Claim form from county court business centre about parking charge

[wart]

Hi please is anybody able to help and give me advice?

I've received a 'claim form' from Northampton County Court Business Centre about unpaid parking fine. In simple words I will try to describe situations that happened to the driver. About 2000 hrs, 20th of September last year the driver stayed for a few minutes in Bedford on parking which according to the local resident was to be free after 1800 hrs. Because there was no lighting in this yard the driver not see any sign with terms and conditions due to darkness. On this square there was some kind of aruing and probably drinking alcohol by a group of men, so the driver was a bit afraid of leaving the car, so quite quickly left the place. In January this year I received a letter from some zzps company that I owe them £ 200 for the parking ticket which I ignored and now I received a letter from the county court for the sum of over £ 300 to pay.

Thanks Wart

[ostell]

Acknowledge the claim online now using the details and password on the form. Do not put anything in the defence. This gives you 33 days from date of issue to prepare a defence and present to the court.

Edit your post so that the identity of the driver cannot be inferred

Post up the first letter from the parking company with identifying details removed but leave dates.

[wart]

hi
thanks for reply below first letter from parking company and second is claim form. hopefully is legible. _MG_2800.JPG_MG_2801.JPG

[ostell]

That first letter is a debt collectors letter and not from CEL themselves. If they have not issued a Notice to Keeper that was delivered within 14 days of the incident then they cannot hold the keeper liable for the actions of the unknown driver. That will be your main defence point.

I believe the claim form is incorrectly signed (others will correct me) and so you can ask for the claim to be struck out.
There is insufficient detail in the form of the alleged contravention to allow a defence to be made.

Look on here and on the private parking section of Pepipoo for CEL defences. Post your defence on here for critique before you send it.

[davenewbergr]

Yes, that's not a valid signature for a Statement of Truth. A Director (or other duly authorised person) must sign on behalf of a company. The Company's name typed/printed on the signature line is an abuse of process. However, if OP doesn't respond in the correct way, there can still be a default judgment. One method would be to acknowledge the claim (within 14 days) and file a defence that states something like 'The Defendant neither admits nor denies the facts stated in the claim but avers that the Claim is an abuse of process because the statement of truth on the claim form is not signed contrary to CPR 22.1 and CPR PD22.3(4).'
Send the defence to the Court and make sure that you point out that the Claim form is defective (using the same language) in the letter, and ask the court of its own motion to strike out the claim as an abuse of process. Point out that you are not represented because of the cost involved and that the claimant is clearly operating a business in the litigation sector and has no excuse for not knowing and following the relevant Civil Procedure Rules (that's what CPR stands for; PD stands for Practice Direction.)
This used to be next to impossible before the blasted CCMCC in Northampton was set up. Any half decent office staff in a 2005 County Court would have simply sent this claim form back to Civil Enforcement Limited and told it that the claim was defective. Now, of course, the Court Service wants the money from the issue fee so they just ignore this sort of crap and the poor defendants catch it in the neck.

[wart]

Hi, so what i need to write to court in defence:

Claimant didn't issue Notice to Keeper within 14 days of incident.
The Statement of Truth is not valid sign as a Director (or other duly authorised person) must sign on behalf of a company. The Company's name typed/printed on the signature line is an abuse of process.The Claim form is defective that why a ask to stike out the claim as an abuse of process.
I am not represented because of the cost involved and the claimant is clearly operating a business in the litigation sector and has no excuse for not knowing and following the relevant Civil Procedure Rules.

I am not sure is that correct, please check above and advice.

thanks

[ostell]

Find some other CEL defences from both this forum and the Pepipoo private parking forum as suggested and use these as the basis for your defence.

The dfrist item will be the incoorect procedure and the claim should be thrown out
Next is no liability as ther has been no NTK to be able to hold the keeper rather than the driver liable.

Just read some CEL defences.