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
    • IndigoMondayToyota
    • By IndigoMondayToyota 29th May 16, 8:31 PM
    • 51Posts
    • 30Thanks
    IndigoMondayToyota
    UKPC - County Court Claim Defence and Process
    • #1
    • 29th May 16, 8:31 PM
    UKPC - County Court Claim Defence and Process 29th May 16 at 8:31 PM
    Good evening all,

    I come to this forum asking for assistance after reading several threads (including the NEWBIES thread), and forums such as MSE, Pepipoo, ParkingPranksters.

    I've been parking in a private residential area which has allocated parking spots to homeowners. As I live with my parents, they have already taken the allotted parking spot for our house, and we therefore cannot take another one within the area. There are only 3 visitor parking facilities available to the hundreds of people who live here. Often at times, the road leading to where I live is fully parked, along with the visitor parking spaces being taken, and thus leaving me with no option to park other than in front of my flat.

    To cut a long story short, I have received several (more than 10, less than 15) PCN's over the course of a few years from UKPC, who I'm sure most of you are familiar with . These are all issued under the contravention that I was 'not parked correctly within a marked bay', even though there wasn't any allocated bay to be able to park in. These were all issued after October 2013.

    After many months and years of ignoring several threatening letters from UKPC, DRPL, Zenith Collections, I realized (after reading the forums recently) that it was too late to do anything and that I shouldn't have ignored those letters!! BIG BIG MISTAKE!

    I initially received a letter from SCS Law early this month regarding 'debt owed to UKPC', detailing the dates, reference, car reg, location, contravention and the amounts. I responded to this letter which they stated should considered as a 'letter before claim' by using zzzLazyDaisy's template via the thread - 'LBCCC Fightback' as I felt it lacked the requirements to be an official Letter Before Claim. SCS Law then responded about the 'revisions being made to the Practice Direction on Pre action Conduct which came into force on 6th April 2015. Annex A was replaced with Paragraph 6 "Steps Before Issuing". Our letter gave a concise detail of the claim, provided the relevant dates and locations where breaches occurred, and described the breaches which gave rise to the parking charges, including the amounts incurred. We are satisfied that our letter complies with the requirements of paragraph 6.'

    Due to work and private commitments, I was unable to respond to their letter, and therefore brings me to where I am now.

    Recently, I have received a Claim Form from the County Court Business Center which tallies up to a total cost of around £2000 (amount claimed, court fee and legal representative's costs). I know this part should NOT be ignored and I have sent my Acknowledgement of Service and selected the option to say I will be defending my claim in full via MCOL. Quick question - does this give me 28 days from today (29th May), or from day of issue on the claim form?

    From what I gather in Bargepole's summary of County Court Claim Procedure, I am now around and Step 3.

    If anyone could help me with my defense and throughout the whole process (excluding the actual hearing!), I'll be eternally grateful as I've never done any of this before.

    Many thanks in advance,
    Inigo Montoya

    PS. That is obviously not my real name!
Page 4
    • IndigoMondayToyota
    • By IndigoMondayToyota 16th Jul 16, 12:01 PM
    • 51 Posts
    • 30 Thanks
    IndigoMondayToyota
    Also to note:

    UKPC have filled out their DQ as following:

    Do you wish to use the Small Claims Mediation Service:
    - Yes

    Contact Details:
    - SCS Law's Legal Representative for UKPC

    Small Claims Track appropriate:
    - Yes

    Hearing Venue:
    - No preference

    Expert Evidence:
    - No

    Witnesses
    - 1 (I'm guessing their Witness is UKPC...?)

    Hearing days where not available:
    - N/A

    Anything above which I should be wary of?
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 16th Jul 16, 1:03 PM
    • 40,565 Posts
    • 52,449 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    Your form on 'witnesses' should match theirs - it is one (you) versus one (them).

    The rest is fine. The only thing to be wary of, is if the Court suggests Mediation is suitable even though you ticked no (and we agree, tick no!). Seach rthe forum for 'Mary' to read about a Mediator who tried to influence a defendant to settle which is all too common a report. Mediation has no real point in PPC cases for a consumer because you are hardly going to suddenly agree to pay even a % of the unfair charge unless a Judge tells you to!
    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.

    • IndigoMondayToyota
    • By IndigoMondayToyota 27th Aug 16, 4:59 PM
    • 51 Posts
    • 30 Thanks
    IndigoMondayToyota
    Good afternoon - hoping all is well with everyone in this board and enjoying the summer break with their families?

    I wanted to update everyone to say - I finally have a court date!!!

    It's towards the latter stage of October 2016.

    As per Bargepole's digestible summary of the CCC process:
    6) Once you have a court date, get back in contact with the member who prepared the initial defence for you, and they will then supply the full witness statement, skeleton argument and court bundle. We have a number of “standard” paragraphs which apply to almost all PPC defences, but we also need to personalise the statement with particulars about how the ticket was issued, what the PPC is claiming in their POC, whether the ticket was pre or post 1st October 2012, what was on the signage, etc.

    Seeing as we have about 2 months before the hearing, would someone who's helped me throughout this ordeal care to give me a hand with the Full Witness Statement, Skeleton Argument and Court Bundle and get it all perfected down to a tee?

    Also, just a quickie (I have a feeling I know the answer already but it still begs the question...) - in the letter, it states that a hearing fee of under £200 is payable by XXXX date by the Claimant unless I make an application for a fee concession - should I go ahead with the application or let the muppets at UKPC / SCS Law take care of that?

    Reason I ask is because the court may look more towards the "good-will gesture" (for lack of a better word) of the Defendant if I paid for it first... I have a feeling you'll say to let them take care of it as they may not even pay it and the claim is struck out - meaning I win, right?!?

    Thanks once again, and have a merry good summer (or what's left of it)
    • DoaM
    • By DoaM 27th Aug 16, 6:10 PM
    • 1,009 Posts
    • 918 Thanks
    DoaM
    The defendant doesn't pay ANY court fees, do they?
    Diary of a madman
    Walk the line again today
    Entries of confusion
    Dear diary, I'm here to stay
    • IndigoMondayToyota
    • By IndigoMondayToyota 27th Aug 16, 7:09 PM
    • 51 Posts
    • 30 Thanks
    IndigoMondayToyota
    Hey DoaM, I presume not, but I wasn't sure if I would look "better" in front of the judge if i shouldered the court fees...

    Forget I asked - it was a stupid question anyway!
    • The Deep
    • By The Deep 27th Aug 16, 7:55 PM
    • 5,561 Posts
    • 4,272 Thanks
    The Deep
    It was a stupid question. You need to get a handle on this or you will end up with a CCJ.
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 28th Aug 16, 2:09 PM
    • 40,565 Posts
    • 52,449 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    Hey DoaM, I presume not, but I wasn't sure if I would look "better" in front of the judge if i shouldered the court fees...
    Originally posted by IndigoMondayToyota
    Absolutely and categorically not. We will try to forget you asked! The hearing fee is for the Claimant to pay of course, at this stage. If you lose at a hearing, you will be told to pay the court fees and the PCN(s).

    Have a look at Anthony94's outcome (he won) and compare it to Joe_R (on pepipoo) and Garsantinos (on here) outcomes from this week. Both lost and came up against a very narky and unhelpful Judge from the outset. They were probably doomed but let's hope you get a decent Judge.

    No-one will write your full defence for you (it can't have extra new points added, so it does not need much of a change except for the padding of the evidence) but we will comment & help, if you ask us anything.

    Basically your 'witness statement' is a statement of facts 'I am the registered keeper' blah blah, like the BMPA set out here:

    http://www.bmpa.eu/static_witness_statement.php

    Your full defence is your previous 'shorter version' one, with evidence added (e.g. case law, photos etc.). The defence bundle you bring with you on the day, has everything printed out in triplicate, and the defence refers to the evidence ('exhibits') like you see here in this really detailed defence shown by the Parking Prankster:

    http://parking-prankster.blogspot.co.uk/2016/08/parkingeye-discontinue-two-cases.html

    Don't be fazed by that defence, clearly written by a legally-qualified person (can tell by the way it is worded, it is not a forum defence). I am merely showing you that one so you can see how the defence refers the Judge at each point, to the full evidence Bundle with short numbering: 'B1' etc.

    DO NOT reply if any poster here or on pepipoo sends you a private message offering to 'help'. The regulars will not contact you by pm and anyone else could be...anyone! We will help here on the forum and you may wish to register and post on pepipoo as well if you have not already:

    http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showforum=60

    Plenty of help on there too if you register and start a thread.
    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.

    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 17th Sep 16, 6:10 PM
    • 40,565 Posts
    • 52,449 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    I wanted to update everyone to say - I finally have a court date!!!

    It's towards the latter stage of October 2016.
    Originally posted by IndigoMondayToyota
    Just to suggest you might want to compare notes with Bobby2k2:

    http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.php?t=5373288&page=4

    Did you see that (as I mentioned above re some of these posters) Joe_R on pepipoo forum and more recently, Sam84 on here, lost their cases v UKPC but Anthony94 and two more posters this week, won, re 'unclear photo evidence of signage near the car/or where the car was even parked'. TommyG5 and badbrains89.

    Have you submitted your witness statement and full defence already and is your court bundle in the process of being prepared? Any questions?

    I would read the threads where people have won and lost recently and try to learn from them.
    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.

    • IndigoMondayToyota
    • By IndigoMondayToyota 17th Sep 16, 7:08 PM
    • 51 Posts
    • 30 Thanks
    IndigoMondayToyota
    Hi CM, apologies for the delay in my response to your two messages - work and personal life have been chaotic and finding time to focus on this case has been very difficult.

    I'll be dedicating tomorrow to having a draft of my Full Defence and Defence Bundle. At the same time, I'll get the Witness Statement drafted.

    Can you elaborate on why the Defence Bundle has to be printed out in triplicate for the court day? I would guess one for me, one for UKPC/SCS Law, and one for the Judge...

    Thanks for linking Bobby2k2's thread, that was a very interesting read. And yes, I did see TommyG5, badbrains89 and Anthony94's win - fantastic victories!!

    Thanks again.
    • IndigoMondayToyota
    • By IndigoMondayToyota 18th Sep 16, 9:33 PM
    • 51 Posts
    • 30 Thanks
    IndigoMondayToyota
    Hi,

    I have the drafts for my Full Defense and Witness Statement (which I'll be posting separately).

    I would gratefully appreciate your time and consideration in reviewing the two posts and letting me know what to add/omit.

    I've set it out in the following format:
    Defence - From my Skeleton Defence in post #35
    Evidence/Exhibit
    Comment / Query

    Full Defense:
    1. It is admitted that Defendant was the registered keeper of the vehicle in question.

    2. The Defendant has no liability as they are the Keeper of the vehicle, and the Private Parking Company has failed to comply with the strict provisions of The Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 to hold anyone other than the driver liable for the charge. (what can i use as evidence?)

    3. The signage displayed clearly only makes an offer of parking to permit holders, and therefore only permit holders can be bound by the contractual terms conveyed. Please refer to exhibit BX (image from post #13)

    4. It is denied that the Claimant has authority to bring this claim. The proper Claimant is the landowner. UK Parking Control cannot overrule the elements of the lease or introduce them subsequently. Strict proof is required that there is a chain of contracts leading from the landowner to UKPC. Please refer to the highlighted part, page X, in exhibit BX (This is to show the highlighted section under ‘Property Register’ from the Title Register, showing the land is between Housing Association and my Parents. Should I also include the Title Plan? (both obtained from Land Registry in June))

    5. The Claimant rejects any 'legal fee' per PCN which UKPC have randomly added, which is a penalty in itself.

    6. Accordingly, the Claimant is put to strict proof the additional fees and costs added to the value shown on signages for the £90/£100 charges was ever in fact incurred per PCN, at all.

    7. UK Parking Control are not the lawful occupier of the land.
    (i) UKPC is not the lawful occupier of the land. Can I reuse the same exhibits from point 4?
    (ii) absent contract with the lawful occupier of the land being produced by the claimant, or a chain of contracts showing authorisation stemming from the lawful occupier of the land, I have the reasonable belief that they do not have the authority to issue charges on this land in their own name and that they have no locus standi to bring this case.

    8. The signage on the site shows two different sums - £90 in one place, £100 in another - so it would be impossible to assume which sign (if any) the driver(s) of the vehicle on each occasion saw, or did not see. Each sign is pale, unlit, unremarkable and placed so high that the £90/£100 charge among the wordy small print is incapable of being read, cannot form a contract and is ambiguous due to the sum differing. The doctrine of contra proferentem applies and the interpretation that most favours a consumer must prevail; that being that the driver(s) did not see or accept the sum the claimant says they did. Please refer to exhibit BX (images from my posts on #13 and #20)

    9. - The signage on the site in question is unclear and was not prominent on site/around those bays at the time the PCN's were issued so no contract has been formed with driver(s) to pay £90/£100, or any additional fee charged if unpaid in 14 days. (Can I reuse the same images from point 8?)

    10. This case can be distinguished from ParkingEye v Beavis [2015] UKSC 67 (the Beavis case) which was dependent upon an undenied contract, formed by unusually prominent signage forming a clear offer and which turned on unique facts regarding the location and the interests of the landowner. Strict compliance with the BPA Code of Practice (CoP) was paramount and Mr Beavis was the driver who saw the signs and entered into a contract to pay £85 after exceeding a licence to park free. None of this applies in this material case. Please refer to exhibit BX (this will be a large printout of ParkingEye’s signage), and exhibit BX for comparison (which shows the images from my posts #13 & #20)

    11. The Protection of Freedom Act 2012 Schedule 4 has not been complied with. The registered keeper is unaware of 11 PCN's and was not the driver, as such the keeper can only be held liable if the Claimant has fully complied with the strict requirements including 'adequate notice' of £90/£100 charge and prescribed Notice to Keeper letters in time/with mandatory wording. (what can I use as evidence?)

    12. It is believed that this Claimant has not adhered to the BPA Code of Practice and is put to strict proof of full compliance. This Claimant has been exposed in the national press - and was recently investigated by the BPA - for falsifying photo evidence, which was admitted by the Claimant. It is submitted that this is not a parking company which complies with the strict rules of their Trade Body, which were held as a vital regulatory feature in ParkingEye v Beavis. Please see exhibit BX (this has the link and screenshots of the pages from the Telegraph: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/11858473/Parking-firm-UKPC-admits-faking-tickets-to-fine-drivers.html)

    13. The Claimant is put to strict proof that none of the photos taken of my vehicle at the time the PCN's were issued were not similarly altered.

    14. This case can be easily distinguished from ParkingEye v Beavis which the Judges held was 'entirely different' from most ordinary economic contract disputes and UKPC have not shown any valid 'legitimate interest' allowing them the unusual right to pursue anything more than a genuine pre-estimate of loss.

    15. If the driver(s) on each occasion were considered to be trespassers if not allowed to park there, then only the landowner can pursue a case under the tort of trespass, not this Claimant, and as the Supreme Court in the Beavis case confirmed, such a matter would be limited to the landowner themselves claiming for a nominal sum.

    16. Save as expressly mentioned above, the Particulars of Claim is denied in its entirety. It is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief at all.

    Statement of Truth:
    I confirm that the contents of this statement are true to the best of my knowledge and belief.
    Last edited by IndigoMondayToyota; 18-09-2016 at 9:38 PM.
    • IndigoMondayToyota
    • By IndigoMondayToyota 18th Sep 16, 9:37 PM
    • 51 Posts
    • 30 Thanks
    IndigoMondayToyota
    And here is my Witness Statement:

    Claim Number: XXXXXXXXXX
    UK Parking Control v IndigoMondayToyota
    Witness Statement of Defendant


    1. My name is XXXXXXXXXX. I live at XXXXXX I am the Defendant in this matter. I make this statement from my own knowledge and personal experience.

    2. On the relevant dates of **th ******** 2013, **th ******* 2013, **th ******* 2013, **th ******* 2013, **th ******* 2013, **th ******* 2013, **th ******* 2013, **th ******* 2013, **th ******* 2013, **th ******* 2013, and **th ***** 2014 I was the registered keeper of a vehicle with the registration mark of XXXX XXX. (I just realised one of those I never received a PCN!)

    3. I am no longer the registered keeper of the above vehicle.

    4. At the time I did not respond to any of the above because for reasons I have expanded upon in my defense.

    5. I received a letter dated the **th ********* 2016 from Small Claims Solicitors (exhibit BX) regarding eleven outstanding PCNs, PCN numbers xxxxxxxx, xxxxxxxx, xxxxxxxx, xxxxxxxx, xxxxxxxx, xxxxxxxx, xxxxxxxx, xxxxxxxx, xxxxxxxx, xxxxxxxx, and xxxxxxxx.

    6. I received a letter dated **th ********* 2016 from Small Claims Solicitors (SCS) with Particulars of Claim enclosed. (exhibit BX)

    7. On the **th ********* 2016 I submitted a Subject Access Request to UK Parking Control for further information via post.

    8. I received a letter dated **th ********* 2016 from UKPC pertaining to information submitted from my Subject Access Request

    9. On the **th ********* 2016 I submitted my initial defense online via www.moneyclaim.gov.uk.

    10. I filed my directions questionnaire on the County Court Business Centre (CCBC) and SCS on the **th ******** 2016 online via www.moneyclaim.gov.uk.

    11. On the **th ******** 2016 I receive Notice of Allocation to the Small Claims Track.

    I believe that the facts stated in this witness statement are true.
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 19th Sep 16, 8:44 PM
    • 40,565 Posts
    • 52,449 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    Why not just say:


    2. It is admitted that I was the registered keeper of the vehicle in 2013, however it is denied that a 'parking charge notice' was issued to the vehicle on all/any of the dates specified, not least because this is three years ago and no credible photographic evidence has been supplied of a PCN on the car on all/any of the days the Claimant suggests a parking charge arose.
    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.

    • IndigoMondayToyota
    • By IndigoMondayToyota 19th Sep 16, 9:17 PM
    • 51 Posts
    • 30 Thanks
    IndigoMondayToyota
    Thanks CM. I'll amend #2 for the Witness Statement with your point.

    What about the rest of the comments/queries?
    • IndigoMondayToyota
    • By IndigoMondayToyota 22nd Sep 16, 8:23 AM
    • 51 Posts
    • 30 Thanks
    IndigoMondayToyota
    Morning all. Just wanted to get some feedback on my queries for Full Defence and Witness Statement. Thanks
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 22nd Sep 16, 12:27 PM
    • 40,565 Posts
    • 52,449 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    Make sure you've covered all bases:

    http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.php?t=5518614

    Yours looked short by comparison, so have you missed anything?
    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.

    • IndigoMondayToyota
    • By IndigoMondayToyota 25th Sep 16, 6:22 PM
    • 51 Posts
    • 30 Thanks
    IndigoMondayToyota
    Apologies, but I'm not sure I follow.

    The link you provided takes me to what looks like a Skeleton Defence. I'm at the Full Defence stage, and I thought I wasn't allowed to change much of mine from the defence I submitted via MCOL?

    Unless you mean to say I add onto what I currently have and add some evidence on top (where applicable - and where I need help on).

    Thanks.
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 25th Sep 16, 9:58 PM
    • 40,565 Posts
    • 52,449 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    Ah OK, I am guilty of skim-reading your post #71 - sorry!

    Yes, you can re-use the same exhibits to make different defence points.

    The Defendant has no liability as they are the Keeper of the vehicle, and the Private Parking Company has failed to comply with the strict provisions of The Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 to hold anyone other than the driver liable for the charge. (what can i use as evidence?)
    Assume the Judge does NOT know about Schedule 4 so have it printed out and an idea of which issues (paragraph 8 and 'adequate notice of the charge') you are going to say they have not complied with. And be well-versed in saying you are only the registered keeper and believe UKPC have not shown compliant Notice to Keepers letters were served in time and with the right wording (in 2013 I doubt the wording was as 'good' as it is now). And they have offered no evidence of who was driving every time, which could have been any member of the family with a driving licence & fully comp insurance, as the family has more than one vehicle.

    4. It is denied that the Claimant has authority to bring this claim. The proper Claimant is the landowner. UK Parking Control cannot overrule the elements of the lease or introduce them subsequently. Strict proof is required that there is a chain of contracts leading from the landowner to UKPC. Please refer to the highlighted part, page X, in exhibit BX (This is to show the highlighted section under ‘Property Register’ from the Title Register, showing the land is between Housing Association and my Parents. Should I also include the Title Plan? (both obtained from Land Registry in June))
    Yes I would include the Title Plan as well, in case you regret missing it out if the Judge asks.

    11. The Protection of Freedom Act 2012 Schedule 4 has not been complied with. The registered keeper is unaware of 11 PCN's and was not the driver, as such the keeper can only be held liable if the Claimant has fully complied with the strict requirements including 'adequate notice' of £90/£100 charge and prescribed Notice to Keeper letters in time/with mandatory wording. (what can I use as evidence?)
    'adequate notice' is pointing out that the signs and lines (if any are marked on the ground) are inadequate notice of any restricted area and in particular, the £100 charge itself which is in small print. You could also use (if it is useful in your case) the bumf your parents were given when they accepted the permit, and argue that the contract was concluded when the permits were received. And no mention of £100 (specifically that sum) as made nor accepted. As such, it is unreasonable to try to add more terms later and expect residents to read signs every day to check they've not been changed, when in fact the signs were never incorporated into the contract and nor was £100 a feature of the permit scheme.

    14. This case can be easily distinguished from ParkingEye v Beavis which the Judges held was 'entirely different' from most ordinary economic contract disputes and UKPC have not shown any valid 'legitimate interest' allowing them the unusual right to pursue anything more than a genuine pre-estimate of loss.
    Here you need the Beavis decision printed out and relevant bits highlighted. Plus the Court of Appeal stage decision from April 2015 (the one before the Supreme Court) where the 'entirely different' comments were made, which were not contradicted by the Supreme Court so are deemed part of that persuasive decision. And after all, the Beavis case was not about a residents' car park, where there is surely much more scope for an 'out of all proportion' charge to be held an unfair penalty against authorised residents with a permit. The Judges did say that a parking charge did 'engage' the penalty rule and it was only the facts and very clear signs and need for a high turnover of spaces that led to a 'commercial justification' view that disengaged the penalty rule in that case alone.

    And you can add that ALL consumer contracts must be considered under the 'test of fairness' according to the UTCCRs (which applied until Sept 2015). This post using IanMSpencer's wording explains it well, why a penalty against a person who already pays for/has signed for a permit and lives at the site, has rights that suggest this sort of charge is penal:

    http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.php?p=71339517#post71339517

    You said in your first post:
    Often at times, the road leading to where I live is fully parked, along with the visitor parking spaces being taken, and thus leaving me with no option to park other than in front of my flat.
    So, is there something in your lease that lends itself to the argument that you have a right of way under the lease, to the flat entrance, which the PPC has ignored, like Laura Jopson in her appeal case:

    http://www.miltonkeynes.co.uk/news/milton-keynes-woman-secures-landmark-victory-for-flat-tenants-in-parking-dispute-1-7459066

    Can you use that, any similarities? Why should a resident be penalised to this extortionate extent?

    And bear in mind the two UKPC cases won recently on this forum this month, were because the photo evidence of the car being near to a sign with legible, prominent terms. So signage and dodgy photos for all the dozen or so situations, might well be your trump card - expose any lack of evidence from UKPC even if it merely gets some of the charges kicked out.

    Finally, how about a witness statement from your parents as well? Saying that they are the leasehold owners of xx flat, they have NEVER given authority to UKPC to issue charges to cars parked at the entrance to/outside their flat and that their lease (show it as an exhibit if it helps?) grants them rights of way and the right for them and their family to 'peaceful enjoyment' of their property.

    They could state that allowing a third party firm like UKPC (ex-clampers, known for doctoring photos) to sue their son is contrary to all common sense and cannot surely give rise to any lawful cause of action.

    They could also confirm that when the permits were supplied, the permit scheme contract was concluded without any mention of £100 (that sum) nor was their attention drawn to any terms on signs which should be read on a day to day basis every time any vehicle of theirs returned after work. At no point were the signs incorporated into the contract and they believed that a permit holder had a right of way to park which this third party cannot overrule and penalise residents for. A contract concluded with the exchange of a permit in good faith cannot have new terms added later nor be held to be 're-made' every day depending on signage that never formed part of the permit contract in the first place.

    HTH
    Last edited by Coupon-mad; 25-09-2016 at 10:04 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.

    • IndigoMondayToyota
    • By IndigoMondayToyota 2nd Oct 16, 11:55 PM
    • 51 Posts
    • 30 Thanks
    IndigoMondayToyota
    Hi CM, just wanted to let you know I've seen and acknowledged your very detailed response - thanks so much!

    Just have a few more questions, and that should be about it for me before the hearing - grateful if you could provide some answers.

    I've taken those notes/exhibits you mentioned on-board and created a separate document with little bullet points and notes to help with each of the points in my full defence - is this allowed in the hearing? Like, if a judge asks me to expand further on XYZ, can i refer to these 'notes'?

    Is everything good with the defence then? No further comments ?

    Also, the Defence Bundle is purely the Full Defence with exhibits and excerpts where applicable? This combined with the Witness Statement is what I cend to the court, UKPC & SCS Law?

    Is it safe to assume that SCS Law could be waiting to see my Defence Bundle before sending their copy across so they have the upper hand on me? If so, how do you suggest it's played?

    Thanks.
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 3rd Oct 16, 9:33 AM
    • 40,565 Posts
    • 52,449 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    Yep - SCS Law are very likely to wait as late as possible but make sure you meet your deadline. Don't wait too late.

    If they miss it and you are sure you didn't, then the first thing you can do at the hearing (or even before, with a quick letter addressed for the attention of this case Judge) is object to any late served documents and ask for them to be struck out. You can even get their witness statement struck out that way.

    Be aware to also object on the day, if the signatory of any witness statement does not attend.

    Take the exhibits in triplicate, to hand over copies as and when each aspect of defence is raised. Have all case law printed out, as well as Schedule 4, site photos of unreadable signs and Land Registry owner information, a copy of the prominent & clear sign in the Beavis case. Plus a copy of a Combined Parking Solutions sign (to show how a non-prohibitive offer can be worded to create a parking licence) etc. Get that from Google images or the Parking Prankster.

    Yes to your other questions - have notes with you at a hearing by all means and also, if it helps, post-it coloured notes with numbering, sticking out of your documents, if it helps to find your exhibits easily.

    IMHO your defence covers all the bases you can and your strongest cards are no contract formed by the unclear/prohibitive signage and 'no keeper liability' if UKPC fail to prove full statutory compliance (including signage giving 'adequate notice' of the parking charge itself in large letters). I understand that UKPC lost a case the other month on Schedule 4 non-compliance re 'period of parking' on the Notice to Keeper. That's a rare finding though and you'd have to talk the Judge through Schedule 4, no doubt.

    If that is dismissed, go for signage in a big way; it is not enough to 'have signs up'. A contract must be transparent and clear, in particular any charges - and of course there must be an offer, the consideration of a parking space offered and agreed (which is not the case with a sign prohibiting parking; it makes no offer and dresses up a penalty as a charge).
    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.

    • IndigoMondayToyota
    • By IndigoMondayToyota 9th Oct 16, 6:57 PM
    • 51 Posts
    • 30 Thanks
    IndigoMondayToyota
    Thanks again.

    Here you need the Beavis decision printed out and relevant bits highlighted. Plus the Court of Appeal stage decision from April 2015 (the one before the Supreme Court) where the 'entirely different' comments were made, which were not contradicted by the Supreme Court so are deemed part of that persuasive decision. And after all, the Beavis case was not about a residents' car park, where there is surely much more scope for an 'out of all proportion' charge to be held an unfair penalty against authorised residents with a permit. The Judges did say that a parking charge did 'engage' the penalty rule and it was only the facts and very clear signs and need for a high turnover of spaces that led to a 'commercial justification' view that disengaged the penalty rule in that case alone.
    Originally posted by Coupon-mad
    https://www.supremecourt.uk/cases/docs/uksc-2013-0280-judgment.pdf

    Been having a look at the Supreme Court Judgement, and I got around about midway through it. Would you say that points 91-99 are most applicable to Defence point 14?
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

275Posts Today

1,314Users online

Martin's Twitter