UKCPM - All appeals must be done by postal?

Fruitcake

iWindmill said:

Should I highlight all the issues with the claimant's statement or leave them out and challenge them in court?
As far as I'm aware I only need to mention SRA and facsimile signature in my supplementary statement.

You can't ambush the claimant or the court with new evidence. I'm no expert, but I think it would be better to inform everyone what you intend to challenge on the day of the court case itself.

iWindmill

I've completed my supplementary WST:

IN THE COUNTY COURT

CLAIM No: XXXXXXX

BETWEEN:

UK CAR PARK MANAGEMENT LTD (Claimant)

-and-

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXX (Defendant)

________________________________________
Supplementary Witness Statement
________________________________________

 

I am XXXXXXXXXXX, of ADDRESS, the Defendant in this matter. Further to my witness statement dated 23rd March 2020, I would like to highlight the fact that I did not receive the claimant’s witness statement, and that I contacted XXXXXX County Court to report this. I received a copy of the claimant’s witness statement from XXXXXXXX County Court on 20th May 2020. After receiving and read the claimant’s witness statement I would like to add the following points:

PARKING ENFORCEMENT CONTRACTUAL AGREEMENT

1. Paragraph 23 refers to an agreement with the landowner, yet both paragraph 5 and the agreement itself do not name nor show an agreement with the landowner, only a management company. No contract has been provided to show that UKCPM has authority from the landowner, or flowing from the landowner via a third party management company.

2. The signatures do not meet the strict requirements of Section 44 of The Companies Act 2006. This states that for a contract to be executed, it must be signed by two authorised signatories, or by a director and a witness, from both parties.

3. Since there is only one signature from each party, and neither are identified as being authorised to sign on behalf of their respective companies in accordance with the act, the contract fails to have been properly executed.
Neither of the signatures are legible and names have not been provided.
In addition, the alleged contract has not been dated by either party so there is no proof that it was in operation at the time of the alleged event.

4. As for the Management Company called HML Andertons, I cannot find one of that specific name, nor can I find any variation of that name listed at Companies House ever having registered offices at the Aldershot address quoted on the alleged contract.

4.1 There is a company called HML PM Ltd that were previously called HML Andertons Ltd and Andertons Ltd that deals with property management. They have never had their registered address in Aldershot, and nobody with a name that might end in Patel has ever been a director, Company Secretary, or someone with significant interest in the company.

4.2 A reasonable person would assume that a reputable company would know the requirements of the Companies Act and ensure any contract signed in their name would comply with said Act.

THE CLAIMANT’S WITNESS STATEMENT

5. On first page of Jack Chapman’s witness statement states that it was done on behalf of the Defendant. I did not instruct Jack Chapman to create this witness statement, nor does Jack Chapman represent me.

6. The statement was signed by Jack Chapman on 19th March 2020, yet at paragraph 4, the ATA is referred to the Independent Parking Company yet the name was changed in 2016. This contradicts the name used for the IPC in paragraph 46.

7. The event occurred on 06/06/2018 as seen at paragraph 10 and the parking notice charge (PCN). I appealed to this PCN on the 19/07/2018, however, according to paragraph 13 the appeal was rejected on 06/06/2018.

8. Paragraph 14 says there was no response from myself and a further notice was sent on 10/07/2018 but fails to mention an appeal was received on 19/07/2018.

9. Since these dates cannot all be true, it puts into doubt whether the claimant has acted in accordance with the IPC’s CoP, and shows that the statement of truth is in fact false.

10. The witness statement appear to not actually be signed by Mr Jack Chapman, and a formal complaint has already been sent to the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) about a similar UKCPM case where this exact same UKCPM 'electronic signature' was exposed by a lay representative last month, to be a facsimile and that UKCPM could not have signed the statement on the date stated under the facsimile signature, or at all.

11. In the two cases in October, Claim Nos. E9GF9M7K and E4GF8M1R, UKCPM -v- Mrs A, before Deputy District Judge Chohan at High Wycombe statements purported to have been signed by 'Jack Chapman', an employee of the Claimant Company, could not have been. A comparison of the signatures on these two statements showed that the signatures are 100% identical in every respect, down to the last pixel. It was highly improbable, if not impossible, that any person would sign his name twice in a completely identical manner on two separate occasions, three months apart. The same signature in this case too. See Exhibit DPR/6.

12. The complaint to the SRA continued: ''The only possible conclusion to be drawn from this, is that Gladstones have copied, traced, or otherwise forged Mr Chapman's signature, and that in fact Mr Chapman has never seen or signed these statements. This is particularly relevant in the case of the second statement, which was emailed to the Defendant on the day after it was created. Gladstones are based in Knutsford, Cheshire, whereas the Claimant company are situated in West Sussex. Unless they couriered it by helicopter, it is clear that Mr Chapman could not have signed it.

13.This is a significant and serious act of dishonesty, for which Lesley Layton of Lance Mason Solicitors was struck off the roll in 2017. See Exhibit DPR/7

14. The complaint, currently under investigation against Gladstones, suggested that the SRA needs to take urgent action on this matter, as it is more likely than not that this is an ongoing and regular practice. See Exhibit DPR/8

15. In the case of UKCPM v Mrs A on 17th October, Deputy District Judge Chohan at High Wycombe struck out both conjoined claims. He also agreed that the two factors of late service, and a defective WS, crossed the threshold of unreasonable behaviour, and awarded Mrs A her full costs in the sum of £331.80, which he said was a very reasonable figure.

16. My case has the same facsimile signature from a person who was not a witness. It is a templated statement and 'Jack' from UKCPM is not here to be cross examined, being conspicuous by his absence.

Statement of Truth

I believe that the facts stated in this witness statement are true. I understand that proceedings for contempt of court may be brought against anyone who makes, or causes to be made, a false statement in a document verified by a statement of truth without an honest belief in its truth.

Signature

 

 

Date

 

As for the claimant's WST section - I found the template from the following links: 

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6017649/county-court-claim-private-pcn-from-uk-cpm/p8

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/76951512#Comment_76951512

however I cannot find attachments to support this. Any assistance with this please?

Coupon-mad

It's not a PNC, it's a PCN.

comply with Said Act.

No capital letter for 'said'!

In 6 you have the wrong name of the IPC even from what you're trying to say.  They will NOT have said the IPC's name ended in 'Company'.

Wrong statement of truth - it changed in April 2020 (Google it):

I believe that the facts stated in this Witness Statement are true.

Umkomaas

4.1 There is a company called HML PM Ltd that was previously called HML Andertons Ltd and Andertons Ltd before that that deals with property management.

Doesn't make sense to me, a bit 'clumsy' perhaps, maybe needs rewording.

I believe that the facts stated in this Witness Statement are true.

You might do, but it's not the Statement of Truth that is now mandatory. Check out the NEWBIES FAQ sticky, second post, or do a Google search. 

iWindmill

Thank you - updated.
As for the attachments for paragraph 11, 13, 14, and 17 - These paragraphs have been used by several people, however, I could not find the source of these paragraphs where attachments could be used as evidence. 

Coupon-mad

Is the postcode in #17 even true in your case?  I thought UKCPM had sorted it out in recent WS.

The SRA email complaint reply about Gladstones are in a few threads but you'd have to trawl cases to find it.  

iWindmill

So I'm nearing the completion of my supplementary WST. Since my hearing was postponed and, due to my hearing loss, I requested for the hearing to be held at court rather than over the phone or video conference and this was accepted.
As of now I do not have a date for my hearing, nor do I know how soon it could be due to the current situation we're in. Should I hold off sending my supplementary WST until I receive a date, and then submit it two weeks prior to hearing? I don't exactly want to give Gladstones enough time to create their own supplementary WST rectifying all the errors.

How should I proceed?

nosferatu1001

2 weeks before sounds good to me. 

Coupon-mad

Yes, I agree.

iWindmill

Okay so my hearing is on 20th and I'm preparing myself for it.

My focus points that I need to focus on and prepare for are:-
- Unable to find HML Andertons on the management company list, nor can I find someone with the name "Patel". 
- No contract between landowner and parking company, also no dates signed etc.
- False signature, who is this Jack Chapman?
- SRA are investigating gladstones.

Any advice for the hearing? I'm nervous.