Court Date Change

nosferatu1001

So you did NOT provide a serviceable address? Yes or No. Thats all I asked for

This is a critical point. They retain the abilty to pursue you IF you dont give a serviceable address (bearing in mind they also need to comply elsewhere) BEFORE they start proceedings.

Glenprk

The answer is No.

Coupon-mad

You couldn't do so, it was impossible. This needs crushing, let's hope the Judge sees it for what it is when you write with the 'Draft Order' that I suggested.

Glenprk

[FONT=&quot]I have revisited some sections of [/FONT][FONT=&quot][FONT=&quot]Protection of Freedoms Act (POFA) 2012 in working out my rationale and remember I was guided by the following, of which I still am not clear:[/FONT] [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Schedule 4, Paragraph 2(1)[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]In this Schedule!!!8212; !!!8220;current address for service!!!8221; means!!!8212;[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot] (b) in the case of the driver, an address at which the driver for the time being resides or can conveniently be contacted;[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]Elsewhere, in a number of places e.g POFA (2012), Section 9[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]9 (2)The notice must!!!8212;[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot](e) state that the creditor does not know both the name of the driver and a current address for service for the driver and invite the keeper!!!8212;[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot](i ) to pay the unpaid parking charges; or[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot](ii) if the keeper was not the driver of the vehicle, to notify the creditor of the name of the driver and a current address for service for the driver [/FONT][FONT=&quot][FONT=&quot]and to pass the notice on to the driver[/FONT][FONT=&quot];[/FONT].[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]
========================================================================
On another note, as mentioned earlier, they did not comply with [/FONT][FONT=&quot][FONT=&quot]POFA (2012) [/FONT]Schedule 4, Paragraph 11, as confirmed in a letter from DVLA, that no Application for details was recorded with regards to the concerned Vehicle Reg No

---

throughout my keepership:

[/FONT] [FONT=&quot][FONT=&quot][FONT=&quot][FONT=&quot]POFA (2012)[/FONT][/FONT], [/FONT]Para 11(1)The third condition is that!!!8212;[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot](a)the creditor (or a person acting for or on behalf of the creditor) has made an application for the keeper's details in relation to the period of parking to which the unpaid parking charges relate;[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot](b)the application was made during the relevant period for the purposes of paragraph 8(4) (where a notice to driver has been given) or 9(4) (where no notice to driver has been given);[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot](c) the information sought by the application is provided by the Secretary of State to the applicant.[/FONT]

Coupon-mad

Yes we know, and given the circumstances you complied as best you could.

Glenprk

I have now received the Claimant's Witness Statement (WS) and their Contract with the Property Management Company. Meanwhile, I still await a response to my request for a date change.



Thank you for advising me to await the Claimant's WS. I have until Friday to respond and have already drafted my own WS which I will post tomorrow for assistance.


Please find below their W/S.

Glenprk

IN THE ---- COUNTY COURT
CLAIM NO:

---

UK CAR PARK MANAGEMENT LIMITED
(CLAIMANT)
-AND-

---

(DEFENDANT)

WITNESS STATEMENT OF

---

I,

---

, OF, ---- WILL SAY AS FOLLOWS:

1. I am the Employee of the Claimant Company ('my Company') and I am duly authorised to make
this statement on its behalf. The facts and matters set out in this statement are within my own
knowledge unless otherwise stated and I believe them to be true. Where I refer to information
supplied by others, the source of the information is identified; facts and matters derived from
other sources are true to the best of my knowledge and belief.
2. Exhibited to this Witness Statement at 'GSL1' are the following documents which my Company
wishes to rely upon;
i) The Agreement authorising my Company to manage parking on the relevant land (as
described therein and hereinafter referred to as 'the Relevant Land');
ii) The Sign ('the Contract');
Hi) The Site Plan;
iv) Notices;
v) Photographs of the incident.
3. The Defendant is liable for a parking charge relating to the parking of a vehicle on the Relevant
Land in a manner so as to incur the same pursuant to the Contract (i.e. the Sign). Set out in the
Schedule below are details of the parking charge;

PCN Number --- Date of charge --/--/2016 Location

---

Description: Not displaying a valid permit


The Defence

The Permit

4. The signage on the Relevant Land is clear and unambiguous; permits must be clearly displayed in
windscreen at all times. My Company doesn't dispute the Defendant was issued with a permit,
however as is evident from the photographs exhibited, it was not properly on display at the time
of the incident. The Defendant was aware of the terms when they obtained a permit. A condition
of use of the permit is that it must be on display in the windscreen. As such, the parking charge
was issued correctly.

5. It is an integral part of the parking scheme that a valid permit is displayed as otherwise the
scheme would be unmanageable; my Company's wardens would have no way of determining if
the parking is legitimate or not. If my Company were to waive one charge on the basis put
forward in the Defence it would open the floodgates to the waiver of many more charges,
making the parking management process that has been put in place entirely redundant.

Particulars of Claim

6. It is denied the particulars of claim are deficient as alleged. It is also denied that my Company's
solicitors issue 'robo-claims' as averred. The Claim is issued via the County Court Business Centre
which is a procedure specifically provided for in the Civil Procedure Rules. This only allows the
Claimant to insert brief details of the Claim. In any event, I can confirm that the Particulars of
Claim contained sufficient information for the Defendant to be aware of what the claim relates to namely:-
i) The date of the charge;
ii) The vehicle registration number;
iii) The amount outstanding;
iv) That is relates to parking charges; and ---
v)That it is debt

7. Further, prior to proceedings being issued the Defendant was sent notices in accordance with
the Act and a Letter Before Claim. As such, the Defendant would have been aware of the charge
which is the subject of this claim.

Compliance with the Civil Procedure Rules

8. It is denied that my Company has not complied with the Civil Procedure Rules, including the A
Letter Before Claim was sent to the Defendant, which contained:-
i) The date of the charge;
ii) The Parking Charge Notice Number;
iii) The location of the charge;
iv) The amount outstanding;
v) The Claimant; and
vi) That the balance relates to unpaid parking charge.
If there has been any minor deviation from the Civil Procedure Rules then it is (or would be)
within the tolerances provided therein whereby the court is required to interpret any provision
having regard to the 'overriding objective', namely to deal with matters in a just, proportionate
- and cost-effective way (rules .1.1 and 1.2).

Claimant's Solicitors identical to Claimant's Trade Association

9. The Defendant's opinion on any alleged conflict of interest with a non-party to this claim is
irrelevant and therefore not the subject matter of the claim before us. Gladstones Solicitors and
the International Parking Community used to have the same Directors, however this is no longer
the case, and in any event they remained separate in its entirety.

The Defendant avers that they were not the driver

10.The Criminal Case of Elliott v Loake 1983 Crim LR 36 held that the Registered Keeper of a vehicle
may be presumed to have been the driver unless they sufficiently rebut this presumption. To
date the Registered Keeper has been invited on numerous occasions to identify the driver, yet
has failed to do so. The Court is therefore invited to conclude it more likely than not that the
Registered Keeper (i.e. the Defendant) was the driver.

11.In the alternative, if the Court is not able to infer that the Defendant was the driver then the
Defendant is pursued as the Registered Keeper of the vehicle pursuant to Schedule 4 of the
Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 ('the Act') Paragraph 4(1) which states:
"The creditor has the right to recover any unpaid parking charges from the keeper of the
vehicle."

12.Paragraph 2 of the Act states that; the "keeper" means the person by whom the vehicle is kept
at the time the vehicle was parked, which in the case of a registered vehicle is to be presumed,
unless the contrary is proved, to be the registered keeper.

13.The relevant Notice was sent to the Defendant in accordance with the Act and the Registered
Keeper (the Defendant) failed to nominate who was driving the vehicle prior to these
proceedings which is required under paragraph 5(2) of the Act.

The Defendant's right to park

14.Without concession, the Defendant has not provided any evidence to support their alleged right
to park. My Company has been instructed to manage the Relevant Land and without concession
the Defendant has failed to prove otherwise.

15.Further, by receiving/accepting a permit from my Company, the Defendant bound themselves to
the parking scheme which was in part for their benefit. In taking this benefit (i.e. in having the
parking bay managed), the Defendant must accept their part to play, which was to simply display
a permit. At no time after the scheme was introduced and prior to the first parking charge being
issued was my Company made aware that there was any objections to the scheme. Without
concession, if the Defendant did have a right over the space (which isn't accepted at present), I
submit they ought to have notified my Company, rather than accepting the permit (and as such the benefit of the scheme).
Any rights they did have were therefore abandoned.

No Contract

16.The Defendant suggests there was no contract. The rules of interpretation require simply that
the parties knew of their obligations to one-another. The Defendant was offered to use the Land
and thereafter either follow the rules and park for free or in breach of the rules and agree to pay
£100. The rules here just so happen to be that to park, they need to display a valid permit.

17.My Company relies on the case of Parking Eye -v- Beavis [2015]^ in which it was accepted as an
established principle that a valid contract can be made by an offer in the form of the terms and
conditions set out on the sign, and accepted by the driver's actions as prescribed therein.

18.In the case of Alder v Moore (1961) the Court concluded that one should consider the obligations
imposed by the agreement, not the terminology used i.e. the agreement's substance, not form.

19.The principles in this case are the same as in the Parking Eye case, save that in the Parking Eye
case, as the particular parking rules were different, the rule breached was that motorists must
leave the site within 2 hours, whereas here, as set out above, the rule was to display a valid
permit. In that case it was accepted as an established principle that a valid contract can be made
by an offer in the form of the terms and conditions set out on the sign, and accepted by the
driver's actions as prescribed therein.

20.The Court may conclude that the Land is managed as follows; the Claimant grants a contractual
license to all; this license allows anyone permission to be on the Land. This is inferred by the
nature of the land and the lack of any general prohibition of entry on the signage. In this regard,
the Defendant (as were all the motorists) was offered to comply with the normal conditions (as
clear on the sign), or park otherwise than in accordance with the normal conditions and incur a
100 charge. The acceptance was at the point the Defendant decided to park, having read the
sign, and his consideration was the promise to pay 100 for the privilege of parking outside the
normal conditions. The Claimant's consideration is the provision of parking services.

21.1 refer the Court to Judge Hegarty's comments in ParkingEye v Somerfield (2011) that "If this is
the price payable for the privilege, it does not seem to me that it can be regarded as a penalty,
even though it is substantial and obviously intended to discourage motorists from leaving their
cars on the car park".

22.Alternatively; it could be concluded that, any person can use the Land provided they do not
exceed the licensed activity as set out on the sign and in failing to comply with the license
granted to them, they in turn agree to the Claimant's entirely distinct offer from that license
which is to park otherwise than in accordance with the license for a charge of 100.

Did not see the signs/the terms are unfair

23.My Company rejects any argument that the Defendant did not see the sign. The signage at the
site is clearly visible and the information on the signage informs the driver of the parking
conditions at the location. Signage is prominent throughout the parking area. Signage location,
size, content and font has been audited by the International Parking Community. It is the driver's
responsibility, to check for signage, and obtain any authorisation for parking before leaving their
vehicle. The signage on site is the contractual document.

24.What is more, without concession, even in the unlikely event the Defendant didn't see the signs I
; submit they ought to have done so. As Lord Justice Roch observed in the Court of Appeal case of
Vine v London Borough of Waltham Forrest 2000;
"Once it is established that sufficient and adequate warning notices were in place, a car
driver cannot be heard to say that he or she did not see the notice. Were that to be the
law, it would be too easy for car drivers who trespass with their cars to evade the only
method land owners have of stopping the unauthorised parking of cars in parking spaces
or parking areas on their property"

25.It is evident from the site plan that there are sufficient signs on the Relevant Land. It is also
reasonable to suggest that the Defendant's headlights would have been directly on the sign and
in the Defendant's line of sight as they pulled onto and parked upon the Relevant Land and
therefore I do not believe that lighting is an issue.

No authority to enforce charges

26.As the contract is between my Company and the Defendant, my Company does have the
authority to enforce parking charges. However, both VCS v HM Revenue & Customs (2013) and
Parking Eye v Beavis (CA 2015) made it clear that a contracting party need not show they have a
right to do what they have promised in the performance of a contract, nor is (in the case of a
parking operator) the agreement between Operator and Landowner of any relevance. In any
event, and without concession, the Agreement exhibited to this Witness Statement evidences
my Company's authorisation to operate/manage the Relevant Land on behalf of the Landowner.

27.Lord Justice Lewison commented in VCS v HM Revenue & Customs [2013] EWCA Civ 186;
(1)"The Upper Tribunal's reasoning on this part of the case was that since VCS did not have
the right under its contract with the carpark owner to grant a licence to park, it could not
have contracted with the motorist to grant such a right. In my judgment there is a serious
flaw in this reasoning.
(2) The flaw in the reasoning is that it confuses the making of a contract with the power to
perform it. There is no legal impediment to my contracting to sell you Buckingham Palace.
If (inevitably) I fail to honour my contract then I can be sued for damages. On the stock
market it is commonplace for traders to sell short; in other words to sell shares that they
do not own in the hope of buying them later at a lower price. In order to perform the
contract the trader will have to acquire the required number of shares after the contract
of sale is made. Moreover, in some cases a contracting party may not only be able to
contract to confer rights over property that he does not own, but may also be able to
perform the contract without acquiring any such right. Thus in Bruton v London and
Quadrant Housing Trust [2000] 1 AC 406 a housing trust with no interest in land was held
to have validly granted a tenancy of the land to a residential occupier. The tenancy would
not have been binding on the landowner, but bound the two contracting parties in
precisely the same way as it would have done if the grantor had had an interest in, the
land.
(3)Thus in my judgment the Upper Tribunal were wrong to reverse the decision of the FTTon
the question whether VCS had the power to enter into a contract. Having the power to
enter into a contract does not, of course, mean that VCS necessarily did enter into a contract with the motorist to permit parking!!!8221;


Charge is excessive/No loss suffered

28.The charge sought is industry standard and is set at a rate so as to suitably satisfy my Company's
legitimate interest. In the case of Parking Eye -v- Beavis [2015] it was held that an 85.00 charge
was neither extravagant nor unconscionable. The Accredited Trade Associations of which parking
operators must be a member in order to apply for DVLA data prescribe a maximum charge of
£100. My Company's charges are within this level. The charge is therefore not excessive.

29.The decision of the Supreme Court made it clear that the charges are not penal, nor do they have
to be reflective of the parking operator's loss. Further, the charges can be set at a level that
provides a deterrent effect.

Interest

30.My Company has made a claim for interest as part of the claim under s.69 of the County Courts
Act 1984 at the prevailing rate of 8%. Interest is only awarded once Judgment has been entered
however, the interest must be pleaded in the particulars of the claim when the claim is issued.
Therefore interest is claimed from the date the debt became due and will continue to accrue
until Judgment is entered.

Costs

31.My Company has included a claim for costs as is its right on issuing proceedings. The costs
claimed are fixed and in accordance with CPR 27.14 and CPR 45.

The Current Debt

32.In view of the Defendant not paying the charge within the 28 days allowed they are in breach of
the contract. Breach of contract entitles the innocent party to damages as of right in addition to
the parking charge incurred.

33.My Company is an Accredited Operator of the International Parking Community (IPC) who
prescribes a maximum charge of 100. The Code of Practice states:
"Parking charges must not exceed 100 unless agreed in advance with the IPC. Where
there is a prospect of additional charges, reference should be made to this where
appropriate on the signage and/ or other documentation.
Where a parking charge becomes overdue a reasonable sum may be added. This sum
must not exceed 60 (inclusive of VAT where applicable) unless Court Proceedings have
been initiated."

34.In view of the Defendant not paying the charge within the initial 28 days allowed or the further
28 days allowed after the Notice to Keeper has been sent, the parking charge has become
overdue and a reasonable sum of 60 has been added.

35.The Sign states the prescribed charge for failing to comply with the terms is #100, however it
also specifies 'you will incur additional charges resulting from further action being taken against
you if the fee remains unpaid'. Further the Letter Before Claim also made it clear the debt may
increase in respect of costs and interest if a claim had to be issued. Due to the Defendant not
paying the charge the matter was passed to my Company's legal representatives, Gladstones
Solicitors Ltd, who were instructed to commence legal proceedings. The potential additional
costs mentioned above are now sought.

36. The debt has, as a result of this referral risen as my Company's staff have spent time and
material in facilitating the recovery of this debt. This time could have been better spent on other
elements of my Company's business. My Company believes the costs associated with such time
spent were incurred naturally as a direct result of the Defendant's breach and as such asks that
this element of the claim be awarded as a damage. The costs claimed are a pre-determined and
nominal contribution to the actual losses. Alternatively, my Company does have a right to costs
pursuant to the sign (i.e. the contract).

STATEMENT OF TRUTH

I believe that the facts stated in this witness statement are true.
Signed:
Print:

---

Dated: !!!8230;!!!8230;!!!8230;!!!8230;!!!8230;!!!8230;!!!8230;!!!8230;..

Glenprk

I am a Freeholder, having lived at the property in excess of 11 years. Please find below their Contract with the Property Management Company, who could neither accept nor deny they were the Principal, always directing me to Property Directors, whose office is resident with them.




UK Car Park Management

Parking Enforcement Contractual Agreement

This agreement is made on the 02 / 04 / 2013 between Crabtree whose
address is

---

(The Proprietor) and
UK Car Park Management Ltd (Company Registration No 07383860) whose
registered office is 19 New Road. Brighton, BNI 1UF (the contractor) of the
other part. !

19 New Road
Brighton
BN1 1UF
Tel

---

Fax

---

RECITALS
1. The contractor is in the business of operating a parking enforcement service by issuing a parking charge
to vehicles that contravene parking restrictions that are detailed in the attached service specification.
2. The proprietor is desirous of entering into an agreement with the contractor for the contractor to provide
the proprietor the services referred to in recital I above. Hereof at the land specified below:
THIS AGREEMENT SHALL RELATE TO THE FOLLOWING SITES:
Queens Road, Croydon, CR0 2NJ
Leclon Place. Lcighton Buzzard, LU7 IFW
Bruford Court, London, SE8 3BP
Mallard Court, London, EI7 3LN
Manning Gardens, Croydon, CR0 7DT
Cumbcrlow Lodge, London, SE254AA
Kings Court, Wembley, HA9 9JF I
Pulse, London, NW9 5DZ \
Retreat Road, Richmond, TVV9 INN
Holland Gardens, Brentford, TW8 0BE
Welbcck Mansions, London, NW6 1QX
Croyland Road, Wellingborough, NN8 2AX
Scarlett Avenue, Wendover, HP22 5FB
G lend tan Court, Enfield, EN3 6DY
St James Place, London, TW13 4SD
City House, Croydon, CR0 2NT >
Brent Works. London, NW9 5GX
Ryder Court, Herne Bay, CT6 7GP
Watson Place, South Norwood, SE25 SEX
Bramuell Place, Woking, GU21 5BL
John Maurice Close, London, SE17 1PY . •
Essex Rd / High Rd, Chadwell Heath, RM6 4HU
The Heights. Hampstead, NW3 6XS
Southdowns Park, Haywards Heath, RHI6 4SS
Kew Bridge West, Brentford, TW8 0EF
Stratford Road, Milton Kcyncs, MK12 5FT
Wenlock House, Enfield, EN1 1NJ
The Mill. Dartfard, DA4 9BD
The Ridge^ay, Cltingford, E4 6BF
Sunninghill Court, Acton, W3 8BB
Kings College Court, London, NW3 3EA
Opal House. Sittingbourne, ME10 SAL
; Page 1 of 5


Chandlers Close, London, KT8 2PA
Beaumont Court, London, E5 8BG
Burket Close, Southall, UB2 5NT
Pulse - Joslyn Ave, London, NW9 SDZ
Pulse - Lingard Ave, LONDON, NW9 5YZ
Pulse - Tanner Cl, LONDON, NW9 5PZ
Pulse - Harvey Cl, LONDON, NW9 5WF
Pulse - Nobel Cl, LONDON, NW9 5TF
Pulse - Charcot Rd, LONDON, NW9 SHG
Pulse - Needleman Cl, LONDON, NW9 SUF
Pulse - Salk Cl, LONDON, NW9 5XH
Pulse - Fletcher Ct (Blk A), LONDON, NW9 SHW
Pulse - Bailey Ct (Blk , LONDON, NW9 5PY
Pulse - Felix Ct (Blk H), LONDON, NW9 5ZD
Pulse - Theodor Ct (Blk P), LONDON, NW9 5TF
Pulse - Planter Ct (Blk Q), LONDON, NW9 5US
Pulse - Conrad Ct (Blk L), LONDON, NW9 5ZW
Pulse - Hitherwood Ct (Blk Nl), LONDON, NW9 5YW
Pulse - Boswell Ct (Blk N2), LONDON, W14 OPQ
Leather Lane, Guildford, GU5 9NB
The Swallows, Watford, WD18 6GX
Oaklyn Gardens, Shanklin, PO37 7DD
Bridge Meadows, London, SE14 5SU
Haywood House, London, SE14 5RU
Donne House, London, SE14 5RP
Carnelian House, Sittingbourne, ME10 SAT
Carew Court, London, SE14 5RP
Lantern Close. Wembley, HAO 2JT
Pointers Close, London, E14 3AP
Champness Road, Barking, IGI1 9PD
Verona Court. London, SE14 5RX
Caversham Court, London, Nil 1EZ
The Quadrangle, Chafford Hundred, RM16 6AZ
Edition, Colindale, NW9 SHE
Hereinafter referred to as "The Sites"
APPLICABLE PARKING RESTRICTIONS:
VARIOUS RESTRICTIONS
The proprietor may request that the Contractor add, alter or remove any of the above addresses and restrictions by
giving 28 days notice in writing to the contractor and thereafter the Contractor shall within a reasonable period,
amend the Parking Restrictions applicable to the site and the Notices thereon to reflect the new Terms and
Conditions. Such Terms and Conditions to replace or amend those herein.
IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE:
Effective from: 1" September 2012
It is hereby agreed

; Page 2 of 5

1. INTERPRETATION:
Reference to any statute, enactment, order, regulation or other similar instrument shall be construed as a
reference to the statute, enactment, order, regulation or instrument as amended by any subsequent
enactment, modification, order, regulation or instrument as subsequently amended or re-enacted;
Reference to any person shall include natural persons and partnerships, firms and other incorporated
bodies and all other legal persons of whatever kind and however constituted and their successors and
permitted assigns or transferees;
The words "include", "includes" and "including" are to be construed as if they were immediately
followed by the words "without limitation1'; and
Headings are included in this Contract for ease of reference only and shall not affect the interpretation or
construction of this Contract.
Words importing the singular meaning include where the context so admits the plural meaning and vice
versa;
Words importing the masculine include the feminine and the neuter;
If any pan of this agreement is subsequently deemed void or unenforceable for any reason then the
contract shall he construed without reference to that part. The remainder of this contract shall be
unaffected and enforceable as if any such part were omitted.
In this agreement the following expressions shall have the following meanings:
"Notices" Shall mean warning notices as supplied and installed by the contractor and agreed by the
proprietor, placed on the premises advising persons that they will be issued with a parking charge if
parked in contravention of the Applicable Parking Restrictions.
"Parking Charge" Shall mean the fee charged for the parking or for any breach of the parking
Restrictions howsoever described on the notices.
•'Premises" Shall mean "the Site" as detailed above or as provided by in any subsequent amendment to
this agreement in accordance with the terms herein.
2. THE CONTRACTOR'S OBLIGATIONS
2.1 To erect and/or place free of charge such numbers of Notices as shall be agreed with the proprietor
in clear imohscured positions on the Premises and thereafter maintain the same in good repair and to
effect such repair and maintenance promptly on receipt of a notice from the proprietor requiring that
the repair and/or maintenance should be carried out and the contractor shall incur all costs in respect
thereof and during normal working hours to maintain an employee of the contractors to administer
the contractors obligation herein.
2.2 To issue a parking charge to any vehicle in breach of the Parking Restrictions
2.3 To collect all parking charge fees in respect of parking charges issued, and to retain the same. The
contractor may use legal action to recover charges due from drivers charged for unauthorised
parking. And it is hereby expressly agreed that the Contractor shall be considered 'the Creditor' for
the purposes of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012.
2.4 From the date hereof until the termination of this agreement to indemnify and keep indemnified the
proprietor in respect of any act of negligence or breach of statutory duty by any of its employees,
servants or agents in carrying out their duties pursuant to this agreement, and for the duration of this
agreement to maintain an insurance policy with a reputable provider for any such acts. Such
insurance policy shall be produced to the proprietor upon demand. The contractor shall be solely
liable for any such damages and shall not assign or subcontract its obligations or powers under this
agreement. :
Page 3 of 5

2.5 The contractor shall within a reasonable period and at their own expense remove all its property
from the Premises upon the termination of this agreement and will make good any damage caused
by the removal of the signs.
2.6 The contactor^s operatives will adhere to the Code of Practice of an Accredited Trade Association.
3. THE PROPRIETOR'S OBLIGATIONS
3.1 Where a vehicle is parked in contravention of the Parking Restrictions and where he considers that a
parking charge notice should be issued to the driver under the parking enforcement service, the
proprietors shall inform the Contractor who shall endeavour to issue the driver with a parking
charge. Provided that the Proprietor shall not be liable to the contractor for any failure to inform the
Contractor of the presence of any vehicle on the premises or in the event that the vehicle has vacated
the premises after the Proprietor has informed the Contractor of the registration number.
3.2 To permit die Contractor its servants or agents to enter upon the premises to perform their duties
under this agreement (subject to any statutory or other legal conditions or restrictions or any
requirements or any person holding an interest in the premises superior to that of the Proprietor)
4. DURATION AND TERMINATION
4.1 This agreement shall endure indefinitely unless and until terminated in accordance with the
provisions of this pan.
4.2 Both parties shall be released from their respective obligations hereunder in the event of any national
or local government statutes regulations or legislation rendering unlawful the issuing of parking
charge notice of vehicles on private land save that the Contractor shall remain liable to indemnify
the Proprietor under clause 3.6 in relation to any claims arising to the date prior to legislation.
4.3 This agreement shall be terminated by either party giving 28 (twenty-eight) days notice in writing to
the other at any time.
4.4 UK Car ^ark Management Ltd will remove all signage in connection to the scheme within a
reasonable period should either party terminate this contract in accordance with the provisions
herein.
5. GENERAL
5.1 Each party shall be liable to pay the other damages for any breach of this agreement and all
reasonable and proper expenses or costs incurred by the aggrieved party enforcing its rights herein
under.
5.2 All notices and materials used in the erection of them, except any provided by the Proprietor, shall
be owned by and remain the property of the Contractor.
5.3 All notices placed on the premises are subject to approval of both the Proprietor and the Contractor.
5.4 This Agreement is governed by the law of England and Wales, and is subject to the exclusive
jurisdiction of the courts of England and Wales.

Page 4 of 5

6. FORCE MAJF.URE
A party shall not be liable for any failure of or delay in the performance of this Agreement for the period
that such failure or delay is due to causes beyond its reasonable control, including but not limited to acts
of God, war, strikes or labour disputes, embargoes, government orders or any other force majeure event
7. CONFIDENTIALITY
Each party to this agreement undertakes not to disclose the contents of this agreement to any person who
is not a party to it or is not acting as their advisor, employee, servant or agent or unless it is required to be
disclosed by any rule of law.
8. DECLARATION
8.1 We, the undersigned, hereby confirm that we have read the terms of this agreement and that we are
duly authorised or empowered to enter into this agreement on behalf of the Client or the Company as
the case may be.
8.2 The Client confirms that he is either the Owner or Legal Occupier of the Site(s), and that he is duly
authorised or empowered to enter into this agreement.

Signed on behalf of the Contractor: ............. : Date: 01/09/2012


Signed on behalf of the Proprietor: ................ Date: 01/09/2012
Page 5 of 5

System

UKCPM are usually solid when it comes to a Pulse location so they will be relying on Keeper Liability - so should your defence.

What is missing from this thread is what the driver is supposed to have done and why the charge was issued. Do you know the details?

Lastly, UKCPM will most likely drop this one at the last moment if it goes to an oral hearing or let it run if you chose a paper hearing. Especially if you include a copy of a death certificate. You can give notice of your non-attendance (graduation) no more than 7 days prior to the hearing date and it will default to a paper hearing.

In the scheme of things it is only a few hundred pounds and opting for a paper hearing may be better all round.

Loadsofchildren123

If you wrote in and haven't had a response re another date, call the court and ask what is happening. I'd have expected a response by now and the hearing is soon.
I think a paper hearing is risky because you have no control over what the Claimant will tell the court.