UKPC - SCS Claim form recieved

Gunner84

I am currently building my defence in accordance with all instructions in the newbies thread, and have noticed something in the particulars of claim that I was curious about as to how it affects the case against my partners vehicle.

The development is gated access. The particulars of claim reference a completely different postcode and address to the position on which my partners vehicle was parked. This other road is part of the same development, but they are seperated by a large area of grass. In fact, it is impossible to drive the car once within the gate to the street address that they have issued the parking charge notice for. Is this relevant? Something that can be used in a defence?

It quite literally is not the correct address. It is however within the area that they cover. What difference does this make?

nosferatu1001

Yes, you can state that the location specified is NOT a location the vehicle has ever been parked (if true!) and as such they cannot have a cause of action.

Gunner84

Thanks, should I start the MCOL defence with that immediately?

My next action was intended to be an SAR request to UKPC for all data held on the keepers vehicle. The Poor quality photos show my partners car clearly parked at a completely different location. Provable with any map and a few supporting photographs. On top of this she is displaying her permit, no signage visible in their own images, apart from one almost 8ft high that is probably about 20 meters away.

Thanks once again for the help. I have 18 days left to defend. Have also requested land ownership documents and the contract with UKPC and the Landowner from property management. I am working to make this as transparent as possible. Please let me know if there is anything I am overlooking.

Thanks again. I may even look in to a counter claim when I have time to find out how viable that would be. This is costing a phenomenal amount of working hours, and there is also a portion of rent paid for these inclusive passes.

eltacano

I don't think you say whether your partner is a resident or not.
Presumably she is not, because if she were a resident clearly she would have no right to park in a visitor's space even if her vehicle displayed a valid guest permit.

nosferatu1001

You must write your defence now. Assuming you have acknowledged you only have 33 days from the date of issue for the court to RECEIVE your defence.

Do NOT use MCOL to write the defence. Do it in word / libreoffice / etc. THEN you can email then a printed, signed, scanned to PDF copy of the defence.

Counterclaim - this CANNOT be your costs in defending the claim. You will know that from reaidng it. A counterclaim would be on grounds of harassment, breach of lease (tortious interference), trespass etc.

Gunner84

I am now in the process of writing my defence. I am still a bit lost regardless as it is such an overwhelming amount to brush up on at once.

What are my strongest points for defence here? Incorrect parking location? Lack of communication regarding replacement of guest passes?

I am sure signage must be a pretty weak argument at this point. Signs upon gate entry say "Permit Holders Only" upon inspection, but as you enter inside they are not clearly visible from the guest bay. Lots of small writing. Only a sign saying "visitor parking" and nothing else.

My biggest issue here is I am not sure which points to base it on. I really feel they are aggressively ticketing and seeing us as a potential cash cow here, so I do not want to construct a defence that looks like clutching at straws.

Coupon-mad

It won't be clutching at straws.

What's wrong with Johnersh's example residential car park defence in #2 of the NEWBIES thread?

Gunner84

I am using that example as a template now. I have had my partner put in an SAR request for all of the data they carry. The photos are awful, but we are currently unable to access them since they passed them over to "debt collection". My own photos show the in-site signage positions not being close the position ticketed.

Should we send a part 18 request? I have the title name of the deed holder, but confusingly on the deed it is registered under the address they have on the ticket (a neighbouring address) but the turning area on which we park is not named that way. Different street sign, and one that matches our home address. I was wondering if with the part 18 we should be looking to determine any further details that would assist us? Or would building on this template theoretically cover that?

I have no doubt that they will try to give us as little information as possible prior to court hearings, so I want to make sure I am doing everithing possible from this stage on.

(I'll post the defence up here later today)

Gunner84

I have checked my tenancy agreement thoroughly. I am not sure if I can argue primacy in terms of the guest passes in the visitors car park. So after my initial agreement expired it is my understanding I am now considered to have periodic tenancy, and the initial tenancy agreement terms still legally apply.

The agreement makes no mention of my parking spaces, despite my own bay parking (numbered correspondent to my flat) and one guest pass being included. It also makes no mention of any parking enforcement in place. How should I be looking to approach these factors in my defence.

Really getting short of time now, and don't want to get this wrong. So much research and so little time.

Thank you in advance.

nosferatu1001

Part 18 does not apply. Just ask them for all doucments they intend to rely upon, in the interests of narrowing the subject under dispute and to meet the overriding objectives of the CPRs

If it is a rolling agreement, then the original agreement terms stand unless it specifies otherwise.

When you say"own bay... being included", WHAT is it included IN if not the agreement????