Printable Version of Topic
Click here to view this topic in its original format
FightBack Forums _ Private Parking Tickets & Clamping _ CEL ticket - POPLA failed
Posted by: Speckled Hen Fri, 18 Jan 2019 - 20:45
Post #1453001
I received a PCN from CEL a few months ago, because my car had been parked without buying a ticket, supposedly.
The circumstances are:
The driver parked the car, rang the number on the signs, and passed all details as required.
A few days later I received the PCN, which of course I appealed, given the circumstances. This appeal failed.
I appealed to POPLA. During this appeal, the parking company supplied evidence, which actually showed that the car details and the payment card details had been recorded, but this transaction failed as the 'caller hung up', which is true of course, as they thought the transaction was finished.
The POPLA appeal failed too.
What further steps are available to me?
Posted by: Glacier2 Fri, 18 Jan 2019 - 21:04
Post #1453005
Sit tight until you get CEL's letter before claim. Ignore all debt collectors until then.
Posted by: Speckled Hen Fri, 18 Jan 2019 - 22:00
Post #1453025
So what do I do when CEL's letter before claim arrives?
Having read this and many other forums, it would seem that everything is based on Contract Law, but I have no idea if such laws cover the requirement for an ANPR and automated payment system to be 'fit for purpose'. My own non-legally based logic would suggest that a payment system operated by mobile phone should send some sort of failure message if the payment failed.
Posted by: Redivi Fri, 18 Jan 2019 - 22:20
Post #1453031
Yes
CEL is seeking to take advantage from a failure of its own payment system
That's what you reply to the Letter of Claim
It will be ignored and CEL will send the account for a ride on the debt collector/solicitor merry-go-round to add charges that are quite frankly fiction
CEL won't issue a claim before this time
A defence that draws attention to the charges is almost certain to guarantee that CEL won't let a judge ask about its business practices
It will instead discontinue the claim or fail to respond to the defence so that the court stays the claim - puts it in limbo unless CEL pays to unstay it
Posted by: SchoolRunMum Sun, 20 Jan 2019 - 01:14
Post #1453361
Having read this and many other forums, it would seem that everything is based on Contract Law, but I have no idea if such laws cover the requirement for an ANPR and automated payment system to be 'fit for purpose'. My own non-legally based logic would suggest that a payment system operated by mobile phone should send some sort of failure message if the payment failed.
See the MSE NEWBIES thread post #2 about LBC and court stage.
CEL normally muck it up.
Plenty of defences on here and on MSE, and many are about failure of a phone app and that the driver made 'reasonable endeavours' to pay.
Search both forums for Jolley v Carmel defence as your keywords and you will be able to read what happened in shedloads of similar cases, and how to write a defence.
Powered by Invision Power Board (http://www.invisionboard.com)
© Invision Power Services (http://www.invisionpower.com)