Civil Enforcement Ltd & DCBL

[charitynjw]

charitynjw
Hello Charity,

I've had a quick look into this; please see below for a slightly abridged version of the paragraph;

warn the keeper that if, after the period of 28 days beginning with the day after that on which the notice is given—

the creditor will (if all the applicable conditions under this Schedule are met) have the right to recover from the keeper so much of that amount as remains unpaid;


Words to the effect of "28 days after non payment may result in CEL taking debt recovery action" are in the footer of the NtK.

It doesn't mention the rights conferred, but they have mentioned Schedule 4 at the beginning of the paragraph.

Does this mean it is not compliant? should they be highlighting the specific rules; ie para 6(1)(b)?

I have attached a copy of the reverse side of a CEL NtK from elsewhere.
It is fairly typical of CEL postal notices.
But your 'original' will still be needed.

Generally speaking, CEL NtK's are pretty bulletproof.

Imho, however, the site sign can be challenged, as can the add-on £70.


.

[ecalid]

I have attached a copy of the reverse side of a CEL NtK from elsewhere.
It is fairly typical of CEL postal notices.
But your 'original' will still be needed.

Generally speaking, CEL NtK's are pretty bulletproof.

Imho, however, the site sign can be challenged, as can the add-on £70.


.

Thanks for this charitynjw

That does sound reassuring. Hopefully they won't even turn up to court

Is there any weight to the fact that it was an 18 minute stay and the ostensible contravention of the alleged 'terms' was to the tune of about £1?

[charitynjw]

Thanks for this charitynjw

That does sound reassuring. Hopefully they won't even turn up to court

Is there any weight to the fact that it was an 18 minute stay and the ostensible contravention of the alleged 'terms' was to the tune of about £1?

The BPA Code of Practice states that a minimum 'grace' period of 10 minutes must be allowed to exit.
It can also be argued that a reasonable 'consideration' period on entry must be allowed to find a parking space, read signage T&Cs etc. (The offer must be communicated to the offeree....plenty of case law to support this.)
18 minutes is borderline.
In my experience, any argument re the overrun time (apart from the consideration & grace) will go nowhere unless it was because of an unforeseeable event, or possibly an 'equality' issue. ParkingEye v Beavis (2015) SC put the kibosh on 'genuine pre-estimation of loss' defences.

[ecalid]

Good afternoon all,

I've had the DSAR back, please find attached.

[ecalid]

I think the paperwork seems compliant, obviously I hope I am wrong and I am waiting for somebody else to correct me. They cheekily included into the DSAR an additional letter which has never been delivered. I don't think this has any weight whatsoever but its notable that they will include non-delivered correspondence into DSAR's.

Additionally, in this non-delivered paperwork, they state that:

It is the drivers responsibility to pay this PCN. However, in England and Wales, if after 28 days from the Issue Date, this PCN has not been paid or you have not provided us with the name and current address for service of the driver, then under Section 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 we do now have the right, subject to the requirements of the Act having been complied with, to recover from the Registered Keeper at the time the vehicle was parked, sums that remain unpaid.

Have they not then opened themselves up to scrutiny, as they have delivered the NtK after approx 10 days but in this correspondence it says the rights are conferred after 28 days? According to this correspondence, should I then not have received the NtK after 28 days?. I think this correspondence refers to a ticket affixed to car scenario; but could somebody confirm this for me?

Had I paid the PCN immediately, would this letter in essence confirm that my payment was invalid?

[des8]

As suspected their paperwork is compliant, and the fact that they themselves are confused isn't going to be of help to you.

Your defence is going to have to centre round their poor signage i.e. it is possible to enter the car park without seeing the sign, and to park in such a position that the other signs are not in view

[ecalid]

As suspected their paperwork is compliant, and the fact that they themselves are confused isn't going to be of help to you.

Your defence is going to have to centre round their poor signage i.e. it is possible to enter the car park without seeing the sign, and to park in such a position that the other signs are not in view

Thanks for this des8

I'll await the claim form and come back to you.

Hopefully, it'll never get that far.


Many thanks,

[ecalid]

Good evening all.

Just a quick update...

Today I recieved a letter before action, they indicate that after 30 days, if there is no response then they will initiate court action.

I certainly will not fill out their stupid expenses form, nor will I pay anything towards this alleged debt. A £1 fee turning into £170+ is absolutely insane.

I have today put in another DSAR to see if there have been any other instances of the car being parked at the alleged car park which has not resulted in a fine. As the terms suggest they might not intend to be legally bound by the terms if I can prove that the car has entered the car park and left without paying in another instance, which did not result in a fine.

Even with a consideration period (which isnt stipulated in any of the terms) the terms seek to overrule any statutory or customary terms for a consideration period by demanding payment "within 15 minutes". This surely could not be interpreted in any other way than payment is due from the first minite.

[des8]

You should respond to the LBA, if only disputing their claim (without identifying the driver!)

[ecalid]

You should respond to the LBA, if only disputing their claim (without identifying the driver!)

Thanks Des. I will do this.

It sounds to me like this will goto court regardless so I may aswell dispute.

[des8]

You have to prepare as if it will end in a hearing, but sometimes they discontinue their claim at the last minute

[ecalid]

You have to prepare as if it will end in a hearing,

Agreed, better to be prepared in full and ready to rumble.

but sometimes they discontinue their claim at the last minute

or they simply neglect to turn up to the hearing. Such a flagrant abuse of process, these companies should be disbanded.

Just waiting for my DSAR to come back now.

[ecalid]

I've just been reading the terms and conditions of the signage; and it states under 'Terms and conditions' (which is placed half way down the notice)


1. If I interpret this in the literal sense, anything below 'Terms and conditions' in the notice, is what is alleged to have been agreed virtue of the contract.

2. The sign reads "Pay at machine", but the 'terms' also refer to obtaining a parking permit

3. The terms do not identify any correspondence which might be issued in contravention of the terms.

4. The terms seem to continue to the end of the notice.

5. "if you breach any of these terms then you may incurr a £100 fee"

6. Term para.5: "Additional costs/recovery charges will be incurred if payment is not made within 28 days" so if the keeper doesn't pay £1 after 28 days, the keeper will incurr a £100 fee, having breached the term?

7. Surely, this must mean that in the literal sense the contractee is given 28 days to pay the £1 parking fee, which could arguably contradict the other term of "payment within 15 minutes"

8. If that is the case, then issuing a collections letter demanding £100 within 28 days means that they have not complied with s9(2)b, c, d & i POFA?

(b)inform the keeper that the driver is required to pay parking charges in respect of the specified period of parking and that the parking charges have not been paid in full; (£1 not £100)

(c)describe the parking charges due from the driver as at the end of that period, the circumstances in which the requirement to pay them arose (including the means by which the requirement was brought to the attention of drivers) and the other facts that made them payable; (Given 28 days to pay £1 by the terms, but letters indicate that a breach of terms were made; the letter was received 10 days after the alleged breach and not after 28)

(d)specify the total amount of those parking charges that are unpaid, as at a time which is—

(i)specified in the notice; and (£1)

In essence, whilst a driver can ostensibly agree to the £100 fee, it surely doesn't make the letters enforceable, virtue of contra preforentum; where terms are ambiguous, for the party attempting to enforce the terms, the courts may construe the terms against the claimant.

[des8]

Stop fretting about this and just wait for the court form.

When received you should acknowledge receipt but not enter a defence.
You will then know what you have to defend
.
Post up the claim form (redacted) when to hand.

[ecalid]

Stop fretting about this and just wait for the court form.

When received you should acknowledge receipt but not enter a defence.
You will then know what you have to defend
.
Post up the claim form (redacted) when to hand.

Good evening,

Thanks Des for your support.

I am coming to the end of my law degree, in the final year, so this is also an opportunity for me to brainstorm and test my own knowledge against others experienced in this field such as yourself. This will also be my 4th claim I've defended, with one reaching court, 2 others for various alleged breaches resulting in discontinuation; mainly consumer credit related and one claim issued by myself for employment issues resulting in a NDA.

That isn't me flexing, respectfully, I just don't want anybody to feel like I am ignoring their advice if I respond in an obstensibly pretentious way. As I don't always announce my legal intuition before engaging in conversation.

Do you have any thoughts on my previous post? As it is obvious the claimant will rely on contractual agreement, it might be sensible to attack this whilst it is one avenue we know they will use.