Link Parking residently PCN

Coupon-mad

Ah OK, so the appellant was person A, the driver. And yet the PPC is pursuing you, person B?

lillianjcharlotte

Exactly. It says on the appeal that I am appealing on behalf of the person in question and even stated that during one of the responses throughout the process.


"The operator reported that...
The appellant was the driver.
The appellant was the keeper.
The operator is seeking keeper liability in accordance with PoFA.."


That was Link Parkings response, advising the appellant is the driver/keeper, who was named at this point. I'm not sure if they would have had access to the appellants details or only my own because I don't know how much they get to see but as I said I mentioned throughout the appeal anyway that I'm appealing on behalf of someone.

Loadsofchildren123

Wait to see if they issue.


They will have the IAS information, so they will have keeper/driver details.


I don't think even Gladstones is stupid enough to issue a claim against you. But you never know. If they do, defend on basis you weren't driver or RK and they know this. Keep it v simple.


When you file the defence, write a letter asking the court to exercise its inherent case management powers to strike out the claim as an abuse of process, or summarily ajudge it as having no prospect of success, given that you have identified the driver and RK and this is absolutely nothing to do with you, save that the driver/RK was visiting you at the time.


Otherwise just ignore it.
If your friend is now pursued, you'll have to help him/her defend with the info you've already provided. You'll be the star witness because you have the parking rights, they were your visitor and you did the online registration. Plus those phone calls you've referred to.


To answer your Q about the lease rights - which will become relevant at the point/if they sue your visitor - you have a letter from the landlord saying they have those rights and have passed them to you. In theory this should be enough. However, some judges can be a bit pro-PPC and so you are better off getting a copy of the lease to show without any doubt that the rights belong to the landlord - it costs about £10 to get a copy of the lease from Land Registry. You don't need to worry about that at this stage, it's not necessary for your defence and will only become relevant if your visitor faces a claim.

Loadsofchildren123

If they do claim, I'd consider adding a trespass counterclaim - they've trespassed on your space. Claim the same as they are claiming from you (probably £150, plus the costs/court fees).


Perhaps write them your own LBC.


Dear Sirs,


Further to your Letter Before Claim dated x and my response dated x, I put you on notice that if your client pursues me any further then I will issue a claim against it for trespass, in respect of which I will seek a permanent injunction and damages in the sum of [£150].


As you are already aware, I am a tenant of [address], pursuant to which I have exclusive rights to use parking space [x]. Those rights were passed to me by my landlord, who is the leasehold owner of, inter alia, the parking space. Your client has no right to interfere with those rights, nor any right to enter upon the parking space for any purpose without my authority. Even if you are authorised by the freeholder to carry out parking management (which is not accepted) then that authority does not extend to the parking space because the freeholder has no rights to interfere with the leaseholder's exclusive rights to use it, which rights have been granted to me.


By entering onto the parking space without my authority on [x date] to stick a PCN onto the windscreen of the car parked on it, your client has committed a trespass.


Please tell your client that it must not enter onto the parking space again, for any reason. It does not have my authority to do so.


If your client chooses to continue to pursue me in respect of the PCN then I will issue a claim in trespass against it.


[normally you must include with a LBC copies of your core documents on which you rely, and this would be your tenancy and that email from your landlord, so you should enclose these and refer to them - so
I enclose the following documents upon which I will rely:
1. xxxx
2. xxxx]


Yours faithfully etc.


This might put them off, if they are not already put off.

lillianjcharlotte

Thank you for that response!


I haven't heard anything since I sent my last Email to Gladstones so playing the waiting game at the moment.
Since then the management company and IPC have confirmed that Link Parking are pursuing me as the driver regardless and given that Gladstones essentially said I was lying about not being the driver on our last conversation I wouldn't be surprised if they pursue this.

beamerguy

lillianjcharlotte wrote: »

Thank you for that response!


I haven't heard anything since I sent my last Email to Gladstones so playing the waiting game at the moment.
Since then the management company and IPC have confirmed that Link Parking are pursuing me as the driver regardless and given that Gladstones essentially said I was lying about not being the driver on our last conversation I wouldn't be surprised if they pursue this.

What right do the IPC to make such a comment, they are an ATA and a very bad ATA at that.
IPC are supposed to be independent but we know they are not,
It's all part of huge scam in operation
POPLA would never make such a statement.

Follow what Loadsofchildren123 has said.

Regardless of the driver or keeper you have rights in your own parking space.

Gladstones lost yet again today, as usual they appear not to have
a clue what they are doing.

Gladstones saying you are lying is plain ignorance.

This is probably going to be another case where we say

Link Parking, you have Gladstoned

You have a trespass case, use it well and put in a counterclaim
as suggested. Then if this wild bunch of solicitors take it further,
and then do their usual and discontinue, your counterclaim
is still live and you can persue them

lillianjcharlotte

beamerguy wrote: »

You have a trespass case, use it well and put in a counterclaim
as suggested. Then if this wild bunch of solicitors take it further,
and then do their usual and discontinue, your counterclaim
is still live and you can persue them

If I do have a trespass case how do you put in a counterclaim? Probably a stupid question I know but I'm completely new to this.. never thought I would ever have to worry about it since it's my own space!

beamerguy

lillianjcharlotte wrote: »

If I do have a trespass case how do you put in a counterclaim? Probably a stupid question I know but I'm completely new to this.. never thought I would ever have to worry about it since it's my own space!

Loadsofchildren123 and coupon-mad are best to advise you

Also, read this, although it's UKPC, same rules apply
http://parking-prankster.blogspot.co.uk/2017/01/ukpc-lose-residential-case-charge-not.html

There was also a case where a PPC trespassed, the defendant
won and got them banned
Someone here will point you to that case

Coupon-mad

You will get good advice about a counter-claim if they try a claim.

lillianjcharlotte

beamerguy wrote: »

Loadsofchildren123 and coupon-mad are best to advise you

Also, read this, although it's UKPC, same rules apply
http://parking-prankster.blogspot.co.uk/2017/01/ukpc-lose-residential-case-charge-not.html

There was also a case where a PPC trespassed, the defendant
won and got them banned
Someone here will point you to that case

Thank you, I'll have a read through of that and get myself up to speed.