UK CPM PCN received

System

Alder v Moore runs both ways. Its a legal sticking plaster for their poorly drafted contracts as it is asking the court to interpret errors in the Claimants favour.

It is the same as EvL which is asking the court to turn a blind eye to the lack of evidence about the driver.

So can we see the contract / letter of authority they have put up.

Best use a Dropbox.

nosferatu1001

1) Thats discussed on here a lot. They have to prove this encumrance exists, that it was executed correctly, etc. ITs not just a "leases can be varied, we say thats whats happened, therefore its fine" situation!

2) You assert there was no contract as you had a right to park already. Therefore there was never a contract on whci heither side had an obligation. Just a tortious interference by their client...!

3) It is a penalty. Of course it is. There is no commercial justification.

4) Thats just that IF there are adequate signs then you cannot claim not to have seen them. BUt that only follows IF there are good signs. If there arent, then you CAN say you haent seen them. It actually HELPS YOU here, if the signs are poor!

5) They can only claim for non-employd persons turning up. Nothing else. Half a days loss of earnings or lea e capped at £95.

They cannot claim any of those costs as damages. Debt recovery is a nromal cost of their business.

DS90

IamEmanresu wrote: »

So can we see the contract / letter of authority they have put up.

Best use a Dropbox.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/pgtxtue05p6d5fd/Contract%20and%20VCS%20Quote.docx?dl=0

Here is the Authorisation Form (sorry about the poor quality) they included in their evidence bundle. Drayton Garden Village is apparently in West Drayton, 90 miles from Canterbury, where the PCN was actually issued. 'St Dunstons' is a misspelling of 'St Dunstan's', which is an area of Canterbury half a mile away from where the PCN was issued. St Dunstan's is the location given on the PCN and the NTK (and is wrong). 'St Dunstons' doesn't exist.

I think even to an untrained eye this looks like an embarrassing falsification of some contract they have with somebody in West Drayton?


The second page is a portion of their WS regarding VCS v HMRC 2013, which asserts basically that nobody anywhere needs permission to establish a contract. I have searched the forum for this case and found some replies to it, particularly in a recent win by 'StaceyPlindfield' (Defence mitigating circumstances, is the name of the thread), which refer to distinctions that can be made between the cases, i.e., that VCS pertains to VAT. But there must be a more substantial rebuttal to this claim? Surely if they can't prove that they have authority then the moment they set foot on the car park they are trespassing. And the Judge in VCS, in their stock market example, clearly states that the trader will have to acquire the shares to perform the contract.

It just seems insane to me (legally ignorant as I am!) that I could theoretically put up a sign on someone's land without their permission and it act as a binding contract?!

Coupon-mad

I wouldn't pore over the VCS VAT case and the argument that they reckon they can 'make a contract to sell Buckingham Palace if they wanted' too much. A Judge isn't going to linger on such fanciful rubbish and you are right, a company can't just put signs up on someone's land to make a contract with passing drivers. Not without landowner authority.

As you say, if the alleged contract states the wrong location it's worthless, but am I right it alo omits:

- names of signatories
- occupation/job title of signatories
- dates of the signatures
- any start date, and end date, or any details about the alleged contract
- any information about the fundamental facts like what each party will do/can do?
- any hours/days of operation, any exemptions, any right to cancel PCNs

A worthless sheet then. All worth drawing to the attention of the Judge.

DS90

Brilliant, thanks Coupon. While I was waiting for a response I have attacked the VCS quite hard in my skeleton, but it's reassuring that it's another of their dubious defences.

The 'contract' (worthless piece of paper, as you say!) names and signatures, blocked out though. The signatures aren't dated, and no end date is listed for the arrangement. Details are very limited, just 'permit holders only' and 'no parking outside of a marked bay'; very few specific details about limitations and rights granted, certainly nothing at all about hours of operation and rights to cancel PCNs/take legal action.

It looks like drivel to me (and, ultimately, irrelevant, as it doesn't even cover the land on which the PCN was issued!).

System

If you check Companies House you will see there is no company called Ringleys Ltd. If there is no company number that identifies them then go to Companies House Webcheck (http://wck2.companieshouse.gov.uk//wcframe?name=accessCompanyInfo) and enter "Ringleys Ltd". Print out the page that shows there is no registered company of that name.

You might ask the Judge for directions on the issue of the Claimant producing such evidence at court.

Edit: This is such a common trait with UKCPM and UKPC contracts you wonder when the penny is going to drop at the courts.

DS90

IamEmanresu wrote: »

If you check Companies House you will see there is no company called Ringleys Ltd. If there is no company number that identifies them then go to Companies House Webcheck (http://wck2.companieshouse.gov.uk//wcframe?name=accessCompanyInfo) and enter "Ringleys Ltd". Print out the page that shows there is no registered company of that name.

Thanks for the tip IamEmanresu. I actually did check Companies House when I first received their bundle, I found a Ringley Limited (so UKCPM have misspelled the name of the company they're contracting with) and a Drayton Garden Village Estate Management Company Limited (which has as its registered address Ringley Chartered Surveyors, Ringley House), so it appears that it is a legitimate organisation.

https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/07887600
https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/03302438

I Googled Drayton Garden Village and it appears to be a self-contained housing site where I wouldn't be surprised to find a PPC, so it seems legit. 'St Dunstan's', however, is a random street in Canterbury - like a high street - that is predominantly small businesses and street-facing offices. Any parking along there is council-controlled, I think, and is just limited stay (two hours max, or whatever).

'St Dunstons' still doesn't exist!

System

Why not put it in as explained. It is not for you to sort UKCPM's problems.

It would also appear to be a self-completed form as Chartered Surveyors tend to be able to fill in forms accurately.

You challenge it as it points to issues with their evidence in total.

DS90

Great point - will do!

DS90

Urgent!

Gladstones phoned me just now explaining that they don't have time to attend tomorrow's hearing (something like that, I was so outraged that I didn't process what they were saying very well unfortunately). They're notifying the court of withdrawal or something for the hearing to be on a later date. He specifically mentioned a later date that would avoid clashes for us. I essentially cut the conversation short and said I'll phone the court to find out.

Haven't phoned the court yet, thought I'd ask for help on here first. What the hell are they doing?

Edit: In hindsight, perhaps it wasn't Gladstones, I just assumed it was. It could have been somebody from UKCPM?