**DISCONTINUED** County Court Business Centre Letter Received

[charitynjw]

Re: County Court Business Centre Letter Received

No worries, put it in anyway.

Are you on the electoral roll at your current address?
If so they will be expected to exercise due dil before issuing a claim.

[OliverJames]

Re: County Court Business Centre Letter Received

Btw, did you get proof of posting/sending for your 6th Oct communication?

Unfortunately i didn't!! Stupidly just shot it off with the last post from the office to make sure it made it out of the door!!!! Only date stamps that I have are the post on here and the letter itself which i have my own copy of. Obviously I know that doesn't account for anything legally.

I have sent another letter to them today with the correct address so hopefully they take note of the correct address this time...

[charitynjw]

Re: County Court Business Centre Letter Received

Tbh, it's better to use your own words rather than 'the party of the first part' kind of legalese.

I'd just add that the Claimant has ignored the information & has incorrectly served the claim form to a wrong address.

Btw, did you get proof of posting/sending for your 6th Oct communication?

[OliverJames]

Re: County Court Business Centre Letter Received

Sorry to be a massive pain, but as I'm sure you can tell already...I'm pretty useless at this so any help is massively welcomed

I want to add to my defence that I wrote to CEL regarding the address issue, but they chose to ignore that to cause unnecessary delay,, but the words just sound like they have been written by a 8yr old, and not legalease...can you give me a suggestion on how to make it sound more official?

On 06^th October 2017 the Defendant wrote to the Claimant advising that the address they were using to send correspondence was incorrect and likely to cause unnecessary delay to the Defendant receiving documents and filing their defence.

I am sure you can get the jist of what i want to say from this...but in short...thats my parents house and although they open all my post now (since this all started!!) i can't rely on them to get to is on time and when they go away no one is picking up the post at all!

They were away when the PoC arrived, and it was only because my Sister popped in by chance that she found the letter and sent me pics of the contents!

Obviously i understand they would MUCH rather the post went to the wrong address and they could cause an ongoing delay....but having been told over 2 weeks ago to not do it, they haven't listened!

Thanks,

OJB

[charitynjw]

Re: County Court Business Centre Letter Received

Under

The vague Particulars of Claim disclose no clear cause of action. The court is invited to strike out the claim of its own volition as having no merit and no reasonable prospects of success.

You could say

'The Defendant is seriously prejudiced due to delay by the Claimant not serving their Particulars of Claim in a timely fashion.
In addition, the Claimant has not responded to an offer, by the Defendant, of a 28 day extension as allowed by Civil Procedure Rules
The Defendant has therefore had insufficient time or disclosure information to assess the legal position in regards to this claim, and has been forced to file a defence without being given due time to properly respond to it.

Should the court not strike out the claim per para (number) above, the Defendant requests that an amended defence can be submitted if necessary & at that the Claimant should bear any associated costs of the amendment.'

Something like that.

You could make a formal application to the court to strike the claim or possibly a summary judgement, but this will cost £250ish & there's no guarantee that you would be able to recoup it.

[OliverJames]

Re: County Court Business Centre Letter Received

Perfect, thank you!

I also read that under court management powers (Part 3.9 https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/pr...les/part03#3.9) I can apply for relief from sanctions because the claiment hasn't kept within the guidelines set out! In this case, they sent their PoC on the 23rd or 24th October, but they back dated the document to the 11th to make it look like they gave a lot more time than they actually did!

Having done some reading up on this, it appears this is a common CEL approach and it doesn't give the defendant enough time to file a proper defence anyway!

How would i go about applying for relief from sanctions?

OJB

[charitynjw]

Re: County Court Business Centre Letter Received

Yep

Post it (CPR 31) asap.
Request disclosure by return....add "Due to separate Particulars being served, disclosure is urgently required"

Wait until the end of this week for filing defence.
If no disclosure received by then, add the fact to the defence.

[OliverJames]

Re: County Court Business Centre Letter Received

Have you sent a CPR 31 request?

That is going recorded delivery this morning as i wasn't able to send it over the weekend. It is the letter i posted up for you earlier.

This doesn't need to be in until the coming weekend, so if it were me I'd wait until the end of the week.

Shall i hold off on posting my defence in that case? Is that what you are saying? If i request the disclosure today/tomorrow (when it arrives), give them until the end of the week to respond, and if I've heard nothing then post the above statement?

Thank you so much for supporting on this, I appreciate it so much!

OliverJB

[charitynjw]

Re: County Court Business Centre Letter Received

It might not all fit into the space allowed in the MCOL online defence response....I believe that's limited to about 1080 characters.
If so you can send a signed copy to CCBC as an email attachment.... ccbcaq@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk
Put 'Civil Enforcement Ltd v [you] Claim no [XXXXXXXX] - Defence' in the subject box

Have you sent a CPR 31 request?
If so & no response (or inadequate one) add

On the [Date] I (or 'the Defendant') sent a request for inspection of documents mentioned in the claimant’s statement of case under Civil Procedure Rule 31.14 to [Claimants or Solicitor name].[I] requested the Claimant provide copies of the [XXXXX].
[Claimant or Solicitor] has not sent [any, or missing ones of these documents] to [me].

Also add that there has been no Certificate of Service of separate Particulars of Claim per CPR 6.

This doesn't need to be in until the coming weekend, so if it were me I'd wait until the end of the week.

[OliverJames]

Re: County Court Business Centre Letter Received

[MENTION=5553]charitynjw[/MENTION] what are your thoughts on template defence documents? I found this and want to get it emailed over to them as soon as possible, but obviously want to make sure it will land properly!!

Let me know your thoughts on this and anything you think should be added or more important, omitted!

County Court Business Centre
Claim Number: XXXXXXX

Between:

Civil Enforcement Limited v XXX

Defence Statement

I am XX, the defendant in this matter and was the registered keeper of vehicle XXXX XXX at the time of the alleged offence. I currently reside at XXX.


I deny I am liable for the entirety of the claim for each of the following reasons:

The Claim Form issued on the 02/10/2017 by Civil Enforcement Limited was not correctly filed under The Practice Direction as it was not signed by a legal person but signed by “Civil Enforcement Limited”.

This Claimant has not complied with pre-court protocol:
(a)There was no compliant ‘Letter before County Court Claim’.
(b) This is a speculative serial litigant, issuing a large number of identical 'draft particulars'. The badly mail-merged documents contain very little information. The covering letter merely contains a supposed PCN number with no contravention nor photographs.
© The Claim form Particulars were extremely sparse and divulged no cause of action nor sufficient detail. The Defendant has no idea what the claim is about - why the charge arose, what the alleged contract was; nothing that could be considered a fair exchange of information.
e) The Defence therefore asks the Court to strike out the claim as having no reasonable prospect of success as currently drafted.

f) Alternatively, the Defendant asks that the Claimant is required to file Particulars which comply with Practice Directions and include at least the following information;

(i) Whether the matter is being brought for trespass, breach of contract or a contractual charge, and an explanation as to the exact nature of the charge
(ii) A copy of any contract it is alleged was in place (e.g. copies of signage)
(iii) How any contract was concluded (if by performance, then copies of signage maps in place at the time)
(iv) Whether keeper liability is being claimed, and if so copies of any Notice to Driver / Notice to Keeper
(v) Whether the Claimant is acting as Agent or Principal, together with a list of documents they will rely on in this matter
(vi) If charges over and above the initial charge are being claimed, the basis on which this is being claimed
(vii) If Interest charges are being claimed, the basis on which this is being claimed

g) Once these Particulars have been filed, the Defendant asks for reasonable time to file another defence.

This case can be distinguished from ParkingEye v Beavis [2015] UKSC 67 (the Beavis case) which was dependent upon an undenied contract, formed by unusually prominent signage forming a clear offer and which turned on unique facts regarding the location and the interests of the landowner. Strict compliance with the BPA Code of Practice was paramount and Mr Beavis was the driver who saw the signs and entered into a contract to pay £85 after exceeding a licence to park free. None of this applies in this material case.


Inadequate signs incapable of binding the driver - this distinguishes this case from the Beavis case:
(a) Sporadic and illegible (charge not prominent nor large lettering) of site/entrance signage - breach of the POFA 2012 Schedule 4 and the BPA Code of Practice and no contract formed to pay any clearly stated sum.
(b) Non existent ANPR 'data use' signage - breach of ICO rules and the BPA Code of Practice.
© It is believed the signage was not lit and any terms were not transparent or legible; this is an unfair contract, not agreed by the driver and contrary to the Consumer Rights Act 2015 in requiring a huge inflated sum as 'compensation' from by an authorised party using the premises as intended.
(d) No promise was made by the driver that could constitute consideration because there was no offer known nor accepted. No consideration flowed from the Claimant.

The Claimant has no standing to bring a case - this distinguishes this case from the Beavis case.
a. It is believed the Claimant does not hold a legitimate contract at this car park. The Defendant has no evidence that they have any proprietary interest in the car park/land in question. As an agent, the Claimant has no legal right to bring such a claim in their name. Any such claim should be in the name of the landowner.
b. The Defendant asks the Claimant to provide a full, up-to date and signed/dated contract with the landowner (a statement saying someone has seen the contract is not enough). The contract needs to state that the Claimant is entitled to pursue matters such as these through the issue of Parking Charge Notices and in the courts in their own name. I clarify that this should be an actual copy and not just a document that claims a contract/agreement exists.

The Defendant avers that the Claimant has issued proceedings inappropriately, prematurely and without complying with the practice directions on pre-action conduct.

5/ BPA CoP breaches - this distinguishes this case from the Beavis case:
(a) the signs were not compliant in terms of the font size, lighting or positioning.
(b) the sum pursued exceeds £100.
© there is/was no compliant landowner contract.

The operator has not shown that the individual who it is pursuing is in fact the driver who may have been potentially liable for the charge

The Claimant has failed to comply with the strict requirements of the Protection Of Freedoms Act 2012, schedule 4 (PoFA 2012):
a. The driver of the vehicle has not been identified. The Defendant is the registered keeper but was not the Driver. In order for the Claimant to transfer liability from the driver to the keeper, they must do so within the strict requirements of PoFA 2012. This too was confirmed by Mr Greenslade, POPLA Lead Adjudicator in page 8 of the 2015 POPLA Report: “If POFA 2012 Schedule 4 is not complied with then keeper liability does not generally pass.”
b. The Claimant did not issue a “Notice to Driver” at the time of the alleged offence; therefore, the Claimant is put to strict proof that a “Notice to Keeper” was issued within the required timeframe of 14 days after the alleged offence in accordance with PoFA 2012 para. 9(5).
c. In failing to comply with the PoFA 2012, the Claimant cannot hold the Keeper liable for any of the claim.

Grace periods
The BPA Code of Practice (CoP) makes it mandatory for operators to allow grace periods at the start and end of parking, before enforcement action can be taken.
The CoP states:

13.2 You should allow the driver a reasonable ‘grace period’ in which to decide if they are going to stay or go...
13.4 You should allow the driver a reasonable period to leave the private car park after the parking contract has ended, before you take enforcement action. If the location is one where parking is normally permitted, the Grace Period at the end of the parking period should be a minimum of 10 minutes.

The Defendant denies any liability whatsoever to the Claimant in any matter and asks the Court to note that the Claimant has:

(a) Failed to disclose any cause of action in the incorrectly filed Claim Form issued on 3rd October 2017.

(b) Sent a template, well-known to be generic cut and paste 'Particulars' of claim relying on irrelevant case law (Beavis) which ignores the fact that this Claimant cannot hold registered keepers liable in law, due to their own choice of non-POFA documentation.

The vague Particulars of Claim disclose no clear cause of action. The court is invited to strike out the claim of its own volition as having no merit and no reasonable prospects of success.

I confirm that the above facts and statements are true to the best of my knowledge and recollection.

Signed



Date:

[charitynjw]

Re: County Court Business Centre Letter Received

The para which you're not sure about....leave it in, it's fine.
(They will probably ignore the request anyway.)

To enable me to file my defence, I require inspection of documents relating to the case ahead of filing my defence.

This needs tweaking.

To enable me to file my defence, I require copies of the documents relating to the case by return.
Should you be unable to do so, I refer you to the below-mentioned defence deadline extension

Words to that effect.

[OliverJames]

Re: County Court Business Centre Letter Received

FYI [MENTION=5553]charitynjw[/MENTION] I used a template from LB which covered a lot of what you said, but added my own gumpf. The paragraph with CPR 27(2) is the only bit that makes no sense to me! Does it need amending or removing, or does it makes sense to a legal brain?

If this reads ok, i will get it in the post first thing tomorrow!!

Dear Civil Enforcement Ltd:

Claim Ref: XXXXXXXXXX– Request for disclosure

On October 2^nd 2017 I received a County Court Claim from yourselves which I have acknowledged, and intend to defend in full.

To enable me to file my defence, I require inspection of documents relating to the case ahead of filing my defence.

1. Copies of any postal communication sent prior to the alleged offence
2. A copy of authority with the landowner, or if there is a chain of authorities, all relevant contracts between parties, to operate parking services on the relevant land.
3. A copy of your KADOE contract with the DVLA
4. A more detailed breakdown of the amount claimed on the court claim form

In accordance with CPR 31.15(c) I undertake to be responsible for your reasonable copying costs incurred in complying with this CPR 31.14 request.

You should note that this claim has not yet been allocated to a specific track and the provisions of CPR 27(2) are of no effect. Had your claim not been issued through CCBC the Claimant would have been obliged to attach copies of the documentation upon which it relies to the Particulars of Claim. (THIS IS THE BIT THAT NEEDS TO EITHER BE AMENDED OR REMOVED)

I, as Defendant, am entitled to see the documents on which the Claimant relies and which you must produce at trial. Disclosure at this stage will enable me to fully plead my case and further the Overriding Objective.

You should ensure compliance with your CPR 31 duties and ensure that the document(s) I have requested are copied to and received by me within 7 days of receiving this letter.

If you require more time in which to comply with this request you must tell me in writing and confirm your agreement to an extension of the time allowed for me to file my defence as allowed under CPR 15.5 so I may notify the court.

[OliverJames]

Re: County Court Business Centre Letter Received

If were me I'd send them a request for disclosure

Thank you so much, this is really useful!! I have been given a link to a template response as well, but i think it goes into way too much detail and I worry it will feel a little forced (http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/...2800#topofpage)!

First things first, i need to get my defence statement in as I only found out today that the online response i made doesn't include that! I will get that done tonight via this form - http://formfinder.hmctsformfinder.ju...uk/n9b-eng.pdf

I will just put in my defence that I don't believe i was the driver and there has been no correspondence from them whatsoever! But surely this is something they could fabricate though, even if they havent sent!!

Anyway...I will get this done tonight as it needs to be with the court by the 6th which doesn't give me much time!

As for writing to them, are you suggesting i write to Civil Enforcement directly? If so, should I copy anyone else (other than me) into this?

One thing i found interesting relating to the precedent that they quoted that is highlighted in the templated letter on moneysavingexpert is the ParkingEye vs. Bevis case that is ALWAYS used in these letters;

This case can be distinguished from ParkingEye v Beavis [2015] UKSC 67 (the Beavis case) which was dependent upon an undenied contract, formed by unusually prominent signage forming a clear offer and which turned on unique facts regarding the location and the interests of the landowner. Strict compliance with the BPA Code of Practice (CoP) was paramount and Mr. Beavis was the driver who saw the signs and entered into a contract to pay £85 after exceeding a licence to park free. None of this applies in this material case.

Seems pretty silly to use that in this sort of case?

Anyway...I will draft a letter assuming that it is meant for Civil Enforcement, and wait to see what you come back with!

Thank you again so much for giving me your help!

Regardless of what happens, it is worth fighting them and without you and the rest of the gang i wouldnt know where to start!



OllieJB

[charitynjw]

Re: County Court Business Centre Letter Received

There seems to be a bit of a cascade of these CEL claims from parking events dating back 2 yrs+.

All the same tosh on the PoC, referencing a more particularised information schedule, all around the same kind of sum claimed.
Goodness knows how they arrive at that kind of figure!
But that is one of many questions to ask.
& if you read the PoC there is nothing that would identify you in there. (Only in the schedule).
Obviously a template.
Also note that they are not using solicitors.

If were me I'd send them a request for disclosure, asking for
All the documentation that they will rely on in court including, but not limited to, any postal communications relating to their claim.
A copy of their authority with the landowner, or if there is a chain of authorities, all relevant contracts between parties, to operate parking services on the relevant land.
A copy of their KADOE contract with the DVLA.
A detailed breakdown of the amount claimed on the court claim form.

Head it Civil Enforcement Ltd v [you] Court claim no [XXXXXXXX]

Offer to pay their reasonable copying costs.
Ask if they require a 28 day extension to the defence deadline, if so to confirm in writing. (If they agree, you have to inform the court).
As the deadline is fairly soon, ask for a response by return.

Keep a copy & get proof of posting.

[charitynjw]

Re: County Court Business Centre Letter Received

Surely it is their job to now prove beyond doubt that their claim should stand, right?

Civil standard of proof is 'balance of probabilities', not 'beyond reasonable doubt'.