PPC taking small claim court action

stckitupem

need any information ref PPC's when small claims court action is being taken:
Please can anyone give me up to date info re PPC's and small claim court action via (MCOL) ... I have a relative who has received a genuine small claim letter ,, this is going to be defended in court... the defence has been filed online already- what we need now is info on what costs included in the 'pre estimate of losses' can actually be claimed ? for instance, they have included costs for :
PCN Issue – Camera equipment, installation and maintenance.
PCN Process. Handling of ANPR camera images/ process
CTO Indirect overheads

They have also included costs for appeals (1st & 2nd) - NO APPEALS WERE LAUNCHED SO HOW CAN THEY CHARGE FOR THEM?

They have also included 'Debt recovery process' - up to now NO debt recovery has been used

Any info would be greatly appreciated

Guys_Dad

You have read https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/4754020 ?

Please also read the Parking Prankster's blogspot and ouR POPLA DECISIONS thread in the stickies - last 4 pages. This tells you what POPLA are saying.

What PPC is involved - PE, for example, are trying a new tack trying to justify their GPEOL.

I have to say that courts do vary on how they view the right and amoiunt of PPC charges. Search POPLA Decisions stick for "Judge Jenkins" for a good verdict. But there are others who do award the amount claimed and costs.

The argument in court is this.

You are a PPC. You supply parking management, allegedly. In order to do that, you have certain fixed costs that must be incurred to supply your service to your client.

How you recover these fixed costs is a commercial matter between you and your client and is not influenced by whether or not I parked my car in alleged contravention of your conditions.

I accept that a small sum for accessing the DVLA, plus stationery and postage may be due to my stay, but this is nowhere near your extortionate charges.

Does your company make a profit? Is any of that profit due to parking charges imposed upon motorists? If so, then an element of the charge must include a profit element. Where is that in your estimate of costs breakdown?

In addition, I want to see a copy of the contract that allows you to pursue me to the courts for these charges. Refer to Parking Eye -v- Somerfield stores 2011 where their contract limited the action that the PPC could take against motorists and their breach that brought about the court case. (This is to demonstrate that contracts vary in the authority allowed to PPCs)

Also is their contract with the landowner or a lessee? IF a lessee, does the lessee have the landowner's permission in their contract to engage a PPC.

Further, when planning permission was given to build a car park, what were the conditions re time allowed for free parking? If not current, was a further consent applied for and given (Check these points out yourself in advance too. Even if unfavourable result, you can always ask the questions as their brief probably won't have the answers)

Hope this may help as a STARTER.

4consumerrights

I accept that a small sum for accessing the DVLA, plus stationery and postage may be due to my stay, but this is nowhere near your extortionate charges.

And as stationery and postage are tax deductible business expenses and also possibly the DVLA charge as part of their ATA/BPA membership can also be reclaimed as business related running costs they also do not form part of a genuine pre-estimate of loss for the alleged breach anyhow.

Coupon-mad

stckitupem wrote: »

need any information ref PPC's when small claims court action is being taken:
Please can anyone give me up to date info re PPC's and small claim court action via (MCOL) ... I have a relative who has received a genuine small claim letter ,, this is going to be defended in court... the defence has been filed online already- what we need now is info on what costs included in the 'pre estimate of losses' can actually be claimed ? for instance, they have included costs for :
PCN Issue – Camera equipment, installation and maintenance.
PCN Process. Handling of ANPR camera images/ process
CTO Indirect overheads

They have also included costs for appeals (1st & 2nd) - NO APPEALS WERE LAUNCHED SO HOW CAN THEY CHARGE FOR THEM?

They have also included 'Debt recovery process' - up to now NO debt recovery has been used

Any info would be greatly appreciated

This will be ParkingEye, yes?

Can't say more than to show you the case like yours I posted some advice on the other day, as did the other regulars here:

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/4844795

and some from last month:

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/4811903

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/4824907

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/4820962

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/4816958

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/4814557

And as well as getting in touch with the Parking Prankster for his evidence about witness statements, as you will learn about in those other similar cases, you should read loads more advice on PE court case threads on pepipoo:

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

They have loads more than here and tons of advice and example defences and wins against Parking Eye to read about. I post as SchoolRunMum over there. The more you read the more you will realise there's more to a defence and rebutting their entire case, than just saying there was no loss. You will need to summarise a skeleton defence for the judge, in good time (even though you've already added a basic defence on MCOL). So you must include all the latest issues because we are turning a corner with these when certain discrepancies are pointed out.

Guys_Dad

4consumerrights wrote: »

And as stationery and postage are tax deductible business expenses and also possibly the DVLA charge as part of their ATA/BPA membership can also be reclaimed as business related running costs they also do not form part of a genuine pre-estimate of loss for the alleged breach anyhow.

They may be tax deductible but that would only get them the tax back, not the cost. I was just trying to identify any additional costs that were specifically attributable to the parking event.

Does no harm to play fair!

spacey2012

Request a full set of pre tax and post tax verified accounts as disclosure.
If they suffer these costs each event, I am quite sure they will be able justify them correctly and they will all be listed, every unpaid ticket will be listed as an actual loss for the exact amount they claim.

they want to play silly bergers,the county court is the perfect place, you can quite easily request full disclosure of any documents of accounts they claim to be used to support the case.
Also if they include "witness statements" request the attendance of signatories to bear testament under questioning.

See how long the case lasts when they refuse.

Guys_Dad

spacey2012 wrote: »

Request a full set of pre tax and post tax verified accounts as disclosure.
If they suffer these costs each event, I am quite sure they will be able justify them correctly and they will all be listed, every unpaid ticket will be listed as an actual loss for the exact amount they claim.

And if you get an unhelpful judge and you are unfortunate enough to lose and the PPC claims costs, will that seem like good advice then?

Easy from an armchair and it's not your money.

hoohoo

From the pre-estimate of loss stuff this doesn't sound like PE, but more like VCS, Excel or perhaps even ANPR.

Might be worth posting over on pepipoo.
http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showforum=60

There are more people who help with court cases there.

Parking prankster usually specialises in ParkingEye cases, but it might be worth emailing on prankster@parking-prankster.com to see if he has any smoking guns in his evidence packs

Buzby

Guys_Dad wrote: »

They may be tax deductible but that would only get them the tax back, not the cost. I was just trying to identify any additional costs that were specifically attributable to the parking event.

Does no harm to play fair!

For clarification - there is no tax 'to get back' this isn't VAT - the deduction is in full and 100% the expression if being TD relates to the cost being wholly offsettable against profits (if any) and they recover the full cost for this from the taxman - but only if they are profitable.

bargepole

spacey2012 wrote: »

... the county court is the perfect place, you can quite easily request full disclosure of any documents of accounts they claim to be used to support the case.
Also if they include "witness statements" request the attendance of signatories to bear testament under questioning.

See how long the case lasts when they refuse.

Sorry, but this advice is completely wrong. A Judge in a small claims case is very unlikely to order disclosure of documents other than those submitted with the particulars of claim.

And even less likely to order a witness to attend in person. The defendant can make a formal application on form N21 for a Witness Summons, which carries a fee of £40, and the risk of having witness costs added to the Judgment if he loses.

Please don't give this sort of advice from an armchair unless you are prepared to go into court and help the defendant as their representative.