Help with what stage and lease wording please!

Brundlecat

Just a quick update that I sent the above letter that C-M so kindly helped me tailor and the PCC came straight back with a standard 'we don't care, it's IAS or debt collectors' response. Obviously.

The management company agent that I Cc'd haven't bothered to come back at all. I also sent a letter some time back recorded delivery to complain to the management company but they have not replied to me either.

I am wondering whether to chase the agent on the request for a named person in court that we asked for in the letter and/or contact the management company again or should I just let it lie now and see what happens next... anyone got a view on this? I've been really hoping for cancellation by the agent so that I can get on with my life and in view of the fact that I am selling the property so really didn't want to have to advise debt collectors and PCC of change of address if it isn't resolved in case of court action but the light of possibility is dimming on this daily to be honest. I can't decide if further contact is in my favor or not at this point or whether letting them all ignore me strengthens a court defense should I need it.

I also haven't had any response or even acknowledgement of receipt for the other two appeals or an NTK for the 4th PCN. I was wondering is there a cut off for response to an appeal or can the PCC make that up as it is their own internal process?! Is this whole part of the process kind of irrelevant and they could still just go straight to an LBC?!

As for the 4th PCN, if I have read correctly the cut off for receipt of an NTK after the offence is between day 29 and 57, is that correct? (it was a window PCN) If so then I believe that this 4th letter is well overdue as the alleged offence was on 2 June which was 92 days ago so I am I right in that don't need to worry about this one?

Thanks as always :-)

Coupon-mad

I would let sleeping dogs lie because you have clearly stated your position.

I'm pleased to note that you are well aware that a house move must be communicated to any potential debt-chasing litigious idiots like a PPC! That's better than getting a default CCJ.

As for the 4th PCN, if I have read correctly the cut off for receipt of an NTK after the offence is between day 29 and 57, is that correct? (it was a window PCN) If so then I believe that this 4th letter is well overdue as the alleged offence was on 2 June which was 92 days ago so I am I right in that don't need to worry about this one?

Yes that is correct.

Keep all paperwork, for 6 years. I doubt they will pick this one for court but if they eventually try, then much of your defence has already been set out in your communications and the 4th one has no possibility of keeper liability unless they pretend a NTK was posted all along.

I would sit tight.

Brundlecat

Thank you as always C-M and to Umkomaas, DoaM, Fruitcake, Ralph-y and The Deep for all of your help too!

Brundlecat

I have one more question!! Because I can't leave anything that makes me angry alone haha! Sorry!

So, today I downloaded my deeds from land registry. Can anyone help me with terminology. Is the registered owner the landowner? It's not my name (obviously) or the name of the management company both of which I know so I assume that it is?

Also, this has been bugging me and was the principle reason for my investigation... when we purchased the flat it was marketed as including a parking space, when our solicitor reviewed the deeds it actual said that 'The lease grants the exclusive right to use the car parking space numbered X in blue on the supplementary plan to the title plan'

We complained as we were under the impression the purchase came with space rather than a right of usage and after after hard some negotiation paid for by the previous owner we had the deeds amended. Looking today I can see that all other flats state this:

04.05.2001 3 XXXX Court (ground (part of) floor flat) 125 years from 1.1.2004
NOTE: The lease grants the exclusive right to use the car parking space numbered X in blue on the supplementary plan to the title plan

Whilst our flat states:

09.09.2008 5 XXXX Court 1 (part of) Floor Flat) and parking space 125 years from 1.1.2004

Anyone know how this might effect being ticketed in my own space?!

System

Looks like an error in the drafting so you should go back to the solicitor to get it confirmed if it was the right to a numbered space or the right to a communal (unnumbered space).

Whatever it is, you have a documented right to park there.

Brundlecat

Thanks IamEmanresu. I don't think it is an error. Each flat has an allocated space (I replaced them with Xs) but for all other flats it says they own the flat plus have a right to use their space whilst ours says we own the flat and the space. This the amendment we insisted in on which is why ours is dated 2008 (year of purchase) and all the others are 2004 (year of build)

I guess I just wondered if that meant that any parking company contract signed in regards to the other spaces that have right of use would not apply to us as we purchased the space outright?

System

It all turns on the ability of the Managing Agents (on behalf of the Freeholder/Head Leaseholder) to vary the conditions on site.

The only people that can give an (almost) absolute rule on that is the LVT - now the First Tier Property Tribunal. If they say yes they can, then you'd be in breach of the site conditions. If no, they you can park unhindered. Suggest that if the PPC wants to take issue with your denial of owing anything is to invite them to go to the FTPT. Add that if they fail to do so within 14 days, then they must remove your personal details from their files as having no reasonable cause to have them.

Have a word with the Leasehold Advisory Service too. (http://www.lease-advice.org/)

The_Deep

Be sure to advise them that, if they persist that, and unless a judge rules against you, you will be seeking financial compensation from them for your time and trouble. You can, if you wish, and are bloody-minded enough, cause them as much trouble as they are causing you.


Scamming is a two edged sword.

Brundlecat

Great, will investigate, thanks!

Brundlecat

Hello, I have received a solicitors letter from CBS, a quick search is telling me it's not a letter before claim and to file and ignore as it is actually the debt collectors UCS masquerading as solicitors. It's the same as the letter posted in May on this thread here (lovingly typed and uploaded before so no need to reproduce again):

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/5454654

From this I am thinking ignore, file and wait to hear from UCS again but want to just double check that this advice remains the same... also to note that for this PCN we entered an appeal direct to the PPC which was outside of the 28 days on the NTK but have not had any acknowledgment or response to it. Just this letter.

EDIT: A further update just in, I have just heard back from the property manager of the land (this is who we pay our ground rent to, I am struggling to find out who actually owns the land as it has changed hands and they don't seem to want to offer this information to me) their response is below:

'I have looked at our database and note that we do not have any contractual relationship with (MANAGING AGENT) at this site because there is a residents management company who are party to the lease. You along with all other leaseholders are members of this company and it is them that have employed (MANAGING AGENT). Can I suggest that you now contact the Directors and ask them to reconsider the parking arrangement?'

So I am beyond confused now. If I am reading this right then as a leaesholder I am actually a member of the same managing company that sanctioned this parking company and is contracting people to fine me?! How is this possible? I certainly haven't agreed to the parking controls... clearly I am not up to scratch on this...

If anyone can help understand please do!

Thanks!