Civil Enforcement Ltd. PCN Court claim

[russh]

Hi all,
I really would appreciate some advice on how to proceed with this matter.
Our company received a pcn notice from civil enforcement ltd a while ago now. The charge relates to one of our vehicles that somebody had parked in a local pub car park..
It appears that you need to enter your registration number into a screen to authorize parking. a representative of our company visited the pub and spoke with the landlord who assured them that it would be canceled by him and to ignore any letters from civil enforcement ltd. We have since had more letters and escalating costs and on each occasion been told by the landlord that it would be canceled.
we have now received a court claim form for the sum of £270.69. The claim is made against our company and i am very worried that a ccj may be issued against us.
should I just pay up and chalk it to experience or do i have e realistic chance of defending and winning.
sorry for the long winded post . would really appreciate any help and advice.

thank you all

[des8]

It is always worth taking on CEL!
From your brief story it is already clear they are stretching their claim beyond what is allowed!

First post up a photo of the PCN (assume only one incident) and Claim form and we can advise more fully then.(leave in all dates and times but remove identifying details and reference numbers)
Photo's of the signage would be useful
Time is limited, so asap please.

Do you think the pub landlord will confirm in writing that he has ordered the charge be withdrawn?

[russh]

hi all.
hopefully i have uploaded a copy of pcn and claim form.
i will go to the car park this evening and photograph the signage and upload a.s.a.p.
as far as the the landlord writing a letter of support, i doubt he will do so in the time allowed. he is notorious for promises that are never met. i have been informed by several people that he has told them the same but then ignored all requests to do so. (i believe he may receive a commission on paid tickets)
any advice on how to proceed would be gratefully received. i need to fill in the acknowledgement of service and would like to know if i fill in my name as company representative or company name.
also is the cost likely to escalate if i am unsuccessful.
many thanks for help

[des8]

Assuming it is a limited company you sign it in your name and state your position in the adjoining box

You should also send a CPR31.14 letter to the claimant.
A template can be found in the shortcuts panel on the right of this page.
It will need amending by omitting points 2 & 3 but substituting:
1) contract i.e. photos of site signage
2) copy of contract authorising CEL (i) to manage car parking at site, (ii) to issue parking charges & (iii) to undertake collection of such charges including by court action

You should also send them a Subject Access Request

If you are unsuccessful at the very least the order should be for less than the claim total:
-as the company was not the driver they are proceeding against the keeper, and legislation states they can only obtain the Parking Charge (£100) not the additional £70 costs
-also as they are not employing a legal representative what is that £50 addition doing there?

[russh]

Good morning,
I have sent the acknowledgement of service to the court on Friday 11/07/2025 . i am today sending the cpr31.4 and s.a.r. to civil enforcement. could you please tell me what date i should put where it says i intend to file my defense on the ?? i am still trying to upload pics of signage but it keeps saying file too large. will keep trying
many thanks

[des8]

Don't worry about inserting a date ... just leave at "before filing my defence"

re signs, suggest you upload to a hosting site such as IMGUR (there are others) and putting a link on this thread.

[russh]

thumbnail_IMG_2629-compressed2.jpgthumbnail_IMG_2628-compressed1.jpg hi there,
sorry for delay posting signage pics but i have had internet issues. hopefully done now.
could you please advise me of next steps needed. I have sent the cpr31.4 and subject access request letters to cel. how long do wait before contacting them to chase and when do i contact the court again?
many thanksfor your help.

[des8]

Defence does not have to be filed with court until August .
When you hear from CEL post up here, but if you don't hear from them give us a nudge around 30th july (next Wednesday)

[russh]

Hi there ,
I have still heard nothing from c.e.l. Ltd
could you tell me what date my defence needs to be sent to court and how i should go about chasing c.e.l.
Many thanks

[russh]

Hi there ,
I have still heard nothing from c.e.l. Ltd
could you tell me what date my defence needs to be sent to court and how i should go about chasing c.e.l.
Many thanks

[des8]

Don't chase CEL.
Your defence has to be filed by Aug 3rd.
I'll post up a draft for you tomorrow.

Was the claim form & PCN addressed to the Ltd Company?
The scans in post 3 seem to have changed to all 4 being the claim form ... any chance you can repost the PCN?

[russh]

Hi there,
Claim form was addressed. To limited company. Pcn also addressed to company , I will try to get a copy of original pcn posted up this morning.
thank you so much for your help with this . I really do appreciate it.

[russh]

Copy of pcn uploaded

[des8]

Copy of pcn uploaded

There are a number of things which have to be checked to see if CEL's Notice to Keeper/PCN complied with the mandated requirements of Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (PoFA2012)

So photos please if there is a page 2 to that PCN ?, and what was the location?

[des8]

Here's a draft defence for you to use or discard or amend.(you will need to enter car reg. in certain places
It might well need changing depending on the answers to post
You will need to send it as an attachment to an email.
In the subject line enter details of case: "xyz co ltd vs CeL claim no; 123456 Defence"
I'm not legally trained, so use it at your own discretion.

1. Unless otherwise stated in this Defence:
   i) the Defendant uses the same terminology as the Claimant has employed in the Particulars of Claim; and
   ii) the Defendant denies each and every allegation or that the Claimant is entitled to any relief.
   iii) all references to paragraph numbers are to paragraph numbers in the Particulars of Claim
   
   INTRODUCTION
2. This claim has been issued against the Defendant in connection with the Defendant's refusal to pay a private parking charge which the Claimant alleges that the Defendant is liable to pay For the reasons set out in this Defence, it is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the sums claimed or any relief at all.
   
   
   
   APPLICABLE LAW
3. Section 56 together with Schedule 4 of The Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (POFA) provides landowners with powers to manage parking on their land. Paragraph 4 of Schedule 4 of POFA stipulates that the liability for an unpaid parking charge may only be transferred from the driver to the registered keeper of the vehicle if certain conditions as prescribed in Schedule 4 are met.
   
   LIABILITY of THE DRIVER OF THE VEHICLE
4. The Defendant puts the Claimant to proof that the driver of the vehicle reg no xx11abc entered into a contract to park with the Claimant
5. It is noted that the signage at the car park is forbidding in nature as it is clearly stated on one sign PERMIT HOLDERS ONLY, and on another CUSTOMER PARKING ONLY and in smaller letters GENERAL PUBLIC PARKING IS NOT PERMITTED
6. It follows from paragraph 5 that anyone parking without a permit, or is not a customer ,is not contracting to park, but is in fact trespassing. It is not possible to contract to perform an act which is forbidden, and only the land occupier may sue for damages following a trespass. CEL are only the managers so cannot sue for trespass
   
   LIABILITY AS THE REGISTERED KEEPER
7. It is admitted that the Defendant is the registered keeper of the vehicle with registration xx11 abc

1. Without prejudice to the foregoing paragraph, a request was made by the Defendant asking the Claimant to provide evidence establishing that the Claimant has authority to manage and enforce the car park by way of issuing parking charge notices pursuant to condition 5(1)(a) of POFA 2012; and
2. Despite the requests as referred to above the Claimant has refused or otherwise failed to provide the necessary evidence or explanation to establish the Claimant's authority to enforce the Parking Charge
3. In the absence of evidence that the driver had contracted to park and was liable to pay a parking charge (as per paragraphs 7, 8 &9 above) it is the Defendant's contention, and the court is invited to make an inference, that the Claimant has no lawful basis to pursue the Defendant
4. Further, the Notice to Keeper fails to comply with the mandated conditions of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (PoFA2012) schedule 4 to transfer liability from the driver to the registered keeper for any unpaid charges.
5. Specifically it does not i) "...specify the total amount of those charges which remain unpaid as at a time which is .... specified in the notice" (Para 9 . (2) (d)
6. If (which the Defendant denies), the Defendant is found to be liable for the Parking Charge as the keeper, the Defendant will say that the Parking Charge is not enforceable on the basis that the terms were contrary to the requirement of good faith which causes a significant imbalance under the contract to the detriment of the Defendant. Consequently, the term is unfair and is not binding on the Defendant pursuant to section 62 of the Consumer Rights Act 2015.(CRA) The Defendant will rely on the following points:
7. Section 68 of the CRA requires that every term of a consumer contract must be transparent and expressed in a plain and intelligible language. The Defendant contends that the term referring to additional costs and debt recovery charges on the signage was neither transparent nor intelligible in that
8. :(i)the font size of the term is small making it illegible from a reasonable distance; the term ought to have been presented in a manner which was far more legible and
9. (ii)the term refers to "additional costs and debt recovery charges” but fails to explain what charges the Claimant is seeking to recover. Accordingly, the term described is vague and ambiguous contrary to the guidance published by the Competition and Markets Authority on unfair contract terms.
10. . In Parking Eye vs Beavis ([2015] UKSC 67. Case ID. UKSC 2015/0116. The S C found the parking
    charge (£85) was a genuine estimate of the costs of operating the parking scheme including losses suffered by the operator if its terms and conditions were not complied with (see paras 188 and 193 of the judgment).
11. In this claim the total charges (£170) may involve an element of double recovery and may be an abuse of process tainting the entirety of the claim and permit the Court to strike out the claim (CPR3 4 (2) (b))
12. It is denied that the Claimant is entitled to recover the Parking Charge from the Defendant as registered keeper of the vehicle.
13. The Claimant has failed to comply with the mandatory conditions required by POFA 2012 to transfer liability for any unpaid charge from driver to registered keeper.
    
    
    Recovery of Claimant's costs associated with the Parking Charge
14. 1.To the extent that the Claimant seeks to recover the costs incurred in pursuing the Parking Charge, the Defendant denies that such sums are recoverable for the following reasons:
    1. The costs sought by the Claimant are based upon a contractual right under the terms of the parking contract. It is well established under the doctrine of privity that a person who is not party to the contract cannot sue or be sued. Any contractual relationship in respect of the parking and the alleged contravention was solely between the Claimant and the driver of the vehicle, not the registered keeper; and
    2. also paragraph 4(5) of POFA provides that the maximum amount which may be recovered from the registered keeper is the total amount of the unpaid parking charges specified in the notice to the registered keeper. The unpaid parking charges specified in the notice were £100.
    
    It follows that any liability owed by the keeper to the Claimant is several to the driver's liability and is limited to an amount that does not exceed the unpaid parking charges. The Claimant's pursuit of these contractual costs is not recoverable and amounts to an abuse of process.
    
    CONCLUSION
15. By reason of the Defendant's non-compliance with the POFA requirements as set out in this Defence, the Claimant is not entitled to pursue the Defendant as the registered keeper of the vehicle for the Parking Charge.
    
    Statement of truth
    
    I believe the that the facts stated in this defence are true. I understand that proceedings for contempt of court may be brought against anyone who makes, or causes to be made, a false statement in a document verified by a statement of truth without an honest belief in its truth.