UKPC/Small Claims Solicitor - Letter Before Claim - £1000 at stake

Hot_Bring

I'm confused by this sentence :

"I and family members have each got a Letter Before Claim and between us we are being chased for about £1000."

They can only take the driver OR the registered keeper to court. Have they really issued one single case covering ALL alleged tickets and named numerous people ? I wasn't aware that was possible.

request

Thanks nobbysn*ts for your help. But maybe I didn't make it clear - it is not a neighbouring property, it is the land surrounding our own block of flats! According to planning permission, no one but our residents can park there.

(I haven't decided what to write yet, just seems easiest this way.)

In reply to Hot Bring: we have got 2 cars and are each registered keeper of one. So 2 separate letters before claim.

nobbysn*ts

Do you have a flat which is specifically sold/rented without any parking space? And it's a condition of your lease that you don't park? If not, what is the actual set up, and why are you getting tickets for parking in your own car park?

request

nobbysn*ts wrote: »

Do you have a flat which is specifically sold/rented without any parking space? And it's a condition of your lease that you don't park? If not, what is the actual set up, and why are you getting tickets for parking in your own car park?

The flat comes without a parking space, and lease says we can't park on the land surrounding. Residents parked there for many years. A couple of years ago the freeholders decided to start charging for parking. We made a fuss. They put in posts, with planning permission only for use if residents.

nobbysn*ts

request wrote: »

The flat comes without a parking space, and lease says we can't park on the land surrounding. Residents parked there for many years. A couple of years ago the freeholders decided to start charging for parking. We made a fuss. They put in posts, with planning permission only for use if residents.

Ok, I have seen flats with this in the t&c's usually in a city centre. Designed to keep urban traffic down. You said none of the residents pay, so I assume you mean it was free to those who's lease allowed a car, then they tried to charge them. But at no time they offered you, or others with your type of lease, an option to park, free or paid? Where do you park now?

request

nobbysn*ts wrote: »

Ok, I have seen flats with this in the t&c's usually in a city centre. Designed to keep urban traffic down. You said none of the residents pay, so I assume you mean it was free to those who's lease allowed a car, then they tried to charge them. But at no time they offered you, or others with your type of lease, an option to park, free or paid? Where do you park now?

1. Not in a city centre, in a suburb.
2. Every resident's lease states no parking.
3. Freeholders have offered us the chance to pay them.
4. We park on the street just outside where there is usually parking, just if there isn't we park inside near the flats.

nobbysn*ts

Ok, I think I'm understanding this. The flats come without parking for anyone. You used to park on the freeholders surrounding land, when the lease prohibited this. The freeholder offered to rent you parking spaces on the land, as a separate contract. You didn't pay, but parked on their land. They took action to stop you parking, but continue to offer you the contract to park, at a fee. You park outside normally, but if you can't you still continue to park on the freeholders land. I'm not sure if this is entirely a case for 'no damages', as you seem to have been offered a contract, which you seem to have accepted by your actions, ie, parking, but don't pay the fee for. Maybe others will correct me here.

request

Yes that's all correct. But there was no formal contract from the freeholders, just a very amateur letter saying we would need to pay them for the right to park.

The fee they were charging was a daily fee. So even if I caused them damage by ignoring the contract and denying them of the fee, it is a minimal amount.

nobbysn*ts

request wrote: »

Yes that's all correct. But there was no formal contract from the freeholders, just a very amateur letter saying we would need to pay them for the right to park.

The fee they were charging was a daily fee. So even if I caused them damage by ignoring the contract and denying them of the fee, it is a minimal amount.

That's what I think is different. You had a specific offer to use the land, from the freeholders, which you did, but didn't pay. I'm sure others can advise.

esmerobbo

How old are the flats? Depending on the age it may be in the original planning permission that they have a parking place. This maybe why the leaseholders were refused permission to charge for parking at the later application.
I would be looking at the conditions imposed in both the original and the later planning applications.

Regarding damages or cost to the landowner, it gets a bit more complicated once you have been told to cease parking.