The mathematics of what you might end up paying are - £0.00 They don't take you to court or you win in court. £420.00 (£320 invoices + £100 court costs) if you lose in court. £370.00 (£320 invoices + £50 court costs as judge disallows legal costs because CST Law are not a real firm of solicitors). £300.00 (£200 invoices + £100 court costs as the judge disallows the Unicorn Food Tax). £250.00 (£200 invoices + £50 court costs as the judge disallows both made-up amounts). Yes, you could lose in court and end up paying less than the fleecers want now!

OK, good news the address issue is covered. I was just worried you could get court papers and not know about it, not defend, and therefore lose by default. Yes, you could get judgement set aside and yes it would clearly be ECP's fault, but it would be hassle you didn't need. Yes, it would rile us if you paid However, it really makes no sense to give in now. The time to give in was when ECP wanted 2 x £60. The fleecers will now not accept anything less than 2 x £160. Court costs would be £100 (£50 legal costs if ECP could make this part stick) plus £25 claim fee + £25 hearing fee.

Thanks for posting this up. I was in the middle of writing about your right to sue ECP for not replying to the SAR - but now I see they have, just to the wrong address! The matter of the address worries me somewhat. If something turned up at your old address, would you be told about it?

OK, mystery solved, registration number. I see the thickheads aren't even saying you didn't pay. The offence is "Driver failed to correctly use pay & display machine". Good luck to them trying that tripe in court Have a look at post 14 at https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/435008-smartcst-anpr-pcn-paploc-wrong-reg-hardwick-road-stockton-on-tees/?tab=comments#comment-5111577 This is a cracking snotty letter mainly the work of forum regular Lookinforinfo, which contains all the legal arguments as to why you are right and they are wrong. Yes, ignore their bilge unless they send a Leter Before Action/Letter Before Claim. Is this place local to you? If so, photos of the signage and machine during the day (so we can see their deficiencies) and at night (so you have proof they don't illuminate the machine and of what you had to put up with) would be useful.

Thanks for letting us have the info so quickly. Firstly, there is the odd misapprehension in post 1. ANPR is useless technology which, even when it works properly, simply takes photos of the vehicle going in and going out. There will be no images of you paying. The only way someone can get a CCJ is if they are taken to court, lose the court case and then defy the court and still refuse to pay. There is no danger whatsoever of you getting a CCJ. You ask "can they enforce?" Well they can send lots of stupid letters certainly, anyone can write to anyone about anything. I could write to you and say you owe me £200 because I don't like the style of shoes you're wearing today. I could even sue you if I wanted. obviously I would get a thrashing in court - as would NPE. Your involvement of the chip shop owner is superb. You have proof you paid. You have done well in ignoring them so far. Keep doing the same. Can you remember if you had to input your registration number into the machine? If so it would explain a lot if in the dark you input a 0 instead of an O for example.

Well done on getting the chip shop owner involved. That will massively help your case. Thanks for filling in the forum sticky. Please sort out the attachments so we can see what they are claiming and help you fight back.

So? Does the case show as defended on MCOL?

What do you mean exactly? Have PE sent you a reminder about the 13-minute "overstay" ticket?

Thanks for making a separate thread. The problem, Dizzy, as you know, is that any reputable company would immediately cancel this invoice. But Smart are a vile, money-grabbing bunch of spivs. Appealing would only make things worse. Smart never, ever, ever accept they are wrong - ever. The two reasons you suggested to appeal should of course be valid, but ex-clampers are only interested in £££££ and would only insist the invoice was issued correctly. Good news! No judge would find against your parents for a 12-minute overstay given they are elderly, and during COVID restrictions. No way is the planning permission for the site only 45 minutes! But I'm afraid you have to explain to them that they are in it for the long haul.

So much for Wally's feather. Seems like the judge decided there wasn't the weight of one feather on the the OP's side, more like a hundredweight of feathers

Just knocked off work and seen this superb news. Well done Unreasonable costs was just a very vague idea from me which judges hardly ever grant, so no worries there. Another welcome hammering for Simon.

Well done on your victory!

Great news! Well done on your victory! In the end OPS wet themselves. They must be gnashing their teeth at having to give in over two invoices. All you have to do is remember to ring the court in a couple of days to make sure they really have discontinued. It's unlikely they're lying, but you never know ...

Good - another own goal from Simon. So can you please redact and upload again.

Open

Yes, he is. If he doesn't look in himself I'll flag the thread up this evening.

I think your e-mail is a good idea, also because their defence wasn't written by an idiot. Sure, it's easy to pick holes in it, but it's not just nonsense. I wonder if a solicitor wrote it and is trying to get a deal out of you? If so, they will bite your hand off to just pay the £50. Let's see. Getting their defence struck out is uncharted territory for me too! If the more experienced Site Team members don't pop onto your thread during the day I'll flag it up this evening and ask for help.

Well, your points in black say it all. It bemuses me why they are defending. Surely they know they are on a hiding to nothing. Stupidity? Arrogance? Normally we don't suggest getting into letter tennis, but I wonder if it would be worth sending them just one single letter saying you have viewed their defence and you will certainly immediately discontinue once you have received payment of £75 to cover the claim fee & interest. They were supposed to deal with the refund in January, they said they were processing it in March, they ignored several communications from you, and were given advance notice of court action when you fully complied with pre-action protocol and sent a Letter Before Claim which they ignored. The alternative to the payment of £70 is that the matter will continue to court and they will incur further costs. Might be worth a try. It would show the judge you have bent over backwards to try to settle before a court case.

The regulars here are always available to have a look at correspondence you propose to send or documentation you are about to file. It would have been much better to have posted up your defence before sending it. Caggers are also supposed to read threads similar to their own to educate themselves about the legal process and the best tactics to use. If you had done so you would have seen the best defence is very short & generic. Grossly simplifying - the Claimant files a brief Particulars of Claim - the Defendant files a brief defence (tactically if you file a long defence the fleecers will know what you are going to say and have months to make up lies to counter your defence. For the same reason when you suggested a set aside by consent I said to send them one photo, not the whole shebang) - a fortnight before the court case both parties have to file a detailed Witness Statement. That is the time to hit them with all your evidence, if possible after receiving theirs so you can rubbish it. Please understand this is not a fine (BN's post 51). Referring to "the fine" will just encourage the fleecers to pursue you thinking you don't know the law. However, none of this is fatal. Please post up anything the judge decided as dx says. Also get yourself on MCOL and see the point your case is at. Please do these things ASAP.

I can't see how they can have any realistic chance with a defence given they promised to refund in March and actually did so in June. They presumably thought you were bluffing about court and when they realised you weren't coughed up but don't want to pay costs. Tough. Too late now. Please can you post up their defence so we can all have a good laugh.

LFI took the words out of my mouth. Prepare properly and you can wipe the floor with OPS here. But get it wrong and it'll be CCJ time again. Will you please answer the questions and points raised from post 49 onwards.

Don't worry, you still have quite enough to see the fleecers off. Have a look at this case http://parking-prankster.blogspot.com/2014/03/waiting-for-space-is-not-parking.html It would be very useful if your relatives could go to the car park the same day & time as you did, and photograph it full (plus takes snaps of the signage).

Wires have got crossed here. dx was only pointing out that the car park is known to us and used to be run by Parking Eye. The advice in that thread to appeal from way back in January 2017 is now well out of date. The fleecers are supposed to get their tripe to you within 14 days under POFA, but failed to do so. In your appeal did you out the driver? If so it was a mistake. However, hardly a fatal one. We have a mountain of cases here where the driver was outed naively in an appeal, but the motorist still went on to hammer the PPC. What do the fleecers reckon you did wrong then? Was it a P&D car park and you didn't pay? Was that 'cos you couldn't find a space? If you can briefly describe what happened it would help.