• Welcome to the LegalBeagles Consumer and Legal Forum. Please register to get the most out of the forum. Registration is free and only needs a username and email address.
  • LegalBeagles® is a free forum, founded in May 2007, providing legal guidance and support to consumers and SME's across a range of legal areas.

    Please do not post your full name, reference numbers or any identifiable details on the forum.

Civil Enforcement Ltd County Court Business Centre Claim

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    & it is not an easy matter for Authorities to displace a byelaw.

    See this. (Revoking a byelaw)
    CAVEAT LECTOR

    This is only my opinion - "Opinions are made to be changed --or how is truth to be got at?" (Byron)

    You and I do not see things as they are. We see things as we are.
    Cohen, Herb


    There is danger when a man throws his tongue into high gear before he
    gets his brain a-going.
    Phelps, C. C.


    "They couldn't hit an elephant at this distance!"
    The last words of John Sedgwick

    Comment


    • #17
      Oh wow! Thank you so much for this!

      Ok, so it's the overall national government that has imposed the bylaws? I did try to access the link you sent me but it says access denied http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/...dule/4/enacted

      Right then, my defence will pretty much look at:
      1) I didn't beach any terms and conditions, they did, by not accepting my payment.

      2) their terms and conditions are unclear as they are not addressing the driver/owner/reg keeper of a vehicle just "You".

      3) they made a new offer the next day which I refused and as contact law requires an offer and acceptance by both parties, no contract was entered. It also in effects nullified any previous one they intended.

      4) they are in breach of the bylaws as set out in (can't access the site but will try and find the name of the doc or dept)

      5) they knew about their own fault and about my medical condition and that they are triggering it with their actions. They persisted in their actions and lead me to have a relapse which I may decide to claim for based on disability discrimination.


      Is this adequate you think? X

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by Lyat View Post
        Oh wow! Thank you so much for this!

        Ok, so it's the overall national government that has imposed the bylaws? I did try to access the link you sent me but it says access denied http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/...dule/4/enacted
        Google 'Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule 4'

        Right then, my defence will pretty much look at:
        1) I didn't beach any terms and conditions, they did, by not accepting my payment.

        2) their terms and conditions are unclear as they are not addressing the driver/owner/reg keeper of a vehicle just "You".

        3) they made a new offer the next day which I refused and as contact law requires an offer and acceptance by both parties, no contract was entered. It also in effects nullified any previous one they intended.

        4) they are in breach of the bylaws as set out in (can't access the site but will try and find the name of the doc or dept)
        If it were me I'd do a little more digging on this.
        HERE is a start.


        5) they knew about their own fault and about my medical condition and that they are triggering it with their actions. They persisted in their actions and lead me to have a relapse which I may decide to claim for based on disability discrimination.
        Also, or in the alternative
        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protec...sment_Act_1997



        Is this adequate you think? X
        ####
        CAVEAT LECTOR

        This is only my opinion - "Opinions are made to be changed --or how is truth to be got at?" (Byron)

        You and I do not see things as they are. We see things as we are.
        Cohen, Herb


        There is danger when a man throws his tongue into high gear before he
        gets his brain a-going.
        Phelps, C. C.


        "They couldn't hit an elephant at this distance!"
        The last words of John Sedgwick

        Comment


        • #19
          To be honest, it seems like the bylaws bit is quite a bit of trouble in this case? Do you think I'm better off sticking to the other points in my defence for now? And should this be rejected at this stage and they me to insist on sending me to small claims court, I should try again to look into the bylaw thing?

          Will totally apply the harassment law so thank you again for that!

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by Lyat View Post
            To be honest, it seems like the bylaws bit is quite a bit of trouble in this case? Do you think I'm better off sticking to the other points in my defence for now? And should this be rejected at this stage and they me to insist on sending me to small claims court, I should try again to look into the bylaw thing?

            Will totally apply the harassment law so thank you again for that!
            Yep, that's what I would do, anyway.
            POPLA etc have decided to 'kick the can down the road' as far as byelaws are concerned.
            They won't adjudicate on the issue....my thought is that they would prefer a 'proper' court to decide.
            Parking co's know this, so they (parking co's) behave with impunity.
            I'd still be digging away behind the scenes, though!
            CAVEAT LECTOR

            This is only my opinion - "Opinions are made to be changed --or how is truth to be got at?" (Byron)

            You and I do not see things as they are. We see things as we are.
            Cohen, Herb


            There is danger when a man throws his tongue into high gear before he
            gets his brain a-going.
            Phelps, C. C.


            "They couldn't hit an elephant at this distance!"
            The last words of John Sedgwick

            Comment


            • #21
              Can I just get some quick clarifications on a few things I have picked up on other threads/ sites?

              I saw this:

              "The Claim Form issued on XX/ XX by Civil Enforcement Limited was not correctly filed under The Practice Direction as it was not signed by the Claimant’s Legal Representative nor a named employee/Director, nor any legal person. The claim does not have a valid signature and is not a statement of truth. Practice Direction 22 requires that a statement of case on behalf of a company must be signed by a person holding a senior position and state the position. If the party is legally represented, the legal representative may sign the statement of truth but in his own name and not that of his firm or employer. The claim should, therefore, be struck out as the claimant has not complied with pre-court protocol.

              This is the same as my claim form as it is signed by "Civil Enforcement Limited (Claimant's Legal Representative)". Not only that but just in point of fact, If the claimant is Civil Enforcement Ltd, how can they be the Claimant's legal representative at the same time?

              I also saw this:

              "This Claimant has not complied with pre-court protocol. And as an example as to why this prevents a full defence being filed at this time, a parking charge can be for trespass, breach of contract or a contractual charge. All these are treated differently in law and require a different defence. The wording of any contract will naturally be a key element in this matter, and a copy of the alleged contract has never been provided to the Defendant.

              (a) The Claim form Particulars contained insufficient detail for cause of action. The Claim form Particulars did not contain any evidence of contravention."

              I am a little confused by this one- what exactly is "cause of action" referring to? In my case, the Particulars of Claim read:

              "Claim for monies relating to a parking charge for parking in a private car park managed by the claimant in breach of the terms and conditions (T + Cs). Drivers are allowed to park in accordance with the T+Cs of use. ANPR camras and/ or manual patrols are used to monitor vehicles entering + exiting the site. Debt + damages claimed the sum of 182.00. Violation date: 20/ 06/ 2018. 10:53 Time out: 18:40. PCN ref XXXXXXXX. Car reg XXXXXX Car Park XXXXX

              Total due- 182.00
              (Ref:www.ce-service.co.uk or Tel: 01158225020)
              The Claimant claims the sum of 193.81 for monies relating to a parking charge per above including 11.81 interest pursuant to S.69 of the County Coourts Act 1984. Rate 8.00% pa from dates above to- 12/04/19. Same rate Judgement or (sooner) payment. Daily rate to Judgement- 0.04. Total debt and interest due 193.81"

              Are there any grounds for me to mention they haven't contained detail in terms of "cause of action"?

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by Lyat View Post
                Can I just get some quick clarifications on a few things I have picked up on other threads/ sites?

                I saw this:

                "The Claim Form issued on XX/ XX by Civil Enforcement Limited was not correctly filed under The Practice Direction as it was not signed by the Claimant’s Legal Representative nor a named employee/Director, nor any legal person. The claim does not have a valid signature and is not a statement of truth. Practice Direction 22 requires that a statement of case on behalf of a company must be signed by a person holding a senior position and state the position. If the party is legally represented, the legal representative may sign the statement of truth but in his own name and not that of his firm or employer. The claim should, therefore, be struck out as the claimant has not complied with pre-court protocol.

                This is the same as my claim form as it is signed by "Civil Enforcement Limited (Claimant's Legal Representative)". Not only that but just in point of fact, If the claimant is Civil Enforcement Ltd, how can they be the Claimant's legal representative at the same time?
                Strictly speaking, the Statement of Truth has to be signed by a real, live person. (Obvious, really, for how can a non-living entity, ie a business, attest to anything?)
                But the courts seem to allow it.
                Still, it's worth a mention, as it ought to lower the validity of the *signed* statement.


                I also saw this:

                *"This Claimant has not complied with pre-court protocol. And as an example as to why this prevents a full defence being filed at this time, a parking charge can be for trespass, breach of contract or a contractual charge. All these are treated differently in law and require a different defence. The wording of any contract will naturally be a key element in this matter, and a copy of the alleged contract has never been provided to the Defendant.

                *(a) The Claim form Particulars contained insufficient detail for cause of action. The Claim form Particulars did not contain any evidence of contravention."

                I am a little confused by this one- what exactly is "cause of action" referring to?
                The cause of action is the reason for bringing the action, & what it is founded on.
                These parking firms seem to be very vague in that area, & their PoCs often provide a 'menu' of possibilities. (By implication)
                Is the cause of action brought in tort? (Ie trespass)
                Or is it common law breach of contract?
                Or is it via legislation? (PoFA 2012)
                All of these should have been narrowed down before a court claim is issued.
                That is one of the purposes of the PAP (Pre-Action Protocol)



                In my case, the Particulars of Claim read:

                "Claim for monies relating to a parking charge for parking in a private car park managed by the claimant in breach of the terms and conditions (T + Cs). Drivers are allowed to park in accordance with the T+Cs of use. ANPR camras and/ or manual patrols are used to monitor vehicles entering + exiting the site. Debt + damages claimed the sum of 182.00. Violation date: 20/ 06/ 2018. 10:53 Time out: 18:40. PCN ref XXXXXXXX. Car reg XXXXXX Car Park XXXXX

                Total due- 182.00
                (Ref:www.ce-service.co.uk or Tel: 01158225020)
                The Claimant claims the sum of 193.81 for monies relating to a parking charge per above including 11.81 interest pursuant to S.69 of the County Coourts Act 1984. Rate 8.00% pa from dates above to- 12/04/19. Same rate Judgement or (sooner) payment. Daily rate to Judgement- 0.04. Total debt and interest due 193.81"
                A Robo-claim!
                Ill defined, & leaves the Defendant with a lot of ground to try & cover.


                Are there any grounds for me to mention they haven't contained detail in terms of "cause of action"?
                Yep.
                *Pretty much what you've quoted above can go into your defence.
                ####

                CAVEAT LECTOR

                This is only my opinion - "Opinions are made to be changed --or how is truth to be got at?" (Byron)

                You and I do not see things as they are. We see things as we are.
                Cohen, Herb


                There is danger when a man throws his tongue into high gear before he
                gets his brain a-going.
                Phelps, C. C.


                "They couldn't hit an elephant at this distance!"
                The last words of John Sedgwick

                Comment


                • #23
                  I've started writing out my defence and I think I'm nearing the end. I'm struggling a little with getting my head around the exact sections of the Equality Act and Protection from Harassment Act that they are violating by triggering me so much with their behaviour that I ended up having a relapse. I will be getting in touch with my nurse and having look at the M.S trust website too in regards to discrimination for help.

                  Can I show you what I have so far?

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Here's what I have so far. What do you think?

                    I am the registered keeper of the vehicle MA03 EBJ and the claim is denied on the following grounds any of which is fatal to the claimant’s case.

                    1.The Claim Form issued on (do I enter the date I received the notice or the date on the form?) by Civil Enforcement Limited was not correctly filed under The Practice Direction as it was not signed by the Claimant’s Legal Representative nor a named employee/Director, nor any legal person. The claim does not have a valid signature and is not a statement of truth. Practice Direction 22 requires that a statement of case on behalf of a company must be signed by a person holding a senior position and state the position. If the party is legally represented, the legal representative may sign the statement of truth but in his own name and not that of his firm or employer. The claim should, therefore, be struck out as the claimant has not complied with pre-court protocol. It is therefore denied that the £50 solicitor’s fee can be claimed. Also, the full claim is denied as the claim has not been signed by either the landowner or the landowner’s solicitor.

                    2. The Particulars of Claim discloses no cause of action. The claimant has not provided particulars to allow the defendant to provide a reasonable defence having not stated clearly within their letters what the charge is for. This Claimant has not complied with pre-court protocol. And, as an example as to why this prevents a full defence being filed at this time, a parking charge can be for trespass, breach of contract or a contractual charge. All these are treated differently in law and require a different defence. The wording of any contract will naturally be a key element in this matter, and a copy of the alleged contract has never been provided to or signed by the Defendant.

                    (a) The Claim form Particulars contained insufficient detail for cause of action. The Claim form Particulars did not contain any evidence of contravention.

                    3. The Particulars of Claim do not meet the requirements of CPR 16. In particular it does not include a concise statement of the facts on which the Claimant relies as it must do under CPR 16.4(1)(a) Neither are they compliant with practice direction 16 7.5.

                    4. Claimants failure to process the payment is not the responsibility of the defendant, and no parking charge can be due. The defendant followed the directions and registered full and true vehicle and banking details via the system put in place by the company. The defendant further reported the incident via:
                    a) The app crash report,
                    b) The listed phone number, and,
                    c) Direct email to the company- all of which is fully documented and evidence of which will be produced in court.

                    5. Further to the claimant’s claim of breach of terms and conditions, the defendant is unaware of which terms and conditions apply given the company changed the terms the following day when changing its original offer which the defendant did not agree to. Under UK common contract law, one of the basic requirements is for the parties to accept the offer being made. The defendant did not accept the new offer being made for the same incident which rendered any contract non-existent.

                    6. The Particulars of Claim state that it concerns a parking charge that was due on 20/ 06/ 2018. No charge could possibly have existed on this date. The Claimant did not issue a parking Notice on this date and as established nullified their own terms and conditions when making a counter offer that was rejected. No debt could have been outstanding on the date stated in the Particulars of Claim that are therefore untrue.

                    7. The claimant was made fully aware of the defendant’s medical condition and how their behaviour was causing the defendant serious medical harm by triggering the defendant’s disability. The claimant was made aware of their harassment and its direct effect on the defendant. The claimant insisted on harassing the defendant which breaches Section 1 ss.1 (a) & (b) of the Protection from Harassment Act 1997 which states:A person must not pursue a course of conduct-
                    (a) which amounts to harassment of another, and
                    (b) which he knows or ought to know amounts to harassment of the other

                    8. The claimant further breaches Section 1A, ss. (c) (ii) of the same Act which states:
                    A person must not pursue a course of conduct-

                    (c) By which he intends to persuade any person (whether or not those mentioned above)-
                    (ii) to do something that he is not under any obligation to do.

                    9. The claimant is also in violation of the Equality Act 2010 Chapter 2 s26 ss. 1. (a): A person (A) harasses another (B) if-
                    1. A engages in unwanted conduct related to a relevant protected characteristic, and
                    2. The conduct has the purpose or effect of –
                    1. Violating B’s dignity, or
                    2. Creating an intimidating, hostile, degrading, humiliating or offensive environment for B
                    Section 4A, ss. 3 also states that:
                    For the purposes of this section A ought to know that A's course of conduct will cause B serious alarm or distress which has a substantial adverse effect on B's usual day-to-day activities if a reasonable person in possession of the same information would think the course of conduct would cause B such alarm or distress.
                    Last edited by Lyat; 22nd April 2019, 14:55:PM.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      I feel like I could go into a little detail regarding exactly how it effected my day-to-day life by landing me in hospital. something like:

                      The defendant was admitted to hospital in April 2019 following the increasing stress caused by the claimants actions which lead to a flare up of her disability which is a protected characteristic covered by the Equality Act that the claimant was made expressly aware of prior to admission.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Imho, 7, 8 & 9 (Protection from Harassment & Equality Act stuff) are more suited to a counterclaim.

                        R0b

                        des8

                        What do you guys reckon?
                        CAVEAT LECTOR

                        This is only my opinion - "Opinions are made to be changed --or how is truth to be got at?" (Byron)

                        You and I do not see things as they are. We see things as we are.
                        Cohen, Herb


                        There is danger when a man throws his tongue into high gear before he
                        gets his brain a-going.
                        Phelps, C. C.


                        "They couldn't hit an elephant at this distance!"
                        The last words of John Sedgwick

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Yes, it would appear that harassment and discrimination are better kept in the counterclaim section. If you don't intend on bringing a counterclaim, probably best to remove.

                          Also, would it not be wise to argue the defence of impossibility?
                          Check out some useful guides below

                          A guide to voluntary termination
                          Seting aside a CCJ
                          Completing an N180 Form (Courtesy of Jaguarsuk)

                          - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
                          LEGAL DISCLAIMER
                          Please be aware that this is a public forum and is therefore accessible to anyone. The content I post on this forum is not intended to be legal advice nor does it establish any client-lawyer type relationship between you and me. Some of the content I post may include example wording, letters, or other similar responses but they are intended purely for informational and educational purposes. Using some or all of the content I post may fail to meet your needs that is specific to your situation. Therefore any use of my content is at your own risk and I cannot be held responsible in any way. It is always recommended that you seek independent legal advice and you can do this through the Law Society's Find a Solicitor database, by contacting your local Citizen's Advice Bureau or legal advice centres such as LawWorks. You may also be able to seek legal advice from your local university who may run a free (but limited) legal advice clinic to members of the public.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            I am thinking about counter claiming but not sure as to the process for that yet. Also, what is the defence of impossibility you are referring to? Thanks for mentioning x

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              The impossibility defence is something you can rely on which excuses you from performing your contractual obligations i.e. to pay for parking because through no fault of your own, you are unable to comply and so you are absolved from liability.

                              As an example, your defence would be written along the following lines:-

                              The Defendant took all necessary measures to ensure that he/she complied with his/her obligations in accordance with the terms and conditions. More specifically, the Defendant:-

                              a. Made several attempts to make payment through the phone application [state name of app] but the application returned error messages.

                              b. Following the failed attempts through the application, a call was made to the number stated on the signage, however, there was no answer. A voicemail was left but the Claimant did not return the call.

                              By reason of the matters above, it was impossible for the Defendant to comply with the terms and conditions of parking, that is to make payment. Accordingly, the Defendant is absolved from any liability and it is further denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed in the Particulars of Claim or any relief at all.
                              Just an example above, if you wish to use this then you will need to adapt it to suit your needs.
                              Last edited by R0b; 22nd April 2019, 20:09:PM.
                              Check out some useful guides below

                              A guide to voluntary termination
                              Seting aside a CCJ
                              Completing an N180 Form (Courtesy of Jaguarsuk)

                              - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
                              LEGAL DISCLAIMER
                              Please be aware that this is a public forum and is therefore accessible to anyone. The content I post on this forum is not intended to be legal advice nor does it establish any client-lawyer type relationship between you and me. Some of the content I post may include example wording, letters, or other similar responses but they are intended purely for informational and educational purposes. Using some or all of the content I post may fail to meet your needs that is specific to your situation. Therefore any use of my content is at your own risk and I cannot be held responsible in any way. It is always recommended that you seek independent legal advice and you can do this through the Law Society's Find a Solicitor database, by contacting your local Citizen's Advice Bureau or legal advice centres such as LawWorks. You may also be able to seek legal advice from your local university who may run a free (but limited) legal advice clinic to members of the public.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Okay, I see! That's brilliant! So If I amend my defence at para 4 and substitute it with what you stated above, then would you think my defence would be ready to submit?

                                I am unsure about taking out the paragraphs regarding them affecting my health because if this goes to a hearing then won't I be needing to have already mentioned it because I am pretty sure I read you cannot rely on any new information or defence etc? Would it be harmful to my defence if I left it in? Is there no way I can tie it to improper conduct under some other Pofa or bpa stuff? (sorry if they're both totally wrong!)

                                In terms of counterclaiming, I believe I have to pay for that right? I am really confused because I am so done with all this and I just want it to stop so ideally I don't want to drag it out further by going down a counterclaim route if it'll just prolong the process and I'll have to pay up too. What do you suggest?

                                Comment

                                View our Terms and Conditions

                                LegalBeagles Group uses cookies to enhance your browsing experience and to create a secure and effective website. By using this website, you are consenting to such use.To find out more and learn how to manage cookies please read our Cookie and Privacy Policy.

                                If you would like to opt in, or out, of receiving news and marketing from LegalBeagles Group Ltd you can amend your settings at any time here.


                                If you would like to cancel your registration please Contact Us. We will delete your user details on request, however, any previously posted user content will remain on the site with your username removed and 'Guest' inserted.

                                Announcement

                                Collapse
                                No announcement yet.

                                Court Claim ?

                                Guides and Letters



                                Search and Compare fixed fee legal services and find a solicitor near you.

                                Find a Law Firm


                                Loading...
                                Working...
                                X