URI:
   DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
  HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       *****************************************************
   DIR Return to: Private parking tickets
       *****************************************************
       #Post#: 77474--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Civil Enfocement letter  Aka: ce-sevice.co.uk
       By: b789 Date: June 21, 2025, 4:07 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Good. You have served a copy of your defence and draft order on
       the claimant. You will also send by email, as advised, on
       Tuesday 24th June, BEFORE 4pm, the defence and draft order to
       enquiries.croydon.countycourt@justice.gov.uk and CC
       legal@ce-service.co.uk and yourself.
       Then you wait and let us know what response you get.
       #Post#: 77489--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Civil Enfocement letter  Aka: ce-sevice.co.uk
       By: MELBE Date: June 21, 2025, 5:59 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       .
       #Post#: 77491--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Civil Enfocement letter  Aka: ce-sevice.co.uk
       By: jfollows Date: June 21, 2025, 6:00 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       [quote author=MELBE link=topic=3589.msg77489#msg77489
       date=1750503555]
       Should  I send my bank details to the claimant as they request ?
       [/quote]
       Do you want them to pay you?
       Of course you should, why wouldn’t you?
       Otherwise their excuse for not paying you will be because you
       wouldn’t tell them your bank details ……
       I’ll happily send you my bank account details if you’re going to
       pay me money!
       #Post#: 82853--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Civil Enfocement letter  Aka: ce-sevice.co.uk
       By: concoj Date: July 26, 2025, 12:33 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Post arrived
       [attachment deleted by admin]
       #Post#: 82865--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Civil Enfocement letter  Aka: ce-sevice.co.uk
       By: b789 Date: July 26, 2025, 2:27 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Have we ever seen there original Particulars of Claim (PoC)? I
       can't find any copy of the PoC or the original claim form (that
       was never received).
       [Edit] Never mind, found it.
       #Post#: 82866--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Civil Enfocement letter  Aka: ce-sevice.co.uk
       By: b789 Date: July 26, 2025, 2:43 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       That order is ridiculous.
       A fully pleaded defence was filed in response to the claim. That
       defence addresses both the substance of the claim and the
       procedural defects, including:
       - The failure to serve the claim form within 4 months of issue,
       contrary to CPR 7.5;
       - The lack of jurisdiction following Vinos v Marks & Spencer plc
       [2001] 3 All ER 784;
       - The failure of the Particulars of Claim to comply with CPR
       16.4(1)(a);
       - The absence of any pleaded cause of action or contractual
       basis.
       The defence also invited the Court to strike out the claim under
       CPR 3.4(2)(a) and (c), and included a draft order to that
       effect. This is a legitimate and efficient approach, consistent
       with CPR 16.5 and CPR 3.4.
       Paragraphs 1–2 deny liability and establish standing.
       Paragraphs 3–8 assert lack of jurisdiction due to expired claim
       form and defective service.
       Paragraphs 9–13 challenge the adequacy of the Particulars of
       Claim under CPR 16.4.
       Paragraphs 14–17 invite strike-out under CPR 3.4(2)(a) and (c).
       Paragraph 18 reserves the right to amend if proper particulars
       are served.
       This is a fully pleaded defence that incorporates strike-out
       grounds as part of the response to the claim — a legitimate and
       efficient approach under CPR 16.5 and CPR 3.4.
       It appears the Court has mischaracterised the defence as an
       application.
       I'll have to consult with a judge to see what they think of this
       and get back to you. You have very little time to get this
       sorted. This whole case has been a bit of a shambles
       unfortunately.
       #Post#: 82873--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Civil Enfocement letter  Aka: ce-sevice.co.uk
       By: concoj Date: July 26, 2025, 4:36 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Dated on the 15th, dated and posted on the 22nd, received on the
       25th and expected reply before the 29th… smells unfairness
       #Post#: 82952--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Civil Enfocement letter  Aka: ce-sevice.co.uk
       By: b789 Date: July 27, 2025, 8:55 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       You will need send the following two documents as PDF
       attachments in an email to the court at
       enquiries.croydon.countycourt@justice.gov.uk and also CC the
       claimant at legal@ce-service.co.uk and also yourself. Include
       the following in the subject field of the email and the rest in
       the body:
       [quote]Subject: Croydon County Court – Claim H3GM8008 – Civil
       Enforcement Ltd v Baruja – Clarification under CPR 3.3(5) and
       Defence
       Dear Court,
       Please find attached the Defendant’s clarification under CPR
       3.3(5), together with a fallback Defence filed in compliance
       with the Order dated 15 July 2025.
       Yours faithfully,
       Marcos Benito Baruja[/quote]
       Now include the following letter and the defence that follows:
       [quote]
       [center]IN THE COUNTY COURT AT CROYDON[/center]
       [right]Claim No: H3GM8008[/right]
       [center]BETWEEN:
       Civil Enforcement Ltd
       Claimant
       - and -
       Marcos Benito Baruja
       
Defendant
       [hr]
       CLARIFICATION IN RESPONSE TO ORDER DATED 15 JULY 2025[/center]
       To: District Judge Rowland
       County Court at Croydon
       Altyre Road
       Croydon
       CR9 5AB
       Dear District Judge Rowland,
       I write in response to the Order dated 15 July 2025, made of the
       court’s own initiative under CPR 3.3, which states:
       [indent]“Upon the Defence appearing to be an application and
       not, in fact, a Defence...”[/indent]
       The Defendant respectfully clarifies that the document filed on
       26 July 2025 was a fully pleaded Defence, compliant with CPR 15
       and CPR 16.5. It addressed both jurisdictional and substantive
       defects in the claim, including:
       [indent]- The failure to serve the claim form within 4 months of
       issue, contrary to CPR 7.5;
       - The absence of any application for extension under CPR 7.6(3);
       - The resulting lack of jurisdiction, pursuant to Vinos v Marks
       & Spencer plc [2001] 3 All ER 784;
       - The failure of the Particulars of Claim to comply with CPR
       16.4(1)(a) and Practice Direction 16, disclosing no cause of
       action.[/indent]
       The Defence also invited the court to strike out the claim under
       CPR 3.4(2)(a) and (c), and included a draft order to that
       effect. This was not an application, but a procedural invitation
       for the court to exercise its powers of its own initiative, as
       permitted under Practice Direction 3A and the overriding
       objective.
       The phrase in the Order — “Upon the Defence appearing to be an
       application and not, in fact, a Defence...” — reflects a
       category error. The Civil Procedure Rules do not require a
       defence to be passive or deferential. A defence can — and should
       — assert strike-out grounds, especially where the claim is void
       or incoherent. This is consistent with the overriding objective
       and the court’s discretion under CPR 3.4.
       The Defendant respectfully submits that no further Defence is
       required to a claim that is:
       [indent]- Expired and unserved within the permitted timeframe;
       - Incoherent and legally defective;
       - Unsupported by any pleaded contractual terms or identified
       breach.[/indent]
       Accordingly, the Defendant invites the court to reconsider the
       Order dated 15 July 2025 and to strike out the claim pursuant to
       CPR 3.4(2)(a) and (c).
       This clarification is submitted pursuant to CPR 3.3(5) and is
       copied to the Claimant.
       Yours faithfully,
       
       Marcos Benito Baruja
       [hr]
       Statement of truth
       I believe that the facts stated in this Clarification 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: Marcos Benito Baruja
       Date: 28 July 2025[/quote]
       The defence:
       [quote]
       [center]IN THE COUNTY COURT AT CROYDON[/center]
       [right]Claim No: H3GM8008[/right]
       [center]BETWEEN:
       Civil Enforcement Ltd
       Claimant
       - and -
       Marcos Benito Baruja
       
Defendant
       [hr]
       DEFENCE[/center]
       1. The Defendant is the registered keeper of vehicle
       registration GJ60PEO.
       2. The Defendant denies liability for the sums claimed or any
       amount at all.
       3. The Defendant asserts that the claim is void, having not been
       served within the time permitted by CPR 7.5. The claim form was
       issued on 14 May 2021. In accordance with CPR 7.5(1), the
       deadline for service was 14 September 2021. No valid service
       ever took place, and no extension under CPR 7.6 was sought or
       granted.
       4. The County Court has already set aside the default judgment
       under CPR 13.2, accepting that no valid service occurred.
       Accordingly, the claim form expired unserved and cannot now be
       revived. In accordance with Vinos v Marks & Spencer plc [2001] 3
       All ER 784, the court has no jurisdiction to try this claim.
       5. Separately, and without prejudice to the above, the
       Particulars of Claim fail to comply with CPR 16.4(1)(a). They
       disclose no facts capable of founding a cause of action. No
       contractual terms are pleaded. No breach is identified. No legal
       basis is set out for the sums claimed.
       6. The Defendant is therefore unable to respond to any specific
       allegations, as none are properly pleaded.
       7. This Defence is filed solely to comply with the Court’s order
       of 15 July 2025. It is not a concession that the claim is valid
       or that further pleadings would be appropriate. The Defendant
       will oppose any attempt to amend or re-serve the claim form,
       which is no longer extant in law.
       8. The Defendant respectfully invites the Court to strike out
       the claim under CPR 3.4(2)(a) and (c), on the basis that it
       discloses no reasonable grounds and constitutes an abuse of
       process.
       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: Marcos Benito Baruja
       Date: 28 July 2025[/quote]
       Do this today or tomorrow.
       #Post#: 83154--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Civil Enfocement letter  Aka: ce-sevice.co.uk
       By: concoj Date: July 28, 2025, 11:16 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Done it as advised, many thanks b789
       #Post#: 83173--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Civil Enfocement letter  Aka: ce-sevice.co.uk
       By: b789 Date: July 28, 2025, 12:16 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       I'm confident that if this is not struck out, it will be
       discontinued.
       *****************************************************
   DIR Previous Page
   DIR Next Page