Parking ticket in residential space

Coupon-mad

You are clutching at straws because UKPC will produce copies of each PCN and Notice to Keeper, later on.

However, their photo evidence *can* be suspect, for example if on one occasion, the staff-clueless-idiot issuing the ticket didn't take good photos, what's to stop an unscrupulous firm trying to claim that one too, and re-using a photo taken on another day? That's the sort of thing to look for in any photo evidence. Not that they've concocted PCNs from nowhere but that they *may* have created better 'evidence' by re-using a photo from one of the other PCNs (same shadows/sun/cars in the background) and changed the date on it.

Oxy333

They've asked for a copy of my tenancy agreement...

Is providing this, or something else which confirms me as a resident, which they will then (should be) able to check that I am allocated the parking space in question, worthwhile?

My only hope is that once they see that and can confirm that the space is 'mine' - they will drop the charges or make a much more favourable proposition to me? As it stands, I guess they do not have any knowledge that I am an actual resident, so is proving this to them a good idea?

Thanks

Coupon-mad

You are giving them FAR too much respect! It's not that they don't know - for goodness' sake they have your address, they KNOW you are a resident! They won't drop it, nor reduce it.

They want to see your evidence in advance. Now you could play ball and supply your tenancy agreement - if it assists YOUR case - but do not say who parked the car each time. For your part, you want some evidence too! I would send a SAR (to UKPC directly) for all the data they hold on you and your vehicle:

https://bmpa.zendesk.com/hc/en-us/articles/206890469-Subject-Access-Requests

Post a copy of your SAR letter with a £10 cheque - and email a copy as well, so they can't lose it:

appealmoreinfo@ukparkingcontrol.com

Each ticket is now £150 and there are several, so as you can imagine, I am worried about the prospect of court.

I'm more worried about you thinking you have to pay £150 a pop or get it reduced, as if rushing to sort it now is your 'only hope', when in fact a court hearing is likely to be the best place to air this and point out that each ticket is NOT £150, and that there was no contract, this is a matter of trespass if anything, like this case:

http://parking-prankster.blogspot.co.uk/2016/05/bargepole-spanks-ukpc-in-court-no.html

No contract formed.

Oxy333

___
Is it expecting too much of them to be this reasonable? Given their history, it seems like it is, but thought it might be worth a go?

Coupon-mad

Worth a go if you use the contact to ask for a SAR, show you mean business!

They will not cancel or reduce the 'demand'. They want you to blink first.

Oxy333

In the parking prankster post I saw that you posted, I read the following quote which relates to the 'trespass' argument:

"The judge called the parties back in at 2:15, and she gave Judgment. She said that the evidence of the relationship between the landowner, Swan Housing, and UKPC was inconclusive; however that didn’t matter because the signage displayed clearly only made an offer of parking to permit holders, and therefore only permit holders could be bound by the contractual terms conveyed. The circumstances of this were different from Beavis, and therefore that ruling did not assist the claimant in this case."

However, as I am a resident and they know that I have a permit, could this not dismiss the argument that I am not a permit holder and therefore no contract exists?

Coupon-mad

However, as I am a resident and they know that I have a permit, could this not dismiss the argument that I am not a permit holder and therefore no contract exists?

You make a very good point for not sending them the tenancy agreement and just going for a SAR!

Oxy333

In terms of defence points, I had a couple of other thoughts which I cannot see mentioned in other similar defences on here and was wondering if they are at all valid to include:

The sign is a standard 'No Unauthorised Parking' - As I am a resident and the property I rent is allocated a parking space, would it not mean I am authorised and no breaching the primary statement on the sign?

Which follows to my second point - is it not possible for there to be primary and secondary terms of a contract (on the basis that one even exists).... For example, the primary term is that you are authorised (i.e. a resident or permit holder), while the secondary term is that you display the permit (purely for the convenience of the parking attendant to show that you are in fact authorised). Therefore breaking a secondary term is not deserving of a £100 fine, whereas it could be argued that breaking the primary term is worthy of the fine?

Obviously it would just be one part of a much bigger defence and argument, but effectively I'm just being punished for being a little careless/forgetful.. not for actually parking without authorisation as such. Thoughts please?

Coupon-mad

The sign is a standard 'No Unauthorised Parking' - As I am a resident and the property I rent is allocated a parking space, would it not mean I am authorised and no breaching the primary statement on the sign?

Yes that seems a reasonable argument, especially if the paperwork which gave you the permit did NOT create a clear obligation to display or create a clear contract to pay a stated £ amount, in the paperwork or email itself, like here:

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/5477541

That poster just showed us the letter his permit came with. Very useful evidence. Take a look.

Which follows to my second point - is it not possible for there to be primary and secondary terms of a contract (on the basis that one even exists).... For example, the primary term is that you are authorised (i.e. a resident or permit holder), while the secondary term is that you display the permit (purely for the convenience of the parking attendant to show that you are in fact authorised). Therefore breaking a secondary term is not deserving of a £100 fine, whereas it could be argued that breaking the primary term is worthy of the fine?

Depends on what the permit email or paperwork said, were you authorised without caveat or subject to an agreement clearer than the one the poster above showed us today?

Oxy333

Thanks!

There was no permit email or paperwork. Just a UKPC permit which I was given by the letting agent when I began renting the property.

The permit itself does say on it that it must be displayed or a PCN will be issued...No mention of the amount of any charges on it though.