Letter Before Claim - SCS Law & UKPC - CASE WON!

Coupon-mad

Yep looks fine. Expect more email tennis, and soon, a claim I expect.

DAngel

Thanks Coupon Mad, always appreciate your unwavering support. At least i've batted the ball out of my court again for now and will just wait and see.

DAngel

More email tennis as suspected - here is their latest response... weak at best!

Re: UK Parking Control Ltd

I write further to your email below, having now obtained our client's instructions.

You raised several points in your email and therefore our response is as follows:-

1. Our client has instructed us that they operated on the site until June 2018. Please provide us with any evidence which suggests otherwise.

2. You state that as a tenant you had to abide by your tenancy agreement which made no mention of any restrictions being put in place in respect of parking. Please provide us with a copy of your tenancy agreement so our client can consider their position in full.

3. As previously explained, our client manages parking at the site in question pursuant to the contract with XX Property Management, who are the managing agents of the site on behalf of the landowner.

4. As previously explained, Schedule 8 of the Lease makes it clear that you need to comply with the estate regulations when using the parking spaces. Therefore, it is our client's position that these regulations included the implementation of a parking scheme and therefore the parking charge notices were validly issued against your vehicle, as you were parked in breached of the terms and conditions.

In light of the above, it is our client's position that you are liable for the parking charge notices for the total sum of £2,250.00.

Please note, if an agreement cannot be reached between the parties in this matter, then I anticipate instructions from our client to commence court proceedings for the recovery of the total sum of £2,250.00 plus costs.

I look forward to hearing from you.


1. I have photos of my road taken on 25th November 2018 with PCM signs up and emails dating back to November 2016 from the resident's committee talking about throwing out PCM, and my neighbour was leading the committee so will have emails to the property management company fighting our cause re PCM. I also have an email from the property management company dated 17th Jan 2019 stating that PCM patrol the accessway.....Unless i'm missing something here and PCM and UKPC are the same company?!?!

2. Thoughts on sharing my tenancy agreement?

4. For ref. Schedule 8 that they are referring to is in the Lease agreement (which I was never in possession of as a tenant) and says:

Covenants Enforceable by the Lessor and the Manager:
"To comply with and make all reasonable endeavours to ensure that all persons living in or visiting the Demised Premises or using the Allocated Parking Space or any part of the Maintained Property shall comply with the Estate Regulations"

The definition of "Estate Regulations" is stated to mean "any reasonable regulations made by the manager from time to time for the proper management of the Estate"

Look forward to your thoughts experts!!

Coupon-mad

PCM are a completely different ex-clamper scumbag firm, than UKPC.

Yes you should show your tenancy agreement so you can't be accused of withholding it, later on. You will be putting it into evidence at WS stage anyway.

As for that quote, search the forum for these words from it:

reasonable regulations time to time proper Estate

As this has been discussed a lot before. Penalising residents who are already entitled to park is not reasonable...

And read more UKPC SCS Law threads. CVKTA's thread has what you want to say but I'm not linking it, I never do, I want posters to research the forum themselves & use it well, including finding a thread by being told who wrote it. Read his most recent letter.

DAngel

And read more UKPC SCS Law threads. CVKTA's thread has what you want to say but I'm not linking it, I never do, I want posters to research the forum themselves & use it well, including finding a thread by being told who wrote it. Read his most recent letter.

I love it, i'll have a more detailed look their letter a little later but noticed CVKTA used my initial letters as inspiration so i'm glad that we're swapping tips to fight these criminals together.

Re reasonable regulations i'm sure I covered something about this in my last letter - the Union Jack statement and all the Primacy of Contract parts, but will do some more searching to be sure.

I love searching the forums, some brilliant work on there and definitely puts the mind at rest seeing others successes.

Back soon when i've pulled together a response.

Coupon-mad

noticed CVKTA used my initial letters as inspiration

Nice; I missed that fact! Collaboration working at its best!

:T

CVKTA

DAngel, you gave me the inspiration needed. Best of luck with your battle!

DAngel

UPDATE:
I've been liaising with my (useless) MA to try and clarify the exact dates that UKPC and PCM patrolled. This is a key point for me, as no one (including the MA, UKPC or their Solicitors) seems to know the exact dates of commencement and termination of contract, and I’ve been told several different dates by all of them.

I have also asked the MA to provide a copy of the letters that would have gone out to residents to inform of dates of implementation and termination of said contracts, to which I keep getting a ‘unfortunately computer says no’ type response.

The MA has provided with me the contract between them and UKPC (which has no dates on it) and notes specify the following:

“Only the access road to be patrolled and out of bays in small car parks. The access road runs the length of the site.
DO NOT cover last car park on the right side of the road

Then on 22.08.2017 it got changed to Please just patrol anyone down the yellow lines, anyone parked on the kerbs etc but not inside the laybys”

All signage specified this too.

Note that the tickets I received were for being ‘parked outside a marked bay’, never on a yellow line though. And just find it interesting that the specification was later changed to just ticket those who were on the yellow lines / curbs?

Is there anything in this to help my case? I wanted to wait for this information to come through before replying in full to SCS, and just wanted to check in with you lovely people first to see if there is anything else we can add here?

Coupon-mad

The MA has provided with me the contract between them and UKPC (which has no dates on it) and notes specify the following:

“Only the access road to be patrolled and out of bays in small car parks. The access road runs the length of the site.
DO NOT cover last car park on the right side of the road

Then on 22.08.2017 it got changed to Please just patrol anyone down the yellow lines, anyone parked on the kerbs etc but not inside the laybys”

That is VERY vague and how on earth are drivers supposed to know this and have any certainty? None of this would be publicly known, so the fact the rules were secretly chopped and changed at the whim of the MA (without reference to the actual landowner, it seems, who authorised nothing) is well worth including in your defence.

DAngel

Response letter drafted, eyes and opinions welcome:


1. According to XXXX, the property manager for the estate at XXX XXX, UKPC operated on site until 19th October 2017. That said, residents were never informed of this, XXX was unable to provide me with any letters to prove this, also the contract that you have both provided (attached) is not dated, and therefore I have not been able to see confirmation of ANY dates in writing, from you, your client, the Managing Agent or otherwise – I would ask that you provide me with written and signed evidence of the dates that UKPC operated, surely as they are your client you should be clear on this. How on earth would drivers and residents have any certainty on whether or not UKPC were actually operating and which part of the road they were in operation, as it’s clear that this was also chopped and changed at the whim of the Managing agent with no authorisation from the actual landowner.

2. Tenancy agreement attached.

3. Nowhere within the head lease is there any mention of any terms which would fetter or restrict my enjoyment of the property. Whilst operating your enterprise, I’m sure your client has become quite versed regarding the concept of ‘Primacy of Contract’ within Residential Parking cases – where a contract cannot be unilaterally altered by one party without the permission of the other.
Under the Landlord & Tenant Act, any variation of a lease has to be through consultation and strict agreement. This never occurred; therefore the lease cannot have been varied. Moreover, I invite you to consider the principle of ‘derogation of grant’: The rule that a party should not derogate from its grant embodies a general legal principle that, if the landlord agrees to confer a benefit on the lessee, then the landlord should not do anything that substantially deprives the lessee of the enjoyment of that benefit. There is considerable case law which supports my view that the Managing Agent, in engaging with a contract with your client, has placed on leaseholders an onerous burden of implementing parking restrictions at the risk of incurring a charge if they fail to do so. This is sufficiently intrusive to override the grant of my right to park, effectively restricting and charging for a right previously enjoyed, without the required consensus and deed of variation. Your client holds a contract with XXX, not with me. Why would I be in the least bit interested in a document which has nothing to do with my tenancy and leasehold agreements signed by two parties neither of whom is me?

4. Under contract law, I’m sure your client is also aware that as a party already entered into a signed agreement, I cannot be offered or entered into any form of contract via signage or otherwise for a service that I am already enjoying the use of, as per the lease agreement. What am I asserting is simply this: since, by virtue of the terms of the lease agreement, I had already been afforded the right to park and there can be no contract as your client claims simply because there is no ‘quid pro quo’, i.e. no consideration provided to me, and I certainly provided none.

The issue of unnecessarily penalising residents lawfully parking on their own property is not being ignored by parliament and our legislature. Notwithstanding the likelihood of an imminent introduction of legislation protecting people against unlawful parking charges (I refer your client to: Parking (Code of Practice) Bill 2017-19 which has passed its third reading in the House of Lords on 4th March 2019) I will also report the matter to my constituency’s MP.