Cetral Ticketing Ltd Edinburgh

White_Jaguar

Son lives in flat in Central Edinburgh and the factor has invited Central Ticketing to oversee the parking in the complex. Son has checked his deeds and he is joint landowner in common with other owners in the complex. He has been allocated a space in the undergound car park, entered via a zapper. He has informed the factor that he does not agree to Central Ticketing Ltd 'policing' the parking in the complex and refuses to sign up to any agreement which means that he is not being issued with a permit. He has now been threatened that the scheme will operate from May and unless a permit is displayed on his car he will be fined accordingly even when parked in the underground car park. No visitor spaces have been allocated therefore he will be unable to receive visits from friends and family. He argues that any person receiving a 'fine' and who is then subsequently harassed by CT Ltd, could accuse him, as the landowner of harassment. He plans to ignore all 'fines' for parking on his own land and all letters to the Factor pleading his case have been ignored and only threats made. He in turn has issued fair warning that he does not want anyone interfering with his car whilst parked on his property and that CT Ltd do not have his permission, as joint landowner, to act on his behalf. The factor is insisting that 'most', therefore not all, owners wish this company to operate on their behalf. I feel they are not aware of the legality of this, or of the tactics of, CT Ltd. Comments please?

peter_the_piper

Find out from the factor just why a secure car park needs policing, except for any rake off they receive of course.

Coblcris

Your son has a good understanding.

Has the factors actually stated in writing that people will be 'fined' ?

They cannot make their plan stand unless your son has signed over explicit rights to the factors in some manner.

Your son has 'the right to peaceful enjoyment' of his parking space, he should remind them of that via assertive testimony. And remind them of privity.
I would serve them a Notice along with a costs schedule.

I would also get as many other residents as possible to take similar assertive action
.

White_Jaguar

Tried to inform other residents but he has been threatened by the factor with police action if he continues to 'harass' other residents. Factor refuses to answer any questions put to them regarding their actions in employing Central Ticketing Ltd and will only state that 'many' of the residents, not all of whom I would imagine are actually the property owners, have signed up to the permit scheme, without, I would imagine, realising the implications. They have been told of the scale of 'fees' charged and posters have been put up around the complex by CT. It is very hard to put your case when all you get are threats of police action. He did at first feel intimidated but he is now very angry and continues to refuse to allow Central Ticketing Ltd permission to 'police' the parking on his land. He plans to ignore all correspondence he receives from CT and has informed anyone visiting him, and therefore on his land with his permission, to ignore all 'invoices' issued by CT. He has written to his MSP and received his support to a certain degree but in the scheme of things it's probably a very small issue to him, although we know that he has been involved in a similar case in the same area. Now considering taking Legal Advice. HELP PLEASE!

peter_the_piper

What Police Action would this be I wonder. As far as I understand its not yet been made illegal to talk to other residents. Being cynical I would think that the more the factor tries to scare him off the more I would believe he/she had something personal to lose. I would think a post on pepipoo.com may elicit other responses.

Coblcris

The 'many' has no effect at all on your son's right to peaceful enjoyment.

It is not an election.

White_Jaguar

Try telling that to the Factor. Have to accept that it is going to happen and will have to deal with the consequences it appears. Factor will not communicate other than to say CT Ltd will be policing the parking from May and if you are not displaying a permit you will be 'fined' even if parked in underground car park, which is not available to anyone not in possession of a zapper, or in the grounds surrounding the complex over which son has joint ownership. Permit will display name of owner/driver, which is also unacceptable and has security implications. If your car is parked away from the flat you are probably not at home.
Daughter had similar proposal put to the residents in her complex, also in Edinburgh, but as there was not 100% support, plans were scrapped.

peter_the_piper

It sounds as if there is more to this than meets the eye. I'm sure there is no financial reason for the factors intransigence of course.

Coblcris

I ask again, do they actually use the word 'fine' ?

Son should just ignore any invoices placed on his car apart from keeping them safe and using them to serve injunctions on the factors and the parking company.

White_Jaguar

The signs erected in the complex by CT Ltd state charges that will be made if any vehicle not displaying a permit is parked within the complex, whether in the allocated car parks or underground car park which can only be entered by using electronic zapper

White_Jaguar

On what grounds do you serve injunctions on Factor and CT Ltd?