Your browser isn't supported
It looks like you're using an old web browser. To get the most out of the site and to ensure guides display correctly, we suggest upgrading your browser now. Download the latest:

Welcome to the MSE Forums

We're home to a fantastic community of MoneySavers but anyone can post. Please exercise caution & report spam, illegal, offensive or libellous posts/messages: click "report" or email forumteam@.

Search
  • FIRST POST
    • Bobby2k2
    • By Bobby2k2 3rd Dec 15, 10:37 PM
    • 67Posts
    • 60Thanks
    Bobby2k2
    UKPC & county court business centre form received
    • #1
    • 3rd Dec 15, 10:37 PM
    UKPC & county court business centre form received 3rd Dec 15 at 10:37 PM
    Hi
    Over the past few years I have received 3x PCNs from UKPC (2x 2013 & 1x 2014). At the time, I followed what I naively thought was the up to date advice by ignoring each one (I now know this is not the case

    I am now in receipt of the 'particulars of claim' issued by the a company called 'Small Claims Solicitors' weirdly signed only with the initials (SCS) as well the Claim form etc from the County Court Business Centre.

    The total is for just under £600 and now I am worried.

    From reading the other posts on here and reading the claim form itself, I am aware that this can not be ignored and do not want to run the risk of losing by default because I have failed to respond. To that end I have completed the 'Acknowledgement of service' and will return this as a matter of priority.

    The part I am completely at a loss with is how to defend this effectively. Can this be in bullet point from or does it need to be more comprehensive than that? I have tried to find templates for similar cases from UKPC but can find any. I have also looked at the post #5 on the newbie sticky entitled 'SMALL CLAIMS COURT?' and it advises to srart a new thread....

    Please help anybody

    Thanks in advance
Page 7
    • Unicorn51
    • By Unicorn51 4th Nov 16, 6:47 PM
    • 52 Posts
    • 79 Thanks
    Unicorn51
    The last paragraph on page 3, just above the signatures states:

    "Confirm that you own the premises"

    Do they own the premises, or are they just agents acting on behalf of the owners?
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 4th Nov 16, 8:11 PM
    • 44,202 Posts
    • 56,929 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    Reading the very short first Witness Statement, why on earth do they adduce 'the site has more than 9 signs'?!

    Ten signs then? errrm... 333,000 signs?!! How many when it was £90. How many when it changed to £100.

    And at #10 of the initial short WS, they say they are allowed to instigate court proceedings against drivers. Not keepers then? Probably because the contract pre-dates the POFA and has never been updated so it can be argued that they do not have any authority to enforce in the courts against registered keepers. When the POFA 2012 took effect on 1.10.12 and Parking on Private Land Appeals (POPLA) came into play, it is believed that BPA AOS members were required to update existing contracts to reflect the significant law change.

    You can suggest that UKPC did not update this contract to authorise any claims against registered keepers - as opposed to just drivers - and indeed (as Umkomaas noticed) the contract is dated May 2012 for just 3 months. And the contract is by this Claimant's own admission, not with the landowner nor does it show any authority flowing from that landowner, who is not the managing agent of course, it is xxxxxxx xxxxxxxxx*




    * get proof of the landowner from the Land Registry and include that in your exhibits even if you have not had that with you before. Have it with you in case the Judge allows it - we had a case lost when the Judge was listening to the Defendant who said the contract wasn't with the landowner but when asked if he could adduce any evidence, he couldn't (he lost, possibly for the sake of a £3 LR search).
    Last edited by Coupon-mad; 21-01-2017 at 6:06 PM.
    PRIVATE PCN in England/Wales? DON'T PAY BUT DO NOT IGNORE IT

    Click on the breadcrumb trail, top of page: Household & Travel > Motoring > Parking Tickets, Fines & Parking & READ THE 'NEWBIES' FAQS THREAD.
    DON'T read old advice to ignore, unless in Scotland/NI.

    • Bobby2k2
    • By Bobby2k2 4th Nov 16, 9:25 PM
    • 67 Posts
    • 60 Thanks
    Bobby2k2
    Just skimmed the contract.

    It runs for only 3 months from the start date - 28 May 2012. There is no evidence the contract extends beyond that. I think your dates of 'contravention' are after this period.

    The rate of discount of £60 from the PCN charge of £90 does not meet with the 'effectively binding' (as per the Supreme Court, PE -v- Beavis) BPA Code of Practice rate of 40%.

    Haven't gone back through your thread, but what level of charge was imposed on you on each of the PCNs?
    Umkomaas, The rates of discount for each PCN are as follows:
    PCN 1 = £90 to £54
    PCN 2 = £100 to £60
    PCN 3 = £100 to £60

    Does this meet with the BPA Code of Practice?

    In relation to the dates on the contract - Yes the PCN's are dated from 2013 onwards. The judge did in fact also raise the issue of whether the contract was still valid as there is no end date or evidence to show otherwise. To be honest I thought they would have produced that now given the chance but obviously they haven't... Would they be allowed to produce this on the day to surprise me??

    The contract refers to "Trinity Estates" but the only company of that name is in Aylesbury; the full name of the client is probably Trinity (Estates) Property Management Ltd.
    Originally posted by Castle
    Yes I think you are correct - I know for a FACT that Trinity Estates is the AGENT and not the landowner. Their solicitor even confirmed this at the first hearing. His argument is that in clause 4.8.3 (last paragraph on page) The Client (Trinity Estates) authorises and assigns any right of action against the driver (or registered keeper/owner) to UKPC.

    My issue is that Trinity estates is not the landowner therefore they do not have the right to assign any right to anybody. And even if the land owner has allowed the agent to do this then where is the proof?? I mentioned this at the hearing and the judge seemed to agree..


    The last paragraph on page 3, just above the signatures states:

    "Confirm that you own the premises"

    Do they own the premises, or are they just agents acting on behalf of the owners?
    Originally posted by Unicorn51
    Very good point - I missed that. No they DO NOT OWN the premises. They are just the AGENT.

    Reading the very short first Witness Statement, why on earth do they adduce 'the site has nore than 9 signs'?!

    Ten signs then? errrm... 333,000 signs?!!m How many when it was £90. How many when it changed to £100.

    And at #10 of the initial short WS, they say they are allowed to instigate court proceedings against drivers. Not keepers then? Probably because the contract pre-dates the POFA and has never been updated so it can be argued that they do not have any authority to enforce in the courts against registered keepers. When the POFA 2012 took effect on 1.10.12 and Parking on Private Land Appeals (POPLA) came into play, it is believed that BPA AOS members were required to update existing contracts to reflect the significant law change.

    You can suggest that UKPC did not update this contract to authorise any claims against registered keepers - as opposed to just drivers - and indeed (as Umkomaas noticed) the contract is dated May 2012 for just 3 months. And the contract is by this Claimant's own admission, not with the landowner nor does it show any authority flowing from that landowner, who is not the managing agent of course, it is xxxxxxx xxxxxxxxx*




    * get proof of the landowner from the Land Registry and include that in your exhibits even if you have not had that with you before. Have it with you in case the Judge allows it - we had a case lost when the Judge was listening to the Defendant who said the contract wasn't with the landowner but when asked if he could adduce any evidence, he couldn't (he lost, possibly for the sake of a £3 LR search).
    Originally posted by Coupon-mad
    I have the land registry documents in my original exhibits and the judge has a copy. Although as you have said this, the claimant has already admitted this at the first hearing.

    Also in terms of the contract, I can see what the witness has said but if you look at clause 4.8.3 (last paragraph) of the terms and conditions of the contract it does state 'driver or registered keeper/owner)

    Does this help them??
    • Umkomaas
    • By Umkomaas 4th Nov 16, 9:39 PM
    • 11,808 Posts
    • 17,995 Thanks
    Umkomaas
    Umkomaas, The rates of discount for each PCN are as follows:
    PCN 1 = £90 to £54
    PCN 2 = £100 to £60
    PCN 3 = £100 to £60

    Does this meet with the BPA Code of Practice?

    In relation to the dates on the contract - Yes the PCN's are dated from 2013 onwards. The judge did in fact also raise the issue of whether the contract was still valid as there is no end date or evidence to show otherwise. To be honest I thought they would have produced that now given the chance but obviously they haven't... Would they be allowed to produce this on the day to surprise me??

    Quote:
    The discounts on the actual PCNs are at 40% per the BPA CoP. BUT - those amounts do not correlate with the contract with the landowner, particularly the 2 x £100. So no landowner approval.

    I haven't gone back to re-read the contract, but there may be a clause giving the PPC the ability to raise the level of the charge. If that's the case, were there any conditions attached (like having to further agree with the landowner, or was a unilateral decision deemed ok)?
    NEWBIES - wise up - DO NOT IGNORE A PARKING CHARGE NOTICE - you have been warned!

    Give a man a fish, and you feed him for a day; show him how to catch fish, and you feed him for a lifetime.

    Please note: I am NOT involved in any 'paid for' appeals service.
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 4th Nov 16, 10:24 PM
    • 44,202 Posts
    • 56,929 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    Would they be allowed to produce this on the day to surprise me??
    If the Judge lets them get away with it - so politely but clearly object to anything like that which was not previously shown, after all they've had two chances, have legal representation and you are an unrepresented defendant.

    in terms of the contract, I can see what the witness has said but if you look at clause 4.8.3 (last paragraph) of the terms and conditions of the contract it does state 'driver or registered keeper/owner)

    Does this help them??
    I think the copy contract looks possibly a cut & paste version because it looks mismatched/not straight. And some of it makes little sense - e.g.

    - why in May 2012, months before the POFA, would they talk about registered keepers and owners (they could not hold those people liable at the time)?

    - the Terms and conditions cannot POSSIBLY be the t&cs from May 2012, not for one nanosecond are the those t&cs, because they mention POPLA in some detail. POPLA didn't exist...

    It says the signatory must confirm they are the owners but you have evidenced that the signatory is not the owner at all and it is silent about whether there is any authorisation flowing from the landowner (for all we know this could be a moneymaking scheme cooked up between two agents with no knowledge of a typical absentee property owning company). The court cannot assume the landowner has authorised this regime.

    The clauses at the end describe the details and parking charge as 'key terms' and the signatory has accepted only those stated key terms (i.e. a parking charge of £90 with a discount to £60 at that time). It also says that if the client requests a change to those key terms it will only 'be effective' when confirmed by UKPC in writing.

    In fact, the t&cs (which as already said, are not May 2012 t&cs by any stretch of the imagination) says in 6.4 that UKPC 'will' give the client company written notice of any increase in parking charges - where is that then? Twice they must have made changes, firstly when the BPA insisted on 40% discount they changed from £90/£60 to £90/54, then later (but when, there is no proof, could have been in 2016 for all we know) they at some vague point, increased the charge to £100. Again, where is the evidence of that forming part of this agreement in an amendment notice as described in 6.4?

    How can we assume that any other key details did not change too, e.g. exemptions, operating hours? Also what is hidden under the blackened out section?

    I would raise all these issues and ask UKPC at the hearing to show the current key terms accepted by the actual landowner, not old out of date 2012 terms accepted by a managing agent who should never have signed it because they could not meet the criteria of 'confirming they are the owner'.

    Have you got the transcript from the Parking Prankster's Blog, of 'PACE Recovery v Mr N' from Croydon court on 16.9.16:

    http://nebula.wsimg.com/c269da31b314e7cc17e383a625b5ae23?AccessKeyId=4CB8F 2392A09CF228A46&disposition=0&alloworigin=1

    If the resident has a lease that allows visitors' cars to be parked (or is silent on any charges for parking) then there are no charges for parking!
    Last edited by Coupon-mad; 04-11-2016 at 10:55 PM.
    PRIVATE PCN in England/Wales? DON'T PAY BUT DO NOT IGNORE IT

    Click on the breadcrumb trail, top of page: Household & Travel > Motoring > Parking Tickets, Fines & Parking & READ THE 'NEWBIES' FAQS THREAD.
    DON'T read old advice to ignore, unless in Scotland/NI.

    • Castle
    • By Castle 6th Nov 16, 10:03 AM
    • 1,177 Posts
    • 1,521 Thanks
    Castle
    Yes I think you are correct - I know for a FACT that Trinity Estates is the AGENT and not the landowner. Their solicitor even confirmed this at the first hearing. His argument is that in clause 4.8.3 (last paragraph on page) The Client (Trinity Estates) authorises and assigns any right of action against the driver (or registered keeper/owner) to UKPC.

    My issue is that Trinity estates is not the landowner therefore they do not have the right to assign any right to anybody. And even if the land owner has allowed the agent to do this then where is the proof?? I mentioned this at the hearing and the judge seemed to agree..
    Originally posted by Bobby2k2
    As written "Trinity Estates" is just a trading name, it fails to identify the legal entity. The only company called "Trinity Estates Ltd" in existence in May 2012 was dissolved in April 2016 without ever trading.
    https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/07944854

    Whilst 4.8.3 apparently assigns any right of action, this would make UKPC a stranger to any contract with the driver. UKPC's terms and conditions at 12.7 clearly states that they are not acting as an agent. In PE V Beavis, PE paid £1,000 per week; I see no mention of any payments in the terms and conditions.
    • Bobby2k2
    • By Bobby2k2 7th Nov 16, 4:47 PM
    • 67 Posts
    • 60 Thanks
    Bobby2k2
    As written "Trinity Estates" is just a trading name, it fails to identify the legal entity. The only company called "Trinity Estates Ltd" in existence in May 2012 was dissolved in April 2016 without ever trading.
    https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/07944854

    Whilst 4.8.3 apparently assigns any right of action, this would make UKPC a stranger to any contract with the driver. UKPC's terms and conditions at 12.7 clearly states that they are not acting as an agent. In PE V Beavis, PE paid £1,000 per week; I see no mention of any payments in the terms and conditions.
    Originally posted by Castle
    Thanks for this but I have managed to find the managing agent' here:

    https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/officers/-cXYK1hiqVMwKCx6acIcXYknVCo/appointments
    • Bobby2k2
    • By Bobby2k2 7th Nov 16, 4:47 PM
    • 67 Posts
    • 60 Thanks
    Bobby2k2
    .....although their seems to be a view entries with the same address as on the contract:

    https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/search?q=trinity+estates
    • Bobby2k2
    • By Bobby2k2 16th Nov 16, 7:41 PM
    • 67 Posts
    • 60 Thanks
    Bobby2k2
    Out of the blue, I've received an updated version of terms and conditions form UKPC's solicitor, as the terms that they had sent with the contract would not have been in force at the time the contract commenced (I think we already worked that out @Coupon-mad).

    They can be found here:

    https://drive.google.com/file/d/0ByKlPmpyHuzOUEVsWGhVanhTLTA/view?usp=sharing


    Not sure it makes that much difference though..
    • IamEmanresu
    • By IamEmanresu 17th Nov 16, 8:23 AM
    • 1,085 Posts
    • 1,952 Thanks
    IamEmanresu
    Are these terms signed? If so by whom and on what date?

    Does the solicitor intend to make a claim that these were the ones applicable at the time and will that be backed by a Statement of Truth?
    Life's for living, get on with it rather than worrying about these. If they hassle, counter claim.
    • Bobby2k2
    • By Bobby2k2 17th Nov 16, 9:36 AM
    • 67 Posts
    • 60 Thanks
    Bobby2k2
    Yes thats right. There was a statement with it from their solicitor Ms Ndure.

    They are NOT signed though nor were the original ones that I posted prevously.
    • IamEmanresu
    • By IamEmanresu 17th Nov 16, 10:11 AM
    • 1,085 Posts
    • 1,952 Thanks
    IamEmanresu
    Just make a note and raise the point that they appear to be reconstructing a contract that may not be the actual one as it has doubtful provenance i.e. unsigned, on UKPC paper and no indication of the person or authority that may have signed it for the landowner/occupier. And there will be no one there to vouch for it (deliberately)
    Life's for living, get on with it rather than worrying about these. If they hassle, counter claim.
    • Bobby2k2
    • By Bobby2k2 18th Dec 16, 6:43 PM
    • 67 Posts
    • 60 Thanks
    Bobby2k2
    UPDATE:
    Received a notice of trial date and accompanying letter from the Centralised listing manager' notifying me that it has been moved to another court (it also says that the case may be released to another judge or court) but for now it seems as though the Judge remains the same as before.

    The new date is in early February 2017 with a time estimate of 1 day (as indicated previously).

    I think it may be time for the 'drop hands offer'
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 18th Dec 16, 9:39 PM
    • 44,202 Posts
    • 56,929 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    A whole day?!
    PRIVATE PCN in England/Wales? DON'T PAY BUT DO NOT IGNORE IT

    Click on the breadcrumb trail, top of page: Household & Travel > Motoring > Parking Tickets, Fines & Parking & READ THE 'NEWBIES' FAQS THREAD.
    DON'T read old advice to ignore, unless in Scotland/NI.

    • Bobby2k2
    • By Bobby2k2 1st Jan 17, 7:43 PM
    • 67 Posts
    • 60 Thanks
    Bobby2k2
    In regards to the Notice:

    How does this sound (or does it need to be longer?)

    Name
    Address

    Date
    Claim number


    Without prejudice - save as to costs

    Dear Sir/Madam

    I Bobby2k2, the defendant deny fully any liability in relation to the above claim however, in order to save any costs that may be incurred as a result of the pending hearing that has been relisted for an allocation 1 day hearing, I suggest a discontinuance on the basis of a "drop hands" offer.

    This will mean that the claim is discontinued, with both parties paying their own costs.

    Kind regards
    Bobby2k2
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 4th Jan 17, 1:30 PM
    • 44,202 Posts
    • 56,929 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    Looks OK to me, based on the advice given before which was to see if they will drop it due to the costs of a 1 day hearing.
    PRIVATE PCN in England/Wales? DON'T PAY BUT DO NOT IGNORE IT

    Click on the breadcrumb trail, top of page: Household & Travel > Motoring > Parking Tickets, Fines & Parking & READ THE 'NEWBIES' FAQS THREAD.
    DON'T read old advice to ignore, unless in Scotland/NI.

    • Bobby2k2
    • By Bobby2k2 6th Jan 17, 5:23 PM
    • 67 Posts
    • 60 Thanks
    Bobby2k2
    Notice sent
    • rebecca91
    • By rebecca91 9th Jan 17, 12:40 PM
    • 22 Posts
    • 28 Thanks
    rebecca91
    Same situation
    Im in the exact same situation as you, So keeping track of this
    Let us know how you got on, and any random questions the Judge put on you that might be of use if possible

    Very good luck
    • Bobby2k2
    • By Bobby2k2 21st Jan 17, 5:42 PM
    • 67 Posts
    • 60 Thanks
    Bobby2k2
    UPDATE:

    Please see laughable response form UKPC solicitors:

    ''Our client is unwilling to accept settlement under the terms you propose, bearing in mind the value of the claim and further costs incurred issuing these proceedings.

    However, our client has made a counter offer confirming that they will accept payment of £*** in full settlement of this claim''

    £*** = £1 more than the actual charge of the x3 original PCN's LOL! (So would probably be accredited to their costs)

    They want a response.. Hmmmm I wonder what to say...
    • The Deep
    • By The Deep 21st Jan 17, 5:51 PM
    • 6,157 Posts
    • 4,962 Thanks
    The Deep
    refer them to Arkle V Pressdram
    You never know how far you can go until you go too far.
Welcome to our new Forum!

Our aim is to save you money quickly and easily. We hope you like it!

Forum Team Contact us

Live Stats

173Posts Today

1,420Users online

Martin's Twitter