Hi all,

Requesting further advice here:

Excel have written to the keeper stating that they are now defending themselves in the case.

And furthermore:

"Persuant to the Civil Procedures Rules, insofar as litigants are expected to try and resolve their disputes wherever possible, we are willing to accept a reduced settlement charge of £175 payable within 14 days from the date of this later. This is made on a 'without prejudice' (to save costs) basis.

Should you fail to accept our offer of settlement then we will continue with our claim for the full amount claimed and bring this letter to the Courts' attention upon the question of costs."

What position does this put the claimant in, with regards to the dispute and how the court may view this?

ostell would hugely appreciate any advice you can give here.

[ostell]

What did you put in your defence?

[marnis09]

ostell

The defendant denies that the claimant is entitled to the sum claimed or any sum. To transfer liability from the driver to the keeper the claimant must comply with the requirements of Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012. However the claimant has failed to give warning of keeper liability on the signs displayed as required by section 9 (2) (f). In their correspondence the claimant has also failed to give period of parking required by section 9 (2) (a)

Furthermore the extra charges are an abuse of process, I refer you to the case of G4QZ465V Excel v Wilkinson whereby it was ruled that given the costs of recovery are built into the parking charge as a cost of operating the scheme, this is a double recovery or an attempt by the claimant to try to add in an additional charge.

The fine listed on the PCN charge £100 and yet the claimant is attempting to recover £160 (plus £25 court fees and £50 legal representative's costs) a difference of £60. In the particular's of the claim the claimant describes these as 'contractual costs and interest' just as in the Excel v Wilkinson case. As a result, the claimant is not entitled to recover that sum.

As per the Excel v Wilkinson case, this is an abuse of process by the claimant, an attempt to recover sums they are not entitled to by seeking unliquidated damages as liquidated damages to avoid a hearing before a judge in relation to default judgement, or by seeking to recover unfair sums which would be recovered by a default judgement application despite the sums not being discoverable at law or by seeking to circumvent CPR 27.14. Once again the claimant is attempting to abuse the process of Court, this is a serious matter and simply disallowing the £60 claim is not sufficient, the defendant thereby claims that the case must be struck off. The claimant continues to claim £60 damages/costs to profit from undefended cases and the court must show its' disapproval for this abuse of process.

[ostell]

So you make a drop hands offer in that both sides walk away and meet their own costs.

[marnis09]

ostell excel have rejected the offer, they did not reply to my correspondence have rejected through mediation but offered again the reduced fee of £175. The case will now proceed to court.

The mediator seemed surprised that I hadn't made a counter claim. Is this something that I should now do?

[ostell]

You cannot make a counter claim now.

[marnis09]

You cannot make a counter claim now.

Ok thanks, anything else you would recommend doing now?

[ostell]

Just wait for it to get to court.

You needed to counter claim at the same time you submitted your defence, hence too late. I can't think f why you would counter claim, unless for breach of GDPR.