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
    • Redvers Buller
    • By Redvers Buller 14th Apr 17, 1:13 PM
    • 12Posts
    • 3Thanks
    Redvers Buller
    PCM UK (Great West Quarter, Brentford)
    • #1
    • 14th Apr 17, 1:13 PM
    PCM UK (Great West Quarter, Brentford) 14th Apr 17 at 1:13 PM
    Good afternoon all
    Well I've just received a LBC from Gladstone's so wanted to confirm that I have a winnable case before proceeding further (otherwise I'll just very reluctantly pay up)!
    I received the original PCN from PCM UK back in November 2016 for parking within a "restricted area" in Great West Quarter, Brentford. The circumstances around this are as follows:
    On the evening of Sunday 20/11/2016 at approx. 5pm I stopped in the Great West Quarter for the purpose of visiting the Sainsbury's Local situated there. However (being passing trade and unfamiliar with the area) I was unaware that "parking restrictions" were in place - there are no signs stating so at the entrance to the area so it just looks like any other side road. It was busy and none of the indicated parking bays were available so I decided to park up on a paved area (no raised kerb) as I was only going to be a couple of minutes. I unfortunately failed to see any of the PCM signs on display (being after dark and none of the signs were lit) and there were no other signs stating "No Parking" or similar sentiment.
    I couldn't have been more than 5 minutes (10 at a stretch) in Sainsbury's but a few days later received the PCN. The "parking attendant" took a photo of my car at 17:11 (and also acknowledged later on in further evidence provided that I had gone into the shop). The Sainsbury's receipt (still in my possession) shows I bought two items and paid at 15:12:37.
    So as far as I am concerned my main argument against paying the PCN is with the poor signage. However I don't know what responsibility the "attendant" has to warn me of the parking restrictions?
    A couple of other things:
    I have a picture off Google Maps that shows removable bollards in place which if they had been fitted would have prevented me parking where I did: if no parking is allowed why remove them? Would this fact help my case?
    With respect to the "recovery of losses" being the reason for a "parking charge" being raised in the first place: the particular area in which I parked appears to be designated for the Childcare/Nursery that operates in one of the adjoining buildings. I would think it reasonable to assume that the Nursery wasn't operating that Sunday evening and therefore no loss of income could have derived from my parking where I did. No parking charges (via meters) are levied either.
    I should point out that I have been through the IAS appeals process (and of course "lost") but it did give me an insight into the operation going on and additional information that wasn't originally provided.
    I haven't disclosed that i was the driver of the vehicle, only that I am the registered keeper (should I do so know or only when the inevitable court papers appear)
    In the meantime I was going to respond to the LBC using the following letter (borrowed from another) as a holding tactic (and to satisfy Practise Direction):


    Gladstones Solicitors
    The Terrace
    High Legh Park Golf Club
    Warrington Road
    Knutsford
    Cheshire
    WA16 6AA

    In relation to Reference: xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

    Dear Sirs
    Thank you for your letter.
    I have received your Letter Before Claim dated 7th April 2017.

    First, I deny any debt to PCM UK Limited and any court proceedings will be vigorously defended.
    Secondly, there is no reference to your letter being fully compliant with the Practice Direction it is in fact woefully defective and appears to be a deliberate attempt to mislead the recipient.

    You cannot presume that I possess all the documents referred to in your letter.
    Please therefore provide a Letter Before Claim which complies with the requirements of the Practice Direction on Pre-action Conduct and Protocols.
    Areas which you are not compliant are listed below:
    2.1
    The claimant’s letter should give concise details about the matter. This should enable the defendant to understand and investigate the issues without needing to request further information. The letter should include –
    (2) the basis on which the claim is made (i.e. why the claimant says the defendant is liable);
    (3) a clear summary of the facts on which the claim is based;
    (5) if financial loss is claimed, an explanation of how the amount has been calculated; and
    2.2
    The letter should also –
    (1) list the essential documents on which the claimant intends to rely;
    (2) set out the form of ADR (if any) that the claimant considers the most suitable and invite the defendant to agree to this;

    Please confirm that your client's contract with the land-holder includes specific authority to take legal action and that this will be produced for the court.
    I also require an explanation for the additional £60 charge including confirmation that it has already been invoiced and paid.
    When I receive the documents and your explanations I will be in a position to make a more detailed response
    It would be unreasonable to proceed with litigation before you have clarified your client's cause of action.
    I look forward to your response

    Yours Faithfully


    Apologies for the long-winded nature of the post!!
    NB I would attach images of the various documents I have received but don't know how to!!
Page 2
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 22nd May 17, 9:20 PM
    • 51,635 Posts
    • 65,295 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    1) Now that I have this copy of the contract I would assume that Paragraph 11 of my Statement is no longer valid as it shows permission has been given by the Managing Agent for claims to be made?
    No because they are not the landowner, are not in possession of the private land and are mere agents themselves, like the parking firm.

    You can say that no chain of authority has been shown to prove that this operator has the authority from the landowner, and that you believe they only have (at best) a very limited contract with the Managing Agent, which is a basic, possibly income-sharing commercial agreement which does not provide for any action outwith the BPA Code of Practice.

    This limited arrangement fails to justify the 'charge' in the persuasive way that ParkingEye Ltd were able to show the Supreme Court, that they had an rare 'legitimate interest' in pursuing a sum far higher than damages, in the Beavis case. In that case it was held that other (less complex) private parking charge cases were likely to continue to engage the penalty rule and a disproportionate and unjustified high charge, would still be unrecoverable. It was held in effect, that what was required in every case, would be prominent signs creating a clear/agreed contract, and a level of commercial justification which did not disregard any rights or interests enjoyed by a driver, under any other rule or statute.

    2) Should I make an alternate statement to the effect that PCM UK are in breach of their contract with the Managing Agent because they are not members of the BPA/AOS (I have checked.....) and therefore have no legal right to enforce parking regulations?
    Yes, why not?

    3) Could PCM UK counter-argue that they abide by the IPC Code of Practise?
    Yes, they will. But your point is still valid to argue.

    4) Should I review/compare the two Code of Practise's for differences to confirm that conforming to the IPC version does not automatically imply conformation to the AOS one? Not being able to access POPLA is possibly the most obvious difference....
    Yes, I would do that. And the grace periods provision is set out in more detail by the BPA.
    Last edited by Coupon-mad; 22-05-2017 at 9:22 PM.
    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.

    • Redvers Buller
    • By Redvers Buller 22nd May 17, 10:12 PM
    • 12 Posts
    • 3 Thanks
    Redvers Buller
    I've updated Paragraph 11 as follows:

    11) It is denied that the Claimant has authority to bring this claim. The proper Claimant (if any debt exists, which is denied) would be the landowner. Evidence has been obtained showing that (at best) only a very limited, possibly income-sharing commercial, contract exists between PCM UK and the location’s Managing Agent. There is no evidence that a chain of authority exists, showing that the PCM UK has the authority of the landowner.
    Furthermore, the contract in question clearly states that PCM UK are to operate the scheme in accordance with the BPA (British Parking Association) and AOS (Approved Operator Scheme) Code of Practice. However PCM UK are not members of these organisations, thus in breach of their contract with the Managing Agent and consequently not legally entitled to enforce parking restrictions on the site.
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 22nd May 17, 11:14 PM
    • 51,635 Posts
    • 65,295 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    Yes that is definitely worth including.

    Your defence seems to cover the bases for this stage, to give you the foundations upon which to build your WS and evidence before the hearing.
    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.

    • amrit_mufc
    • By amrit_mufc 12th Jun 17, 8:13 PM
    • 1 Posts
    • 0 Thanks
    amrit_mufc
    Same location
    Hi. I too have a parking ticket in the same location from the same agency (PCM).

    I was wondering if you have any update regarding this case. If there is insufficient evidence to suggest that PCM have interest in the land or with the land owner could I argue it on that bases? I do not have and excuse I simply parked in the wrong bay (for hotel use) when I was supposed to park in the bay for the gym users.

    Any reply is appreciated. Thanks
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 12th Jun 17, 11:20 PM
    • 51,635 Posts
    • 65,295 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    You need your own new thread and if you are only at PCN stage, you just appeal as per the 'NEWBIES PLEASE READ THESE FAQS FIRST' thread.
    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.

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

503Posts Today

3,024Users online

Martin's Twitter