IMPORTANT: Please make sure your posts do not contain any personally identifiable information (both your own and that of others). When uploading images, please take care that you have redacted all personal information including QR codes, number plates and reference numbers.

UKPC & county court business centre form received

145791018

Comments

  • Bobby2k2
    Bobby2k2 Posts: 107
    First Post First Anniversary Name Dropper Combo Breaker
    Forumite
    @IamEmanresu - Thanks for your continued support...
    can you explain why the parking in a resident's bay is such a "crime" at that site.

    Did you for example parked in someone else's bay or are all the bays available for all the residents (and their guests - hat tip TD)

    The amount they are claiming can only be justified is it is in pursuit of an aim to benefit all the residents. Your partner's lease / rental agreement should explain the do's and don'ts of parking there. Dig it out and quote from it if it supports your case

    There are a mixture of apartment blocks on this site. In relation to the parking spaces, some of them are allocated to specific apartments blocks so that ALL the residents within that block (not individually) can park with a resident permit.

    The others are numbered and as far as I know allocated to some individuals and the remaining ones are 'allocated'.

    The car is alleged to be parked in one of the latter 'numbered spaces' whether this space is allocated to an individual 'unallocated' I am unsure. What I do know is that it is was NOT a spaced allocated to a specific block that serves to benefit all the residence in that block (if that makes sense).

    I will confirm the above by checking through the lease.

    However, the reasons displayed on each PCN slightly differ, they are as follows:
    PCN 1: 'Parked in a residents' parking area without clearly displaying valid residents' parking permit'
    PCN 2: 'Parked in a residents' parking area without clearly displaying valid residents' parking permit'
    PCN 3: 'Parked in a permit area without displaying a valid permit'

    The NTK attached to PCN 3 reads: ' Parked in permit space without displaying a valid permit.

    In any event I will add:
    "Careful analysis of the Supreme Court judgment (ParkingEye v Beavis) is not ,as the Claimant may believe, a judicial green light legitimising all parking charges.It is indeed quite the reverse , and the onus is on the Claimant to demonstrate that they have a legitimate interest in enforcing their charge and that the charge is proportionate to that interest. In this case they do not and it is not. "

    Does the rest of the defense look OK as it is???
  • System
    System Posts: 178,077
    Photogenic Name Dropper First Post
    Community Admin
    I'd add a paragraph to say that "UKPC have not demonstrated the legitimate interest they claim they are protecting. As a resident, I have a right to peaceful enjoyment of my lease/tenancy which includes the communal parking area and I wish to put the Claimant to strict proof of the commercial justification they claim to have that overrules my pre-existing rights to that enjoyment. I require the claimant to produce a unredacted contract to show the same.".

    Your defence will narrow down to the battle of terms. Your lease versus their contract and you want them to produce it and show the exact terms that allow them to overrule your pre-existing rights.
  • Bobby2k2
    Bobby2k2 Posts: 107
    First Post First Anniversary Name Dropper Combo Breaker
    Forumite
    @IamEmanresu

    Thanks for your last point, the problem is I am not tenant my partner is so the lease is hers. I will still include the point from your prior post though as that will still be relevant. :beer:
  • Coupon-mad
    Coupon-mad Posts: 130,572
    Name Dropper First Post Photogenic First Anniversary
    Forumite
    edited 2 April 2016 at 11:35PM
    Does their evidence actually show the car was in a numbered bay? i.e. have they shown a picture of that bay without a car in it or is the number visible in each of the 3 cases?

    Have they shown how drivers would know what the numbers mean?

    And have you made sure your defence for the hearing is based upon your original defence and only expands on those points made originally? i.e. you can't add a brand new point.

    You need to make more of this, I think:
    4.
    The Defendant has the reasonable belief that the Claimant has attempted to Claim an expense that was not incurred according to their own so called agreement. Specifically, the £90 charges displayed on a document provided by the claimant has been inflated by £10. The Claimant is therefore in breach of their own so called agreement and has not complied with 12(3)(b).

    *** This refers to a piece of evidence provided by UKPC as part of their limited response to my part 18 request: As mentioned above they provided grainy photos of their signs which were quite high up and in small print. I addition to this they also provided what I describe as a black & white ‘proof’ image of signage. This is clearly not the actual but a paper version of what it ‘should’ say. The problem with this is that it states that failure to comply will result in a £90 parking charge however, the PCN with NTK attached has been charged at £100 (£10 more than stated on their document).

    To me, your comment in red is clearer than the bit you put above it. And it's not just about saying they are trying to get '£10 more'. It's about saying there is no evidence ofany sign creating a contract to pay £100.

    In simple terms, their evidence is based upon illegible signs where the terms and sum of the parking charge cannot be read; contrary to Schedule 4 of the POFA 2012 here:


    (2)The reference in the definition of “parking charge” to a sum in the nature of damages is to a sum of which adequate notice was given to drivers of vehicles (when the vehicle was parked on the relevant land).

    (3)For the purposes of sub-paragraph (2) “adequate notice” means notice given by—[...] the display of one or more notices which—

    (i) specify the sum as the charge for unauthorised parking; and

    (ii) are adequate to bring the charge to the notice of drivers who park vehicles on the relevant land.


    AND in addition, their evidence supplied as a result of your part 18 request evidences in an isolated close-up versionof the signage, that the signs actually only provide for a charge of £90.

    No contract to pay £100 exists then.

    You'll need numbered 'exhibits' (documentary evidence) to illustrate your defence. For example, where you mention the POFA Schedule 4, you will need that as one of your numbered exhibits and where you refer to your partner's tenancy agreement if there is a section about parking (this is a long thread and I can't recall?) then you need that.

    And where you refer to case law, you need that as well.

    I'm not convinced about all those older PE cases being useful.

    This link is written in quite a straightforward way although it does ask you if you want a lawyer's help (cross it off, or find a link you prefer):

    http://www.inbrief.co.uk/preparing-for-trial/preparing-small-claims-hearing.htm#

    Best to read the Practice Direction:

    http://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part27/pd_part27

    Each party must deliver to every other party and to the court office copies of all documents on which he intends to rely at the hearing no later than 14 days before the hearing. The original documents must then be brought to the hearing. Best to bring 3 copies, have your evidence in triplicate with you on the day, to hand documents quickly to the Judge and claimant to look organised.

    Number any documents that you wish to refer to and number your pages of defence and have it presented double-line spaced for clear reading (as you've shown, with each point also numbered).

    Your partner could supply a witness statement too (because it's their tenancy) to confirm facts such as if tenants were not warned of any £100 charge. And to confirm that drivers of VRN xxx xxxx are authorised visitors to the flat, and to confirm that your partner believes the £100 charge ha never been brought clearly to residents' attention until it is too late...anything useful in the way of facts.

    Often we've seen that any permit scheme just mentions displaying the permit and might vaguely warn of a parking charge notice but not state the sum. That's contrary to the POFA as quoted above = no keeper liability then, for the actions of the driver(s) on the three occasions.
    PRIVATE 'PCN'? DON'T PAY BUT DON'T IGNORE IT (except N.Ireland).
    CLICK at the top of this/any page where it says:
    Forum Home»Motoring»Parking Tickets Fines & Parking - read the NEWBIES THREAD
  • Bobby2k2
    Bobby2k2 Posts: 107
    First Post First Anniversary Name Dropper Combo Breaker
    Forumite
    @Coupon-mad
    You need to make more of this, I think:


    4.
    The Defendant has the reasonable belief that the Claimant has attempted to Claim an expense that was not incurred according to their own so called agreement. Specifically, the £90 charges displayed on a document provided by the claimant has been inflated by £10. The Claimant is therefore in breach of their own so called agreement and has not complied with 12(3)(b).

    *** This refers to a piece of evidence provided by UKPC as part of their limited response to my part 18 request: As mentioned above they provided grainy photos of their signs which were quite high up and in small print. I addition to this they also provided what I describe as a black & white ‘proof’ image of signage. This is clearly not the actual but a paper version of what it ‘should’ say. The problem with this is that it states that failure to comply will result in a £90 parking charge however, the PCN with NTK attached has been charged at £100 (£10 more than stated on their document).
    ”To me, your comment in red is clearer than the bit you put above it. And it's not just about saying they are trying to get '£10 more'. It's about saying there is no evidence ofany sign creating a contract to pay £100.

    In simple terms, their evidence is based upon illegible signs where the terms and sum of the parking charge cannot be read; contrary to Schedule 4 of the POFA 2012 here:


    (2)The reference in the definition of “parking charge” to a sum in the nature of damages is to a sum of which adequate notice was given to drivers of vehicles (when the vehicle was parked on the relevant land).

    (3)For the purposes of sub-paragraph (2) “adequate notice” means notice given by—[...] the display of one or more notices which—

    (i) specify the sum as the charge for unauthorised parking; and

    (ii) are adequate to bring the charge to the notice of drivers who park vehicles on the relevant land.

    AND in addition, their evidence supplied as a result of your part 18 request evidences in an isolated close-up versionof the signage, that the signs actually only provide for a charge of £90.

    No contract to pay £100 exists then.

    That makes sense, I will amend this point to emphasis this.

    You'll need numbered 'exhibits' (documentary evidence) to illustrate your defence. For example, where you mention the POFA Schedule 4, you will need that as one of your numbered exhibits and where you refer to your partner's tenancy agreement if there is a section about parking (this is a long thread and I can't recall?) then you need that.

    And where you refer to case law, you need that as well.

    I have started to put all of my other exhibits together (photos, land registry docs etc) but I just wanted to clarify the following:

    - In order to use the POFA Schedule 4 as an exhibit do I just simply print a copy then number and include?

    - Where I do refer to any case law - Do I need to include the whole judgement as evidence/exhibits or just the parts that I have quoted?
    Does their evidence actually show the car was in a numbered bay? i.e. have they shown a picture of that bay without a car in it or is the number visible in each of the 3 cases?

    Have they shown how drivers would know what the numbers mean?

    I can confirm that their evidence doesn't show any of the above in any of the 3 cases.
    And have you made sure your defence for the hearing is based upon your original defence and only expands on those points made originally? i.e. you can't add a brand new point.

    You have advised me before that I may struggle here as my original defence was limited to:

    1) No contract with landowner
    2) UK Parking Control Ltd did not have signs within the site that were capable of being read and/or form a contract
    3) UK Parking Control Ltd did not put tickets on the car...

    My final point was:

    4) UK Parking Control Ltd have not sent enough information on the particulars of claim received from their solicitors. As a result I have sent in a part 18 request for further information.

    I am hoping that the judge will allow additional points based on that fact that the claimant is at fault for not initially providing full particulars of claim until AFTER I submitted my original defense in response to my part 18 request. Any additional points are a result of this.
  • Coupon-mad
    Coupon-mad Posts: 130,572
    Name Dropper First Post Photogenic First Anniversary
    Forumite
    edited 4 April 2016 at 12:17AM
    - In order to use the POFA Schedule 4 as an exhibit do I just simply print a copy then number and include?

    Yes.
    - Where I do refer to any case law - Do I need to include the whole judgement as evidence/exhibits or just the parts that I have quoted?

    The whole judgment - most are available via the ParkingPrankster blog website.
    ''Does their evidence actually show the car was in a numbered bay? i.e. have they shown a picture of that bay without a car in it or is the number visible in each of the 3 cases? Have they shown how drivers would know what the numbers mean?''

    I can confirm that their evidence doesn't show any of the above in any of the 3 cases.

    Then that needs spelling out by you. The burden for evidence falls to the claimant and there is no evidence of the above. Sounds like the car could have been parked anywhere in the pics and the signage photos will be grainy and illegible too so they might be digging their own holes anyway.

    I hope you are lucky if the Judge allows you to expand on the defence in view of the lack of particulars. Small claims is a lottery, by all accounts of those with experience on this forum (and from what we've leanred over the years) almost a law unto itself and much will depend upon your local court/Judge how this goes. You are fighting it as best you can, which is admirable.
    PRIVATE 'PCN'? DON'T PAY BUT DON'T IGNORE IT (except N.Ireland).
    CLICK at the top of this/any page where it says:
    Forum Home»Motoring»Parking Tickets Fines & Parking - read the NEWBIES THREAD
  • System
    System Posts: 178,077
    Photogenic Name Dropper First Post
    Community Admin
    Quick question regarding "peaceful enjoyment". Is your V5 registered to the address where the parking "offence" occurred.
  • Bobby2k2
    Bobby2k2 Posts: 107
    First Post First Anniversary Name Dropper Combo Breaker
    Forumite
    Quick question regarding "peaceful enjoyment". Is your V5 registered to the address where the parking "offence" occurred.

    No unfortunately not. 5 mins up the road.
  • System
    System Posts: 178,077
    Photogenic Name Dropper First Post
    Community Admin
    No unfortunately not. 5 mins up the road.

    You can still use "peaceful enjoyment" but you'd have to be clear you were there as a guest of the leaseholder/tenant. As a guest there still are rights but not as strong as those who live there.
  • pappa_golf
    pappa_golf Posts: 8,895
    Combo Breaker First Post
    Forumite
    your licence and v5 have to be at a serviceable address , they are , and you now live at the place of the offence
    Save a Rachael

    buy a share in crapita
This discussion has been closed.
Meet your Ambassadors

Categories

  • All Categories
  • 342.4K Banking & Borrowing
  • 249.9K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
  • 449.4K Spending & Discounts
  • 234.6K Work, Benefits & Business
  • 607K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
  • 172.8K Life & Family
  • 247.4K Travel & Transport
  • 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
  • 15.8K Discuss & Feedback
  • 15.1K Coronavirus Support Boards