3. GroupNexus invoice Taunton Deane South
« previous next »
Pages: [1] 2

Author Topic: GroupNexus invoice Taunton Deane South  (Read 1619 times)

0 Members and 965 Guests are viewing this topic.

GroupNexus invoice Taunton Deane South
« on: »
Have received this as the registered keeper of the vehicle.  First. Is this invoice compliant with POFA?  I (on behalf of the driver) feel it is not, but would appreciate assistance with a challenge.  Secondly they ask for an online challenge, as it is better, which I doubt.  My main point would be inadequacy of signage.  On entering the services, the driver was presented with a large sign above driving head height, covered in dense writing.  The only thing that was noticed by the driver was a prominent bit in the top left hand corner of the sign saying HGV.  The driver being mindful of entering an area with pedestrians, saw HGV and presumed that the rest of the sign related to HGV only.  The driver parked and having looked around saw no further signage other than a smaller version of the entry sign, they then went into the caravan and fell asleep. 
Does the driver have an opportunity to successfully defeat this.





Logged

Share on Bluesky Share on Facebook

Re: GroupNexus invoice Taunton Deane South
« Reply #1 on: »
It is PoFA compliant but not fully. That won't make any difference to an appeal as they will reject any appeal. The NtK does not invite (nor any synonym of the word) the keeper to pay the charge which is a failure to fully comply with PoFA 9(2)(e)(i).

Also, the NtK does not specify the actual contractual terms breached. It simply States that "the vehicle remained at the site for longer than the free parking period". There is no evidence of what the free period is.

You can appeal and wait for the rejection and a POPLA code and then appeal to POPLA and throw the usual "kitchen sink" of points for the operator to rebut but I would wager that POPLA will reject also. Good luck though. I would love to be proved wrong.

In my personal opinion, this will go al the way to a county court claim being issued. That is a good thing because a truly independent arbiter, a judge, is best placed to decide whether you owe GN a debt or not.

If it does go to a claim, there is a good new "short" defence coupled with a draft order that should see it quashed. The only caveat is whether you are up for fighting this all the way with the very remote risk that if it all went south for whatever reason and the judge decided that you sis owe GN a debt, it could cost around ~£200 all-in, which would still be less than what they will be claiming. There is no risk of a CCJ because if paid in full within 28 days of judgment, there is no record of it in your credit history.

The most likely outcome is that you resist any debt collector demands with the knowledge that they are powerless to do anything and can be safely ignored and wait and see if they actually do issue a claim. They may or they may not.
Logged
Never argue with stupid people. They will drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience” - Mark Twain
Re: GroupNexus invoice Taunton Deane South
« Reply #2 on: »
For your argument on signage, we would need to see photos of this to advise.
Logged
Re: GroupNexus invoice Taunton Deane South
« Reply #3 on: »
Unfortunately the google images are 8yrs out of date, but they did not convey the terms.  All I could see was a wall of text, the only thing I saw was a bit top left in bold saying HGV, which meant as a car and caravan combo the sign, didn’t apply to me.
Logged
Re: GroupNexus invoice Taunton Deane South
« Reply #4 on: »
Today 11.2.25. We have received an official LETTER OF CLAIM claim  dcblegal ltd.  The letter is dated 5.2.25. In next steps we are invited to visit the dcb legal ltd website to fill in the reply form and financial statement.

First question, is this normal, or should we wait for formal court documentation?

Secondly, is our previous failure to engage, going to be an issue?  (We have had  a quite a few medical issues, which meant dealing with this was forgotten in the maelstrom)

Third thing, the reason, is still only a bland “vehicle remained on private property in breach of prominently displayed terms and conditions”. This appears to be far to vague.  Is it?

Can they change the reason for action, if we argue that their cause of action is way to vague?

Any assistance would be gratefully received.

Logged
Re: GroupNexus invoice Taunton Deane South
« Reply #5 on: »
Receipt of an LoC is normal. Any previous failure to engage will not have any bearing on this case.

The "reason" for the claim is also going to go against them when the actual N1SDT Claim Form is received from the CNBC. When that arrives (it will), redact your personal info and the claim number and MCOL password (leave all dates and times showing) and show it to us. We will provide the necessary defence.

If the claim is not struck out at allocation stage, it will be discontinued before they have to pay the hearing fee.

Respond to the LoC with the following:

Quote
By email to: info@dcblegal.co.uk

[Date]

Dear Sirs,

Re: Letter of Claim dated [date]

I refer to your Letter of Claim.

I confirm that my address for service at this time is as follows, and I request that any outdated address be erased from your records to ensure compliance with data protection obligations:

[YOUR ADDRESS]

Please note that the alleged debt is disputed, and any court proceedings will be robustly defended.

I note that the sum claimed has been increased by an excessive and unjustifiable amount, which appears contrary to the principles established by the Government, who described such practices as “extorting money from motorists.” Please refrain from sending boilerplate responses or justifications regarding this issue.

Under the Pre-Action Protocol for Debt Claims, I require specific answers to the following questions:

1. Does the additional £70 represent what you describe as a “Debt Recovery” fee? If so, is this figure net of or inclusive of VAT? If inclusive, I trust you will explain why I, as the alleged debtor, am being asked to cover your client’s VAT liability.

2. Regarding the principal sum of the alleged Parking Charge Notice (PCN): Is this being claimed as damages for breach of contract, or will it be pleaded as consideration for a purported parking contract?

I would caution you against simply dismissing these questions with vague or boilerplate responses, as I am fully aware of the implications. By claiming that PCNs are exempt from VAT while simultaneously inflating the debt recovery element, your client – with your assistance – appears to be evading VAT obligations due to HMRC. Such mendacious conduct raises serious questions about the legality and ethics of your practices.

I strongly advise your client to cease and desist. Should this matter proceed to court, you can be assured that these issues will be brought to the court’s attention, alongside a robust defence and potentially a counterclaim for unreasonable conduct.

Yours faithfully,


[YOUR NAME]

Make sure you also CC in yourself.
« Last Edit: February 11, 2025, 05:17:23 pm by b789 »
Logged
Never argue with stupid people. They will drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience” - Mark Twain
Re: GroupNexus invoice Taunton Deane South
« Reply #6 on: »
Thank you for that info.  Will add the required info and send tonight.  But do we use the link in their letter to fill in what they request.
« Last Edit: February 11, 2025, 05:52:34 pm by Oldstoat »
Logged
Re: GroupNexus invoice Taunton Deane South
« Reply #7 on: »
You attach the reply as a pdf document and send it by email to the address shown. CC in yourself.
Logged
Never argue with stupid people. They will drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience” - Mark Twain
Re: GroupNexus invoice Taunton Deane South
« Reply #8 on: »
Re reading my last post I may not have been clear.  In the letter of claim. It is required that the person must fill in a financial statement of means.  Do they need to fill this in?  Would that statement of means be issued by the court?
Logged
Re: GroupNexus invoice Taunton Deane South
« Reply #9 on: »
There is no obligation to use the forms provided by the solicitors, and indeed you shouldn't. Respond in the way advised above.
Logged
Agree Agree x 1 View List
Re: GroupNexus invoice Taunton Deane South
« Reply #10 on: »
Ah. I just sent as an email. To info@. I did cc myself. Do i also send it
Logged
Re: GroupNexus invoice Taunton Deane South
« Reply #11 on: »
Update. Received claim from HMCTS on 5th April. Case issued 2nd. The particulars of claim are 1.  Defendant is indebted for parking charges issued to vehicle at Roadchef Taunton Dean South.  2. The date of controvention is 29.6.24 and defendant was issued a PC(s) by the claimant.  3. The defendant is pursued as the driver of the vehicle for breach of the terms on the signs (the contract). Reason Vehicle trmsined on private property in breach of the prominently displayed terms and conditions   4.  In the alternative the defendant is pursued as the keeper pursuant to POFA 2012 schedule 4.  AND THE CLAIMEENT CLAIMS 1.  £170 being the total of the PC(s) and damages 2. Interest. 3.  Costs and court fees.

Now. When they increased the cost from £100. They added £70 as legal fees. Now the £170 is described as damages.  They have also added Legal representative costs of £50.

My initial feeling is that at 3. They have not specified what terms have been breached and with regards costs, they have changed the £170 initially claimed as the PC and fees to PC and damages, this is naughty.  However. I am in need of being assisted with a defence. Any and all help gratefully welcomed.
Logged
Re: GroupNexus invoice Taunton Deane South
« Reply #12 on: »
Without seeing the claim form we already know that it was issued by DCB Legal and signed by Sarah ENsall. Follow the advice:

With an issue date of 2nd April, you have until 4pm on Tuesday 22nd April to submit your defence. If you submit an Acknowledgement of Service (AoS) before then, you would then have until 4pm on Tuesday 6th May to submit your defence.

If you want to submit an AoS then follow the instructions in this linked PDF:

https://www.dropbox.com/s/xvqu3bask5m0zir/money-claim-online-How-to-Acknowledge.pdf?dl=0

Otherwise, here is the defence and link to the draft order and relevant transcripts that go with it. You only need to edit your name and the claim number. You sign the defence by typing your full name for the signature and date it. There is nothing to edit in the draft order.

When you're ready you send all the documents as a single PDF attachment (in the order of 'defence', 'draft order' and then the 2 'transcripts') in an email to claimresponses.cnbc@justice.gov.uk and CC in yourself. The claim number must be in the email subject field and in the body of the email just put: "Please find attached the defence and draft order in the matter of CP Plus Ltd v [your full name] Claim no.: [claim number]."

Quote
IN THE COUNTY COURT
Claim No: [Claim Number]

BETWEEN:

CP Plus Ltd
Claimant

- and -

[Defendant's Full Name]

Defendant


DEFENCE

1. The Defendant denies the claim in its entirety. The Defendant asserts that there is no liability to the Claimant and that no debt is owed. The claim is without merit and does not adequately disclose any comprehensible cause of action.

2. There is a lack of precise detail in the Particulars of Claim (PoC) in respect of the factual and legal allegations made against the Defendant such that the PoC do not comply with CPR 16.4(1)(a).

3. The Defendant is unable to plead properly to the PoC because:

(a) The contract referred to is not detailed or attached to the PoC in accordance with CPR PD 16(7.5);

(b) The PoC do not state the exact wording of the clause (or clauses) of the terms and conditions of the contract (or contracts) which is/are relied on;

(c) The PoC do not adequately set out the reason (or reasons) why the claimant asserts the defendant has breached the contract (or contracts)

(d) The PoC do not state with sufficient particularity exactly where the breach occurred, the exact time when the breach occurred and how long it is alleged that the vehicle was parked before the parking charge was allegedly incurred;

(e) The PoC do not state precisely how the sum claimed is calculated, including the basis for any statutory interest, damages, or other charges;

(f) The PoC do not state what proportion of the claim is the parking charge and what proportion is damages;

(g) The PoC do not provide clarity on whether the Defendant is sued as the driver or the keeper of the vehicle, as the claimant cannot plead alternative causes of action without specificity.

4. The Defendant cites the cases of CEL v Chan 2023 [E7GM9W44] and CPMS v Akande 2024 [K0DP5J30], which are persuasive appellate decisions. In these cases, claims were struck out due to identical failures to comply with CPR 16.4(1)(a). Transcripts of these decisions are attached to this Defence.

5. The Defendant attaches to this defence a copy of a draft order approved by a district judge at another court. The court struck out the claim of its own initiative after determining that the Particulars of Claim failed to comply with CPR 16.4.(1)(a). The judge noted that the claimant had failed to:

(i) Set out the exact wording of the clause (or clauses) of the terms and conditions relied upon;

(ii) Failed to explain the reasons why the defendant was allegedly in breach of contract;

(iii) Provide separate, detailed Particulars of Claim as permitted under CPR PD 7C.5.2(2).

(iv) The court further observed that, given the modest sum claimed, requiring further case management steps would be disproportionate and contrary to the overriding objective. Accordingly, the judge struck out the claim outright rather than permitting an amendment.

6. The Defendant submits that the same reasoning applies in this case and invites the court to adopt a similar approach by striking out the claim for the Claimant’s failure to comply with CPR 16.4(1)(a).

Statement of truth

I believe 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.

Signed:


Date:

Draft Order for the defence

CEL v Chan Transcript

CPMS v Akande Transcript

If you want an editable MS Word file with everything in a single document which you can then save/export as a single PDF file when ready to send, use this:

MS Word .docx file for defence [CPR 16.4(1)(a)]
Logged
Never argue with stupid people. They will drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience” - Mark Twain
Re: GroupNexus invoice Taunton Deane South
« Reply #13 on: »
Have received the directions questionnaire, from the claimant.  Sneakily,they want a hearing on the papers only held at their local court.  I have filed our directions questionnaire, saying want a hearing at our local court in person.  They have stated suitable for mediation.  So I have agreed, (well tbh) the DQ did not ask if I did or did not want mediation.  It assumed I would be having mediation.

Curious, about others experiences with this claimant.  Are they likely to turn up at a contested hearing or is this just another hoop they are trying to get us to jump through.
Logged
Re: GroupNexus invoice Taunton Deane South
« Reply #14 on: »
Stop overthinking this. Every claimant puts their local court and hearing on the papers. In a small claims hearing where the defendant is an individual, it will always be at their local county court.

You DO NOT want a hearing on the papers. It is NOT suitable for mediation but there're using an old version of the N180 DQ and mediation now is mandatory, irrespective of what you put. Mediation is not part of the judicial process and does not involve a judge. It is without prejudice and is a complete waste of time, which is why when you receive your phone appointment, you offer £0 and it is all over in minutes.

Ignore all the other forms that came with your N180. you can discard those. Download your own here and fill it in on your computer. You sign it by simply typing your full name in the signature box.

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/673341e779e9143625613543/N180_1124.pdf

Here are the answers to some of the less obvious questions:

• The name of the court is "Civil National Business Centre".

• To be completed by "Your full name" and you are the "Defendant".

• C1: "YES"

• D1: "NO". Reason: "I wish to question the Claimant about their evidence at a hearing in person and to expose omissions and any misleading or incorrect evidence or assertions.
Given the Claimant is a firm who complete cut & paste parking case paperwork for a living, having this case heard solely on papers would appear to put the Claimant at an unfair advantage, especially as they would no doubt prefer the Defendant not to have the opportunity to expose the issues in the Claimants template submissions or speak as the only true witness to events in question.."

• F1: Whichever is your nearest county court. Use this to find it: https://www.find-court-tribunal.service.gov.uk/search-option

• F3: "1".

• Sign the form by simply typing your full name for the signature.

When you have completed the form, attach it to a single email addressed to both dq.cnbc@justice.gov.uk and info@dcblegal.co.uk and CC in yourself. Make sure that the claim number is in the subject field of the email.
Logged
Never argue with stupid people. They will drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience” - Mark Twain
Pages: [1] 2
« previous next »
  3. GroupNexus invoice Taunton Deane South