County Court Claim Form, Civil enforcement limited Options

[Frank White]

Good evening all,

I'm completely new to forums but have found a lot of relevant information to my case on this website in the last few days. There is a lot i am still confused about though so i hope one of you can offer some advise on how to go about the next steps. I'll tell you about the form and the incident that its for first...

My Fathers business has received a County Claim Form from Civil enforcement limited via the County Court business centre. Pretty much the same as many others have posted on previous topics. The form states one of our company vehicles had over stayed at a Burger king car park in Aldershot on the 11/02/2018 from 15:29 to 18:01 to be exact. We now need to pay £271.08 according to them. The date of issue was the 31st of January. I have been authorised to deal with this claim on the companies behalf.

The parked vehicle mentioned on the claims form is a company vehicle and wasn't on company business that day as it was a weekend. We can only remember one letter being sent to us about this parking notice and we ignored it as it seemed like a scam and nothing like a normal parking fine. We only ignored the letter after reading up on parking notices of course and the advise we found at the time was that they are not backed by the law and are basically just invoices for a breach of contract. I lived at the businesses address but i moved away a few months after so i am unaware if we received any more letters as my parents don't actually recall receiving any more apart from this claim form a year later.

The driver was having lunch with friends and doesn't remember seeing any parking signs. I will go and check if there are any signs at the BK car park in question as i will be ale to use it in our defence if there aren't.

My Plan was to acknowledge the claim against our company first on moneyclaim.gov.uk and defend the entire case but i'm not sure if it might be better to get in contact with Civil enforcement and tell them that the company van was driven by an employee that lives at a different address.

After reading a few topics on here and other websites i am a little unsure on how to proceed next as there is so many different cases on here all similar but still different.

I would greatly appreciate some advice on how to proceed next

Thank you in advance

This post has been edited by Frank White: Sat, 9 Feb 2019 - 20:26

[Advertisement]

[Redivi]

Acknowledge service immediately before you forget

The claim has been issued against your company as the registered keeper
Once the claim has been issued it's too late to name the driver

Even if you could, CEL could argue that the company is liable for the actions for its employees

There are dozens if not hundreds of Civil Enforcement defences on the Forum
Use one from no earlier than 2018

They all cover the same points - No cause of action, unsigned Particulars of Claim, No landowner contract, bad signs, fake debt collector and solicitor charges, fake legal representative fee
All points that CEL won't want to explain to a judge

They rarely need more than a couple of sentences to be changed
In your case that might be a failure to meet the conditions of POFA to recover payment from the registered keeper and a declaration that you weren't on company business

[ostell]

It's best to not give hints at who was driving so edit your posts.

So the driver was having lunch and was not on company business.

[nosferatu1001]

Indeed, the driver MUST NOT be identifiable.

2.5hr at BK? Yikes

With an ISSUE DATE of 31.01, you have 33 days frmo that date for the court to RECEIVE your defence
You get ONE SHOT at this
You will NOT get a reminder.

[Frank White]

Thank you for your replies so far.

I have followed your advise and acknowledged the service and will defend the entire case.

I went back to the BK car park and was shocked to see signs all over it. The signs look very new to be honest so i have no way of knowing if they were there on the day of the incident.

Thanks for pointing me in the right direction for my defence. I have found a lot of cases on here and MSE and have been reading through them all day. I'm confused on what to actually do with the defence though. Do you type it up and send it to the county court business centre that we received the claims form from? If that is the case should i do this as soon as possible?

I apologies in advance if my questions seem stupid but i would appreciate your guidance

This post has been edited by Frank White: Sat, 9 Feb 2019 - 20:24

[Ollyfrog]

You still need to edit so as not to give away the driver's identity though, in both of your posts now.

Parking slime read the forums and pick up any info they can so don't give them any help.

The driver went to BK, the driver didn't see the signs etc etc. Your father's company is the registered keeper and you are authorised to deal with the claim on their behalf. You went and looked at the signs, the driver said he didn't remember them. Edit both posts to read like that.

[Frank White]

Good evening people

So i am currently working on my defence and i would greatly appreciate it if one of you could give me some advise on it when its done. Will post it on here when its complete.

I have been reading about Part 18 of the Civil Procedure Rules and wonder if i should send one of them to CEL? If so by E mail or Post? or both?

I have also come to notice that there is no mentioning of a solicitor on my county court claim form. Just CEL + address as claimant and the same again in the box below it that is marked as " Address for sending documents and payments"
Does that mean anything to you ?

Thanks in advance for any advise !!!

[nosferatu1001]

Youve been reading an OLD thread if youve found info on part 18. Doesnt apply to small claims track cases.

No. You send them a SUBJECT ACCESS REQUEST to their DPO (google it) via the best method you have - post is worst as its slow and can go missing. First class, frree proof of posting of course. No other method of posting, ever.

Yes, it menas they have likelychargd the "filing fee" of £50, whcih can ONLY BE CHARGED BY A SOLICITOR. They dont have a solicuitor and, to my knowledge, dont have in house solictors either, meaning theyc annot charge this amount. Charging amounts they KNOW they are nto entitled to is an abuse of process. If you look at CEL defences and look for the filing fee argument you shoudl see this.

Advice.

Remember you are looking 2018 defences and on ONLY. NOTHING. OLDER.

[bearclaw]

Thank you for your replies so far.

I have followed your advise and acknowledged the service and will defend the entire case.

I went back to the BK car park and was shocked to see signs all over it. The signs look very new to be honest so i have no way of knowing if they were there on the day of the incident.

Thanks for pointing me in the right direction for my defence. I have found a lot of cases on here and MSE and have been reading through them all day. I'm confused on what to actually do with the defence though. Do you type it up and send it to the county court business centre that we received the claims form from? If that is the case should i do this as soon as possible?

I apologies in advance if my questions seem stupid but i would appreciate your guidance

Whats the location? Google streetview goes round a lot of places and can show that new signs appears recently... you can often get a series of imaghes through time on a GSV

[Frank White]

Good evening all,

Yes the part 18 was indeed from an old thread. Thanks fro pointing that out. I have since sent the SAR to CEL. Had to post it though as i struggled to find an e mail address.

i have drafted a defence which i will paste at the end of this post. Would be great to get some advise on it.

Thanks for your help and input so far in any case. much appreciated.

DEFENCE

I am ********, the defendant in this matter and registered keeper of vehicle ******* I currently reside at *******,

I deny I am liable for the entirety of the claim for each of the following reasons:

1. The defendant was not the driver at the time of the alleged incident as the vehicle is used privately by employee's on weekends.

2.The Claim Form issued on 11/02/2018 by Civil Enforcement Limited was not
correctly filed under The Practice Direction as it was not signed by a legal person but signed by “Civil Enforcement Limited (Claimant’s Legal Representative)”.

3. 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) There was no compliant ‘Letter before County Court Claim’, under the Practice Direction.

b) The Schedule of information is sparse of detailed information.

c) The Claim form Particulars were extremely sparse and divulged no cause of action nor sufficient detail. The Defendant is unaware of what the alleged breach was and how the original charge arose; the defendant has never been issued with a copy of the alleged contract.

d) The Defence therefore asks the Court to strike out the claim as having no reasonable prospect of success as currently drafted.

e) Alternatively, the Defendant asks that the Claimant is required to file Particulars which comply with Practice Directions and include at least the following information;

(i) Whether the matter is being brought for trespass, breach of contract or a contractual charge, and an explanation as to the exact nature of the charge
(ii) A copy of any contract it is alleged was in place (e.g. copies of signage)
(iii) How any contract was concluded (if by performance, then copies of signage maps in place at the time)
(iv) Whether keeper liability is being claimed, and if so copies of any Notice to Driver / Notice to Keeper
(v) Whether the Claimant is acting as Agent or Principal, together with a list of documents they will rely on in this matter
(vi) If charges over and above the initial charge are being claimed, the basis on which this is being claimed
(vii) If Interest charges are being claimed, the basis on which this is being claimed

f) Once these Particulars have been filed, the Defendant asks for reasonable time to file another defence.

4. The Claimant failed to meet the Notice to Keeper obligations of Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012. Absent such a notice served within 14 days of the parking event and with fully compliant statutory wording, this Claimant is unable to hold me liable under the strict ‘keeper liability’ provisions.

I confirm that the above facts and statements are true to the best of my knowledge and recollection.


Signed
Date

This post has been edited by Frank White: Mon, 25 Feb 2019 - 23:39

[ostell]

I would put the POFA keeper liability early in the defence. Judge agrees with you and no need to go on any further.

Where's the objection to the £50 solicitors just to show the judge how underhand they are.

I would put the POFA keeper liability early in the defence. Judge agrees with you and no need to go on any further.

Where's the objection to the £50 solicitors just to show the judge how underhand they are.

You are representing the company and not the defendant

[nosferatu1001]

You need to object to the added made up fees theyre not entitled to
THis is abuse of process. They will not want a judge to see them.

[southpaw82]

[quote name='Frank White' date='Mon, 25 Feb 2019 - 23:37' post='1465319']
You need to head it properly.

I am ********, the defendant in this matter and registered keeper of vehicle ******* I currently reside at *******,

I deny I am liable for the entirety of the claim for each of the following reasons:

Why are you using “I” when the defendant is (according to you) a company? Just use “the Defendant”.

1. The defendant was not the driver at the time of the alleged incident as the vehicle is used privately by employee's on weekends.

I’m not sure you need to say that the defendant was not the driver if the defendant is not a living person. “Employees” not “employee’s”. You should explain that the parking incident occurred at a weekend if you’re saying employees use the vehicle at the weekend.

2.The Claim Form issued on 11/02/2018 by Civil Enforcement Limited was not
correctly filed under The Practice Direction as it was not signed by a legal person but signed by “Civil Enforcement Limited (Claimant’s Legal Representative)”.

Don’t know what you’re getting at here. Explain. In any case, it’s not something that ought properly to appear in a defence. If you want to strike out the claim form you need to make an application to do so, or at the very least put the request in a separate letter.

3. This Claimant has not complied with pre-court protocol.

You can put this at the end.

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.

I’m not sure why you’re including this. If you can’t plead your defence then say so but you’ll be pushed to do so consider you seem to have produced a lengthy defence.

a) There was no compliant ‘Letter before County Court Claim’, under the Practice Direction.

Not a defence issue - this will go to costs.

c) The Claim form Particulars were extremely sparse and divulged no cause of action nor sufficient detail. The Defendant is unaware of what the alleged breach was and how the original charge arose; the defendant has never been issued with a copy of the alleged contract.

Are you applying for a strike out, considering you’re alleging no cause of action is disclosed? If not, why are you mentioning it?

d) The Defence therefore asks the Court to strike out the claim as having no reasonable prospect of success as currently drafted.

I think that’s unlikely. Even so, you ought to properly make an application, as a hearing will probably be needed. I would not put this in a defence.

e) Alternatively, the Defendant asks that the Claimant is required to file Particulars which comply with Practice Directions and include at least the following information;

(i) Whether the matter is being brought for trespass, breach of contract or a contractual charge, and an explanation as to the exact nature of the charge
(ii) A copy of any contract it is alleged was in place (e.g. copies of signage)
(iii) How any contract was concluded (if by performance, then copies of signage maps in place at the time)
(iv) Whether keeper liability is being claimed, and if so copies of any Notice to Driver / Notice to Keeper
(v) Whether the Claimant is acting as Agent or Principal, together with a list of documents they will rely on in this matter
(vi) If charges over and above the initial charge are being claimed, the basis on which this is being claimed
(vii) If Interest charges are being claimed, the basis on which this is being claimed

Again, this should be an application and not in the defence.

f) Once these Particulars have been filed, the Defendant asks for reasonable time to file another defence.

Application, not defence.

4. The Claimant failed to meet the Notice to Keeper obligations of Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012. Absent such a notice served within 14 days of the parking event and with fully compliant statutory wording, this Claimant is unable to hold me liable under the strict ‘keeper liability’ provisions.

‘The Defendant’ not ‘me’.

I confirm that the above facts and statements are true to the best of my knowledge and recollection.

The Defendant believes that the facts stated in this defence are true. I am authorised by the Defendant to sign this statement of truth.


Signed
Date
Position [e.g. director]


I’ve not considered whether anything substantively needs to be added to the defence, I’ve merely commented on what you’ve done. The templates on the internet are almost uniformly bad.

[Frank White]

Thanks for that.

So it seems i haven't written a defence at all ... ill start again and use a different template as well as adding all points you have mentioned.


Thank you southpaw82, ostell, nosferatu1001 !!!

This post has been edited by Frank White: Tue, 26 Feb 2019 - 15:59

[Frank White]

This is my current version of my Defence.
Hope its closer to a defence then my last one.
Thoughts on what else should go in or needs changing would be much appreciated.


IN THE COUNTY COURT

CLAIM No: xxxxxxxxxx

BETWEEN:

CIVIL ENFORCMENT LTD (Claimant)

-and-

xxxxxxxxxxxx (Defendant)

________________________________________
DEFENCE
________________________________________


1. The Defendant denies that the claimant is entitled to relief in the sum claimed, or at all.

2. The Defendant was the registered keeper of the vehicle in question at the time of the alleged incident. The particulars of the claim state the legal basis is brought against the Defendant for ‘breach of terms of parking’ by the driver. However, it is denied that the Defendant, or any driver of the vehicle, entered into any contractual agreement with the Claimant when parking at Burger King- Aldershot on the ***** at ******.

3. The alleged incident occurred on Sunday ********. The company’s vehicles are not in business use on weekends. The driver was using the vehicle privately and was a customer at Burger King Aldershot during the recorded parking time. This explains the vehicle being parked at the Burger King car park.

4. The Defendant is the registered keeper of the vehicle. ‘Keeper liability’ under Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (“the POFA”) is dependent upon full compliance with that Act. The Claimant failed to meet the Notice to Keeper obligations of Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012. Absent such a notice served within 14 days of the parking event and fully compliant statutory wording, this Claimant is unable to hold the defendant liable under the strict ‘keeper liability’ provisions

5. The Defendant objects to the Claimants Legal representative’s costs as there is no Solicitor mentioned on the claims form and such fee can only be claimed by a Solicitor. he Defendant believes that the charges added Legal Representative (£50) are fake and were not incurred by the Claimant and therefore cannot be recovered in Court as part of this claim.
a. Even if the Legal representative’s cost of £50 is genuine it cannot be recovered in Court as this does not comply with Civil Procedure Rule 27.14
b. If the £50 legal cost to prepare the claim was not incurred, the statement of truth must be false.
c. The Claimant is put to strict proof that it paid any debt recovery agency or legal representative in escalating the matter. If incurred – the defendant believes this consists of the administration staff of the Claimant performing their normal duties. The Defendant believes this is another example of the Claimant artificially inflating the amount of the claim.

6.The Particulars of Claim state that the Defendant; was the registered keeper and/or the driver of the vehicle; Ford under registration xxxxxx. These assertions indicate that the Claimant has failed to identify a Cause of Action and is simply offering a menu of choices. As such, the Claim fails to comply with Civil Procedure Rule 16.4, or with Civil Practice Direction 16, paras. 7.3 to 7.5. consisting of a completely unsubstantiated and inflated three-figure sum. The claim form itself is vague and lacks pertinent information as to the grounds for the claimant’s case.

7.The Claimant has failed to provide any details of the claim prior to issuing a claim at court. As such, the Claimant has failed to comply with the Practice Direction – Pre-Action Conduct and Protocols, para 6 (a) & ©.
The Letter before Action fails to provide the following information:
i A clear summary of facts on which the claim is based.
ii A list of the relevant documents on which the claimant intends to rely.

The Defendant believes that the facts in this defence are true. I am authorised by the Defendant to sign this statement of truth.



Signed
Date
Position

[southpaw82]

a. Even if the Legal representative’s cost of £50 is genuine it cannot be recovered in Court as this does not comply with Civil Procedure Rule 27.14

How so? Under r 27.14 the recovery of fixed costs is allowed. The fixed legal costs for a claim up to £500 is £50 - so why is this not permitted by r 27.14?

6.The Particulars of Claim state that the Defendant; was the registered keeper and/or the driver of the vehicle; Ford under registration xxxxxx. These assertions indicate that the Claimant has failed to identify a Cause of Action and is simply offering a menu of choices. As such, the Claim fails to comply with Civil Procedure Rule 16.4, or with Civil Practice Direction 16, paras. 7.3 to 7.5. consisting of a completely unsubstantiated and inflated three-figure sum. The claim form itself is vague and lacks pertinent information as to the grounds for the claimant’s case.

I don't think that means no cause of action is identified. It seems it's an action for debt (some are for breach of contract). It seems to be a claim in the alternative - either as the driver or as the keeper - that doesn't mean no cause of action is identified. As such, I don't think it fails to comply with the rules (at least on that ground).

7.The Claimant has failed to provide any details of the claim prior to issuing a claim at court. As such, the Claimant has failed to comply with the Practice Direction – Pre-Action Conduct and Protocols, para 6 (a) & ©.
The Letter before Action fails to provide the following information:
i A clear summary of facts on which the claim is based.
ii A list of the relevant documents on which the claimant intends to rely.

Ok, so...?

[Frank White]

hi Southpaw

So i should remove section 5a , 6 and 7 from my defence ?

Any thing else you think i should include in this defence ?

Whats your opinion on the defence so far?

Judging from the amount of posts on this forum i assume you have way more experience with these claims than me....

Can you give me an idea how these sort of cases play out? I've come across a lot of information that suggests that CEL doesn't even turn up to hearings. Any thoughts on that ?

Thanks for your comments so far

This post has been edited by Frank White: Wed, 27 Feb 2019 - 21:23

[southpaw82]

So i should remove section 5a , 6 and 7 from my defence ?

That's a matter for you but if they don't add anything to your defence why include them?

Any thing else you think i should include in this defence ?

Whats your opinion on the defence so far?

I think it has the virtue of not being a copy and paste of a lot of the rubbish templates that are around.

The essential elements you want to cover are:
- Admitting that the defendant is the registered keeper (if this is the case)
- Denying that a contract was entered into - you will need a reason for this. I don't know the facts but, for example, it may be that there are not prominent signs at the location. What does the driver say about it?
- Denying that the keeper can be held responsible due to non-compliance with PoFA (if this is the case). You don't need to go into a lot of detail, that come out in court.
- One line about whether the parties have or have not complied with the pre-action protocol.

Judging from the amount of posts on this forum i assume you have way more experience with these claims than me....

I don't do these sorts of claim at all. I do, however, do civil litigation for a living.

Can you give me an idea how these sort of cases play out? I've come across a lot of information that suggests that CEL doesn't even turn up to hearings. Any thoughts on that ?

I don't know what CEL's reputation is like. It is my view that many of these cases are successfully defended because the claimant's case is factually week and/or legally unsound and/or poorly presented.

[nosferatu1001]

CEL have rarely turned up. Twice that I can think of and that we've seen, and those were for poorly pleaded defences initially. Even then, CEL lost.

If theyve artifically inflated the claim - usually by
1) sending out a final notice
2) then sending to some other debt collector
3) then sending elsewhere
...
and so on
n) finally issuing a letter before claim.

This post has been edited by nosferatu1001: Thu, 28 Feb 2019 - 08:13