UKPC - SCS Claim form recieved

Gunner84

The beavis case is such a huge document, i am struggling to distil it just to my relevant points. Do you think im safe to just compare the sign and reference "in the case of parkingeye vs beavis the supreme court saw the following evidence" to debate the lack of an offer of contract from ukpc.

Or do you think i need case file extracts? Can i just presume they will know what i am talking about safely?

Gunner84

So, big day tomorrow. The hearing is first thing in the morning. Got some really important questions about the claimants bundle as i go through it.

1. The claimant is citing estate regulations in the master lease as the reason they are able to take amend my rights to permit visitors on a first come first service basis. They claim i do not have an unfettered right to park, even though it states entitlement to a like right. Is this likely to stick for them?

2. They have noted in red at the foot of the master lease document page "This official copy is incomplete without the preceding notes page. What does this mean for us? If anything.

3. They have supplied 3 contracts. All with managing agents. The first one is with the managing agent that is on my lease, but its from 2006, 5 years before i lived there. They refer to a letter also from 2006 to residents from that managing agent, detailing that they will begin ticketing to protect the spaces. It says they will all contain registration plate numbers and be issued every 30 days. This DOES NOT happen. How best do i use this?

4. The only contract they have that is close to the dates of the alleged contraventions is with the propery management. However, there is no contract between that property manager and the landowner in the bundle. Can they assume that this new property managers have taken over? Or does the lack of contract between the property manager and the landowner break the chain of authority?

5. There is a redacted "client commission" section. It appears to indicate the property manager profits from not cancelling all those tickets for me.

6. Today, i managed to get an email from the current managing agent. The name on their contracts, saying as follows:

"Thanks for your call just now.

As discussed, we refresh the permits at the site on a regular basis - in the past it has been once every two or three years. There is no set schedule as it is done as and when it is needed."

Obviously this hasn't been sent in my evidence bundle. Is there any way i can admit this or still put this in front of the judge? Surely this is a complete killer for them if the permits are recognised at all. No predictable system.

Gunner84

If someone could urgently advise on the above. I have beat cancer this week and got the all clear, now i intend to beat this scum.

Additionally,UKPC have relied upon UKPC vs Peenith 2016 in their witness statement. How do i best address and nullify that?

Coupon-mad

Gunner84 wrote: »

So, big day tomorrow. The hearing is first thing in the morning. Got some really important questions about the claimants bundle as i go through it.

1. The claimant is citing estate regulations in the master lease as the reason they are able to take amend my rights to permit visitors on a first come first service basis. They claim i do not have an unfettered right to park, even though it states entitlement to a like right. Is this likely to stick for them? It might do, but you would be saying that a clause that talks about reasonable regulations for the benefit of the residents' does not include a penalty that causes a 'private nuisance' to residents.

Search this forum for 'UNION JACK' to see how a Judge viewed it.


2. They have noted in red at the foot of the master lease document page "This official copy is incomplete without the preceding notes page. What does this mean for us? If anything. You can argue nothing, and in fact, it was up to THEM to check the rights of residents in the master lease before starting enforcement.


3. They have supplied 3 contracts. All with managing agents. The first one is with the managing agent that is on my lease, but its from 2006, 5 years before i lived there. They refer to a letter also from 2006 to residents from that managing agent, detailing that they will begin ticketing to protect the spaces. It says they will all contain registration plate numbers and be issued every 30 days. This DOES NOT happen. How best do i use this? Say so and question their rep about it, as it shows the permit scheme does not follow the authority from the managing agent, and there is NO EVIDENCE that any authority for any enforcement regime, actually flows from the landowner in possession.

4. The only contract they have that is close to the dates of the alleged contraventions is with the property management. However, there is no contract between that property manager and the landowner in the bundle. Can they assume that this new property managers have taken over? Or does the lack of contract between the property manager and the landowner break the chain of authority? As above, you must question their rep and point this out to the Judge.


5. There is a redacted "client commission" section. It appears to indicate the property manager profits from not cancelling all those tickets for me. OK, perhaps worth mentioning.


6. Today, i managed to get an email from the current managing agent. The name on their contracts, saying as follows:
"Thanks for your call just now.

As discussed, we refresh the permits at the site on a regular basis - in the past it has been once every two or three years. There is no set schedule as it is done as and when it is needed."

Obviously this hasn't been sent in my evidence bundle. Is there any way i can admit this or still put this in front of the judge? Surely this is a complete killer for them if the permits are recognised at all. No predictable system.
Take it with you and mention it as if it was in the bundle and hope they don't call you out on it. Anything goes in small claims and if they do call you out, say it's not new evidence and the Claimant should already know all of this if they reckon they are operating a legit permit scheme that can override the rights of residents.

Comments in red above.

Additionally,UKPC have relied upon UKPC vs Peenith 2016 in their witness statement. How do i best address and nullify that?

Never heard of it, and any small claim decision does not override another one.

No doubt you put some cases in evidence yourself? PACE v Noor, Link v Parkinson, anything in your own bundle carries just as much weight.

Gunner84

So we are sitting waiting now. The witness from UKPC has not attended. Only an advocate for LPC (SCS law) called David Chamberlain.

What does Abdullah Yaqubs non attendance mean for our hearing? We obviously can't question him. Can we use this non attendance?

Is it OK for them to not attend if they just send a legal representative?


VERY URGENT. Could go in at any moment.

Coupon-mad

What does Abdullah Yaqubs non attendance mean for our hearing? We obviously can't question him. Can we use this non attendance?

Yes, you can remark to the Judge that their witness is not here, and thus it is unfair on you not to be able to question him in person.

AND that you believe that the rep has no RIGHTS OF AUDIENCE, regardless of his legal qualification, it's not about 'being a legal rep'.

Is it OK for them to not attend if they just send a legal representative?

No, but to argue that, you'd have to understand RIGHTS OF AUDIENCE and why a legal rep can't appear in their stead.

A quick link or two:

https://www.lawgazette.co.uk/57199.article

https://www.parkingcowboys.co.uk/right-of-audience/

and the legislation:

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/1999/1225/made

Gunner84

WE WON!

The judge insisted on tackling it ultimately in a really weird order. For a long while he didn't permit me or the defendant to speak, as the claimants advocate from LPC was forced to scramble around through a 200 page evidence bundle where they chain of contracts stopped at the managing agent.

I drew attention to the witness statement saying they were entitled to claim under contract with the managing agent due to their contract with the land owner.

I said that to open paragraph 2 of a witness statement citing this as your standing for claim, and then neither supply this contract within the witness bundle, nor turn up to take defendants questions on it, is a very strange decision and that their own witness statement essentially points out that they have no standing at all.

The UKPC advocate then requested an ajournement to provide this contract. He said they he would give him five minutes to address this. He started citing estate regulations which I said I failed to see are relevant since they have indicated that the lessees contracts rights apply to me, and no amount of estate regulations are going to make this contract materialise.

The judge agreed with me, after 6 hours of nonsense, talking about permits, and tenancy agreements, rights of way. Ultimately UKPC did not have standing.

I was awarded costs, and the claim was dismissed.

I can't thank you all enough. In a short space of time I have now beaten cancer AND UKPC.

Coupon_mad you particularly have educated me to the point where we had the UKPC representative stutteringly having to wade through their awful paperwork anxiously trying all kinds of outlandish routes. We never got to signage which I also think we were well equipped for.

Thank you all.

Umkomaas

In a short space of time I have now beaten cancer AND UKPC

Brilliant. Two very nasty entities out of your life. Well done winning on both counts, especially the one that really matters. Puts everything else into perspective.

Thank you for feeding this back to us. Any reported win helps motivate us, but I have an even warmer feeling hearing your news. :T

Coupon-mad

Coupon_mad you particularly have educated me to the point where we had the UKPC representative stutteringly having to wade through their awful paperwork anxiously trying all kinds of outlandish routes.

:T

In a short space of time I have now beaten cancer AND UKPC.

:T :T

WELL DONE! Another one bites the dust!

Did you mean SIX HOURS, surely not?

Redx

well done to you , on all counts, including medical

I hope you stick around and help others with your new found knowledge and experience, because you can also sock it to these par@sites by helping others to beat them , it gives all the regulars here great satisfaction in costing the sc@mmers money , because if they were in the right each and every time , they would win each and every time

the fact that they dont win each and every time means they have a flawed business model and deserve to be caught out and be out of pocket every time they try to sc@m somebody like yourself

again , well done on your wins (plural)