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
    • Jobe12
    • By Jobe12 20th Mar 17, 8:42 AM
    • 10Posts
    • 4Thanks
    Jobe12
    Court summons for residential parking - Over £1000!
    • #1
    • 20th Mar 17, 8:42 AM
    Court summons for residential parking - Over £1000! 20th Mar 17 at 8:42 AM
    Hi,

    I posted on this forum under a different account a while back regarding a similar issue and ended up winning a POPLA appeal. I'm hoping someone can help me again.

    The driver recently received a small claims court summons in the post. The claim is with regards to multiple tickets (well over 10) that were issued whilst the driver's vehicle was parked in a parking spot outside of the apartment he was renting. The parking spot was allocated to the driver's apartment (each apartment had one allocated spot and were numbered clearly.) UKPC are claiming that since no permit was displayed, the driver is liable for charges totaling at well over £1000.

    The permit was lost by the driver and a replacement permit has since been ordered and paid for. The driver no longer lives at the property in question but still has the tenancy agreement which proves the driver was a resident during the time the tickets were issued. The driver has sent an "Acknowledgement of service" to the court to give time to prepare the defense.

    More information:
    • The driver didn't make a POPLA appeal for any of the tickets
    • The driver has attempted to contact the estate agents and managing agents but this has been unhelpful
    • A friend of the driver recently won a POPLA appeal against UKPC for the same parking spot in question. This forum provided really helpful advice that allowed the driver's friend to prepare a POPLA appeal so strong that UKPC decided to give up!


    I've never been taken to court before and don't really know what to expect, any advice would be really appreciated.

    Are my odds of winning decent? It seems outrageous that I can be fined so much for parking in my own spot by a company that I have nothing to do with!

    Thank you for your help!
Page 2
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 7th Sep 17, 6:56 PM
    • 51,473 Posts
    • 65,061 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    You need to refer back to post #2 of the NEWBIES thread which has several links about Witness Statement stage, where you are at, with some good examples. Show us your WS, it's a simple statement of facts plus your evidence (not a re-hash of the defence).

    Start getting your ducks in a row this weekend. Spend time on it, a 4 figure sum is at stake!

    You can also (not mandatory) prepare a skeleton argument to file before the hearing and use as a crib sheet to follow your defence arguments blow by blow, and in that, you can note any issues from their WS that you wish to raise at the hearing.

    And also before the hearing, file a Costs Schedule to reclaim your costs when you win! All these things are covered in post #2 of the NEWBIES thread, along with a final tip about how to challenge Rights of Audience, as these legal firms (SCS Law?) often send a legal rep who is not 'exempt' and you can challenge their right to speak and get them kicked out.

    Search the forum and Google as well, for 'Rights of Audience BMPA' to find some solid advice.
    PRIVATE PCN? DON'T PAY BUT DO NOT IGNORE IT TWO Clicks needed for advice:
    Top of the page: Home>>Forums>Household & Travel>Motoring>Parking Tickets, Fines & Parking - read the 'NEWBIES' FAQS thread!
    Advice to ignore is WRONG, unless in Scotland/NI.

    • Jobe12
    • By Jobe12 14th Sep 17, 9:43 PM
    • 10 Posts
    • 4 Thanks
    Jobe12
    Witness Statement
    Thanks for the advice, I really appreciate it.

    I've read up on all of the recommended threads, it was very helpful.

    I have now prepared my witness statement and will send it to the court and SCS.

    I have recieved the witness statemnt and evidence from SCS, the total package consists of:

    - Pictures of the car for each date that a PCN was issued

    - The contract between UKPC and the landowners giving them the right to operate

    - A copy of an email with an appeal that they granted me during the first week of my tenancy when I was issued a PCN for not displaying a permit, I sent them a picture of the permit which they have also included

    - The witness statement claims that the statement in my defence "I was never obligated to read the signs because residents believed that they were directed at trespassers and I was completely unaware of the existence of any £100+ 'parking charge'." Is invalid as it is my responsibility to read the conditions of the sign as I am bound by them once I enter the premises.

    I have included a copy of my witness statement below and will attach this in an email alongside with the supporting case transcripts, the images of the signs, the beavis sign and my tenancy agreement.

    I hope I've got it all right, quite nervous about the upcoming hearing.

    Thanks again.


    I am the Defendant in this matter, I am unrepresented, with no experience of Court procedures. If I do not set out documents in the way that the Claimant may do, I trust the Court will excuse my inexperience.

    In this Witness statement, the facts and matters stated are true and within my own knowledge, except where indicated otherwise.

    I assert that I am not liable to the Claimant for the sum claimed, or any amount at all, for the following reasons:

    1.
    The claim relates to a number of parking tickets issued while the vehicle was parked at the spot allocated to my apartment during the duration of my tenancy

    2.
    At no point during my tenancy was I made aware of the charge and as can be seen in my tenancy agreement, I was never obliged to display any sort of permit to allow me to park at the property.

    3.
    It is trite law that a contractual term cannot be relied upon that is only communicated after conclusion of a contract, as that is too late to be incorporated into the prior agreed terms.

    4.
    The claimant makes note of the fact that I had previously used the permit in my car when appealing a parking charge during the first month of my tenancy. However the fact I made reasonable endeavours and cannot be penalised under UK contract law is also a circumstance supported by trite law. Authority for this is the case of Jolley v Carmel Ltd [2000] 2 EGLR 154, where it was held that a party who makes reasonable endeavours to comply with contractual terms, should not be penalised for breach when unable to fully comply with the terms

    5.
    The claimant UKPC begun to constantly put parking charge notices on my car, however, the parking attendant had seen my car there for multiple months prior to the permit not being displayed and must have been aware that I was the resident at the property

    6.
    For a period of time a note was placed in the car explaining that I am a tenant of the property but this didnít alter UKPCís actions whatsoever. There is no Ďlegitimate interestí in penalising me, a resident, for using my own parking space under a scheme where as far as the landowner is concerned would exists for the benefit of the residents

    7.
    I was never asked to read or obey the tiny signs placed high on poles. As can be seen in the images included, the conditions on the sign are tiny and the apparent ďparking chargeĒ of £100 is very difficult to read, especially from a moving vehicle. I have also included a copy of the sign used in the case of ParkingEye Ltd v Beavis [2015] UKSC 67, the sign in the case has large clearly visibly marked out conditions and the fine of £85 could potentially be seen from a moving vehicle whereas the sign used by UKPC is far less clear.

    8.
    UKPC also referred to the case of ParkingEye Ltd v Beavis [2015] UKSC 67 (The Beavis Case) in a letter sent to me but this was purely done to intimidate and bully me as the wholly different and Ďcomplexí case of ParkingEye Ltd v Beavis can be fully distinguished from mine as it relates to a commercial parking charge not penalising a resident.

    9.
    In addition to the original Ďparking chargeí, believed to be £100, for which liability is denied, the Claimants have artificially inflated the value of the Claim by adding £60 to each parking charge notice issued, if this is for legal costs I submit that these have not actually been incurred by the Claimant.

    10.
    A POPLA appeal (ref XXXXXXX) was won with regards to the same parking spot with a different vehicle of mine against UKPC, however I donít have any legal experience and by the time I had discovered the ability to appeal through POPLA it was already too late for the current parking charge notices related to this case to go through the POPLA appeal process

    11.
    The only potential loss that could have been incurred during my tenancy would be the value of the permit itself, however, the only valid claimant if any would be the landowner, due to this I have settled this with the estate agents managing my tenancy and have paid for a replacement permit

    12.
    The Court is invited to dismiss the Claim, and to allow such Defendantís costs as are permissible under Civil Procedure Rule 27.14.

    I believe that the facts stated in this Witness Statement are true.
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 16th Sep 17, 12:55 AM
    • 51,473 Posts
    • 65,061 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    10. A POPLA appeal (ref XXXXXXX) was won
    Include that decision in evidence too. If you've lost it, email POPLA and ask for a copy, as you need it and time is of the essence because the parking firm are suing you.

    Sort your evidence and number each piece, and refer to that number, where you talk about that piece of evidence in the WS.

    In your case transcripts, have you got Jopson v Homeguard, and PACE v Noor? Were those in your original defence?
    PRIVATE PCN? DON'T PAY BUT DO NOT IGNORE IT TWO Clicks needed for advice:
    Top of the page: Home>>Forums>Household & Travel>Motoring>Parking Tickets, Fines & Parking - read the 'NEWBIES' FAQS thread!
    Advice to ignore is WRONG, unless in Scotland/NI.

    • Jobe12
    • By Jobe12 16th Sep 17, 10:12 AM
    • 10 Posts
    • 4 Thanks
    Jobe12
    I've now sent off the WS and the evidence to both SCS and the courts as the 14 day deadline has now passed.

    I didn't include a copy of the POPLA appeal.

    I did include transcripts of both of those cases and they were both referred to in my defence.

    Is there anything else I need to do to better prepare myself for the hearing?

    I assume I can't take the POPLA appeal to the courts now as I didn't include this with my WS
    • Jobe12
    • By Jobe12 24th Sep 17, 1:02 AM
    • 10 Posts
    • 4 Thanks
    Jobe12
    Hi,

    The court date is now less than a week away.

    Is there any final bits of advice that could help me?

    I've attached extracts of the contract included by SCS in their witness statement that UKPC has with the managing agents.

    imgur.com/gallery/dGDIe

    I've removed any personal information.

    The contact is signed in 2014 and has an initial period of 12 months, does that mean it has expired? I can send the entire contract if that will help.

    Also the sign allocation approval form included hasn't been signed by the managing agents, does that help at all?

    Apart from that their witness statement consists of:

    100 pages of pictures of the car and the signs

    The contract between the managing agents & ukpc

    A few pages outlining their points -

    They mention the beavis case as justification of the costs.

    They claim that contrary to my defence they are not predatory but providing a service in protecting the residents from the public abusing their parking.

    They claim the signage was sufficient and when I parked on the side I gave rise to a contractual relationship.

    I've read loads of recent cases and forums but I'm worried about losing as they added on an extra £650 as costs and I really can't afford £2000.

    Thanks again for your continued support.
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 24th Sep 17, 1:36 AM
    • 51,473 Posts
    • 65,061 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    I assume I can't take the POPLA appeal to the courts now as I didn't include this with my WS
    Take it in your bundle anyway, in triplicate, you never know if the Judge might want to see it/allow it, especially as its a document/decision already in the possession of the claimant, after all.

    The contact is signed in 2014 and has an initial period of 12 months, does that mean it has expired?

    Also the sign allocation approval form included hasn't been signed by the managing agents, does that help at all?
    Yes and yes - and the 'signage allocation' isn't even signed by UKPC nor dated, and comprises some scribbles and highlighter on a rudimentary map of an unidentified location. Completely useless, you can argue, in terms of having any evidential weight as to the likelihood of which signs might have been in place (or not) or obscured by trees, years later than the purported contract.

    And in any case, signs offering parking cannot create a contract with a resident who already enjoys that right, because UKPC offer nothing of value.

    And even the purported contract is 'signed' on an unrelated third page, where page 2 could have been replaced/altered, inserted later. The rep should be asked to supply the original from his bundle to show it is a true, single document, IMHO, because the signatures are in complete isolation.

    Is it even signed by the landowner? Managing agents are not the landowner, of course.

    Prepare a skeleton argument that deals with all these issues in bullet points, so you can go through each point you want to raise, one by one even if feeling nervous (using your skeleton like a crib sheet).

    Examples of skeleton arguments are in the NEWBIES thread. As these are documents that are intended to assist the court process, you should file a copy 2 or 3 days before the hearing, along with your Costs Schedule, in case you win. And copy the other side, always, by email, and print proof that you did (and print proof that you sent them a copy of your Witness Statement and evidence too, in case the rep pretends he/she hasn't got it an blames you - yes, it happens).

    Have all of that in your bundle.

    Example of a Costs Schedule is also in post #2 of the NEWBIES thread.

    As for their costs:

    I'm worried about losing as they added on an extra £650 as costs
    That's wholly unreasonable and even if you find you haven't got a sympathetic Judge, you MUST question the added costs.

    This also goes into your skeleton! Make it clear to the Judge that the intention of Parliament (in the POFA 2012) is that the sum deemed recoverable for a private parking charge is the sum on a Notice to Keeper only, not added costs which is double recovery and certainly not 'damages' arising because there are none arising within this business model.

    You should point to the Beavis case to support your argument against costs, and say that ParkingEye only sought the £85 on the sign, no more, and the Supreme Court remarked and were satisfied that the charge was inflated to include profit and it has been shown - and the Claimant is put to strict proof to the contrary - that an automated parking charge process involving a few template letters, costs up to £15 per ticket, which when claimed at £100 a ticket, already includes a huge percentage for profit, with no loss/damages credibly arising whatsoever.

    Also the sum on the sign is the only 'contractual sum' possibly recoverable - if the court believes the signs were even contractually enforceable against a resident with primacy of contract - which you don't...blah blah...brief bullet point about signs having the £100 in small print (even better if a sign says £90, not £100, which they sometimes do with UKPC!).

    Your main point though MUST be your rental Agreement which you have filed as evidence of primacy of contract/right to use the allocated bay unfettered and unharassed? This point is key:

    1. The claim relates to a number of parking tickets issued while the vehicle was parked at the spot allocated to my apartment during the duration of my tenancy

    2. At no point during my tenancy was I made aware of the charge and as can be seen in my tenancy agreement, I was never obliged to display any sort of permit to allow me to park at the property.
    The claim is with regards to multiple tickets (well over 10) that were issued whilst the driver's vehicle was parked in a parking spot outside of the apartment he was renting. The parking spot was allocated to the driver's apartment (each apartment had one allocated spot and were numbered clearly.) UKPC are claiming that since no permit was displayed, the driver is liable for charges totaling at well over £1000.
    UKPC not predatory? LOL:

    http://metro.co.uk/2016/06/21/parking-warden-hides-behind-bins-to-catch-unsuspecting-motorists-5958753/

    http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showtopic=63597

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/11858473/Parking-firm-UKPC-admits-faking-tickets-to-fine-drivers.html
    Last edited by Coupon-mad; 24-09-2017 at 1:40 AM.
    PRIVATE PCN? DON'T PAY BUT DO NOT IGNORE IT TWO Clicks needed for advice:
    Top of the page: Home>>Forums>Household & Travel>Motoring>Parking Tickets, Fines & Parking - read the 'NEWBIES' FAQS thread!
    Advice to ignore is WRONG, unless in Scotland/NI.

    • The Deep
    • By The Deep 24th Sep 17, 9:22 AM
    • 7,377 Posts
    • 6,421 Thanks
    The Deep
    Has the world gone mad? If I try to overcharge a tenant for a light bulb I can get myself jn trouble.

    A company known for acting fraudulently tries to charge a tenant £2,000 for parking in their allotted space and everyone takes them seriously.

    He wins the case after spending hours researching the law and writing countless defences, and what does he get for his efforts, a measly few quid, not enough for a couple of theatre tickets.

    Why do judges put up with this scam? Why do leaseholders and tenants not go for the jugular? Roger Davey did.
    Last edited by The Deep; 24-09-2017 at 9:28 AM.
    You never know how far you can go until you go too far.
    • Umkomaas
    • By Umkomaas 24th Sep 17, 10:04 AM
    • 15,432 Posts
    • 24,135 Thanks
    Umkomaas
    Roger Davey did.
    As did Nicholas Bowen.

    https://www.theguardian.com/money/2017/aug/26/parking-eye-takes-on-top-barrister-85-fine

    Both received punitive damages! Difference between them and Joe Public - both are QCs.

    Like shelling the proverbial - and in front of judges likely to be junior to them. Chalk and cheese peas I think.
    We cannot provide you with a silver bullet to get you out of this. You have to be in for the long run, and need to involve yourself in research and work for you to get rid of this. It is not simple. We will help, but can't do it for you.

    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.
    • beamerguy
    • By beamerguy 24th Sep 17, 11:00 AM
    • 6,333 Posts
    • 8,144 Thanks
    beamerguy
    It all comes under the title of RIP OF BRITAIN

    Sajid Javid and the Uber problem.

    Now I don't use taxis so cannot comment but as Sajid Javid
    is "Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government",
    why does he not have the balls to remove ATA status for the
    great GLADSTONES/IPC/IAS SCAM ???


    Probably if Uber were scamming people, they would keep
    their licence
    RBS - MNBA - CAPITAL ONE - LLOYDS

    DISGUSTING BEHAVIOUR
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

112Posts Today

2,206Users online

Martin's Twitter