Period of validity

Fruitcake

Missaver said:

This is the Contract they say gives them authority to dish out their fines.

As already mentioned, for the contract to be executed (valid) in accordance with the Companies Act 2006, it must be signed by two authorised signatories or a director and witness of MCS Ltd. A manager is not an authorised signatory. 
There is no PPC signature on the contract therefore there is no proof a contract was ever agreed by Parking Control Management UK. Any reasonable person would expect a company to sign a contract with another party

According to Companies House, Management Company Services Ltd (Company number 05032589) filing history, the Annual Reports up to February 2011 and up to February 2012 do not show a Ben Smith as an officer of the company. He was neither a company secretary nor director and thus was not authorised in accordance with the Act to execute a contract on behalf of the company. This assumes he actiually existed at all.

The contract does not have an end date, nor mention of auto renewal, therefore there is nothing to prove the contract was still in existence at the time of the alleged event.

Add all that to the fake reference to the IPC two years before it came into existence, and you have one dodgy contract. 

Missaver

Also, the letter from GS sent with their WS states :

We act for the Claimant in the above matter.
 Please find enclosed, by way of service, the Claimant’s Witness Statement.      
 The assumption is that our Client is not attending the hearing and therefore we kindly request this notice be treated as a notice pursuant to CPR 27.9. However on some occasions our Client may wish to attend and will do so.
 We confirm the statement has been filed at the Court.

If they don't attend the hearing, that means the case will be thrown out on the day, but if I wanted to save printing and posting, I can't really wait until then, haha 

KeithP

If they don't attend the hearing, that means the case will be thrown out on the day...

No it doesn't. Please read CPR 27.9.

nosferatu1001

No, it just means the client will not attend. Not that there won't be a rep there for them

MAKE IT REALLY CLEAR that the contract is a false instrument. Use those words 

Fruitcake

In addition to the advice already given about your court case, you should complain to the DVLA that a false instrument has been used to obtain your personal details which is a DPA/GDPR breach as well as a KADOE contract breach.

Please send the complaint with the dodgy contract and proof of IPC formation two years later to:

ccrt@dvla.gov.uk for the DPA breach  

and

KADOEservice.support@dvla.gov.uk for the KADOE contract breach. 

You should also complain to the SRA and ICO about this fraudulent act.

Umkomaas

I agree with Fruitcake - this could be serious enough for the DVLA to restrict access to RK data. In the current climate, that could push them towards the brink. 

henrik777

Missaver said:

Also, the letter from GS sent with their WS states :

We act for the Claimant in the above matter.
 Please find enclosed, by way of service, the Claimant’s Witness Statement.      
 The assumption is that our Client is not attending the hearing and therefore we kindly request this notice be treated as a notice pursuant to CPR 27.9. However on some occasions our Client may wish to attend and will do so.
 We confirm the statement has been filed at the Court.

If they don't attend the hearing, that means the case will be thrown out on the day, but if I wanted to save printing and posting, I can't really wait until then, haha 

They haven't issued a notice that complies with the requirements of cpr 27.9 because quite clearly they don't understand it. Our client might be there or might not be. But they've not asked for the claim to be decided in absence.

However, that doesn't mean the claim must be struck out, just that it may be.

Missaver

Fruitcake said:

In addition to the advice already given about your court case, you should complain to the DVLA that a false instrument has been used to obtain your personal details which is a DPA/GDPR breach as well as a KADOE contract breach.

Please send the complaint with the dodgy contract and proof of IPC formation two years later to:

ccrt@dvla.gov.uk for the DPA breach  

and

KADOEservice.support@dvla.gov.uk for the KADOE contract breach. 

You should also complain to the SRA and ICO about this fraudulent act.

I will do, thank you for those contacts.   
I'm looking forward to how this turns out after all this time.
 How much do you think I can claim for these breaches of Contract as part of their Unreasonable behaviour, so that I can include in my Summary of Costs Assessment?

KeithP

How much do you think I can claim for these breaches of Contract as part of their Unreasonable behaviour, so that I can include in my Summary of Costs Assessment?

You claim for your costs.

This is not an opportunity to 'think of a figure and double it'.

You need to work out how much it has actually cost you, in both time and materials, to Defend yourself.

Look at other examples. there are some linked from the second post of the NEWBIES thread.

If you want more than that, then you'll need to raise a Claim against them.

Fruitcake

Missaver, would you have any objection in sending me a pm with the location of the car park. I collect copies of contracts in case the same location comes up again on the forum.
I understand if you do not wish to do this.