CEL (Civil Enforcement Ltd) PCN County Court Claims Received.

[ostell]

Unfortunately the invite and warning are all in that extremely small text at the bottom of the NTK.

However there was a case where it was ajudged that the tear off slip at the bottom was a separate document, leading to the confirmation that the NTK was not correct. Unfortunately, for the life of me, I can't remember the case.

[Kar0t]

Thanks for your help - is it worth still posting the below letter to CEL:
--------------------------------------
Dear Sir / Madam,

The NtK [reference no] issued 14/05/18 is non compliant by the virtue of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 s9, and am no way obliged to name the driver at the time of the alleged contravention.

I require you to cease processing my personal data, remove it from your database and not to contact me regarding this matter other than to confirm the same.

Yours faithfully,

[name of allleged]
-------------------------------------
...please advise

Thanks

Jay

[Kar0t]

I have found this...

It is acknowledged that your company provided the required information on the payment slip enclosed with your NTK, however, the High Court ruled in the case of Barnet Council v The Parking Adjudicator 2006 EWHC 2357 that the payment slip constitutes a separate document to the notice to owner. This decision is binding on all lower courts and ombudsman services, including the County Court and POPLA.

.... can i just add this to to letter

Impressed with my googling skills

[Kar0t]

Excuse the triple posts..would the below suffice...

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

I am writing to appeal the above PCN sent to me as the registered keeper of the above vehicle, I was not the driver of the vehicle at the time of the alleed infringement.

As you do not appear to have identified the driver at the time of the alleged infringement, it is assumed that your company intends to rely on the keeper liability provisions of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (PoFA).

Schedule 4 Paragraphs 8 & 9 of the PoFA stipulate the mandatory information that must be included in a Notice to Keeper (NTK), in order for it to be valid. Amongst many other requirements, it stipulates that the NTK must:

● Advise that the driver is responsible for the parking charge and the amount, and that it has not been paid in full

Unfortunately, your company has failed to provide the above information on the NTK and therefore it fails to meet the requirements of Paragraph 6 Schedule 4 of the PoFA in establishing keeper liability.

It is acknowledged that your company provided the required information on the payment slip enclosed with your NTK, however, the High Court ruled in the case of Barnet Council v The Parking Adjudicator 2006 EWHC 2357 that the payment slip constitutes a separate document to the notice to owner. This decision is binding on all lower courts and ombudsman services, including the County Court and POPLA.

As you have failed to establish keeper liability under the PoFA, I will not be making any payment in respect of this PCN. Your alleged contract is with the driver of the vehicle at the time of the alleged infringement, and I am afraid that I am unable to assist you with identifying the driver on the specified date and time.

Please ensure that your reply includes a notice of cancellation of the above PCN

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

Someone who submitted this in April 2018 got their ticket cancelled by CEL

[charitynjw]

Transcript of the case attached.
Well done you!

Also add that you require them to remove your personal data from their records, & that you require confirmation of same.

[ostell]

Glad that was found, it has been added to my collection of bits and pieces. I knew it was somewhere but the memory is a funny thing.

[charitynjw]

Glad that was found, it has been added to my collection of bits and pieces. I knew it was somewhere but the memory is a funny thing.

[Kar0t]

Letter posted via recorded delivery today... will keep you guys posted at the outcome.

[Kar0t]

Hi all yet to hear from CEL yet, they got the letter on Tues 26th March. If I don’t hear from them tomorrow I am away until the 2nd April, the date my MCOL defence has to be submitted by.

Do I need to notify anyone if I hear nothing or is it just a waiting game for CEL’s response?

[charitynjw]

Hi all yet to hear from CEL yet, they got the letter on Tues 26th March. If I don’t hear from them tomorrow I am away until the 2nd April, the date my MCOL defence has to be submitted by.

Do I need to notify anyone if I hear nothing or is it just a waiting game for CEL’s response?

If you could get a pic of the site sign it would be good.
CEL do tend to fold when faced with a robust defence (though they may try to bluff it out a while longer...poss even issue a county court claim to see if they can frighten you. But they then usually withdraw if the Defendant stands their ground.)

Why?

Do you remember the playground bully at school........?