Parking fines by UKPC

Money...MATTERS

I am starting this thread on behalf of a colleague who has received several PCNs from UKPC in 2014. Unfortunately she decided to put her head in the sand and has received a letter stating that UKPC have instructed SCS Law to issue court proceedings to recover the amount (which is in excess of £1200) I responded to her LBC which was done in a haste because she only informed me about it on the day of the deadline.

The claim is for parking within the boundaries of the flat that she rents. Her tenancy confirms that she is allowed to park in the parking bays and surrounding area as long as a valid permit is displayed. The permit she was issued with would not stick to the window and would fall off (one of the pictures taken by the parking attendant clearly shows the permit on the dash board). She advised that on some occasions her permit would fall behind the dash board of her old VW so she would leave a note explaining that she was awaiting for a new one (also seen in pictures)

The company have now given her 14 days notice pursuant to paragraph 8.2 of the pre-action protocol for debt claims this was issued on 5/10/2018. My colleague will be travelling on the 13/10/2018 and is returning on 5/11/2018, I have requested that she get someone to collect her mail in case the POC is issued and to forward to me. I know there is not much that can be done right now but any advice would be appreciated. Also I think in this case would it be best for her to say that she is the driver?

Thank you to all the regulars that commit their free time to assist us panicking novices, truly appreciated.

Fruitcake

Follow the guide to court in post 2 of the NEWBIES.

Admitting to being the driver is normally the best method for "own space" issues.

There is nothing stopping you sending another, more detailed response to the LBC.

I believe the new pre-action protocol allows 30 days for response, not 14, so that should be challenged.

The lease needs to be scrutinised in detail. Does it allow a third party to issue charges and issue court proceedings?
Is the permit scheme mentioned in the lease, or has this come from the MA or the scammers themselves?

Have you/your colleague complained to the landowner?

From a court case mentioned on the Parking Prankster's blog site.

http://parking-prankster.blogspot.com/search?q=sticky

The judge dismissed the claim. He ruled that it was the responsibility of the parking company to provide sticky backed tickets and that he had already thrown out 6-10 of these type of cases which Link Parking had brought.

The same would apply to a permit. If it falls off then a frustration of contract has occurred.

The_Slithy_Tove

If the initial response to the LBC was done in haste, and therefore doesn't cover everything, then now is your opportunity to open fire with all guns blazing. Check out other similar cases, and ask for anything and everything that's relevant. Make life hard for them. They will likely pursue this as the amount is significant. You could potentially threaten them with a counterclaim (DPA) if they continue, though you need to be sure you have valid grounds.

While the tenancy may insist on a permit being shown, (a) what does the head lease say and (b) what happens when this clause is breached; she is technically in breach of the tenancy, the remedy for which is not to pay a third party "stranger" to the agreement a sum of money.

The_Deep

If the Law allows 30 days, and the solicitor has only given 14 complain to the SRA

http://www.sra.org.uk/home/home.page

Money...MATTERS

Hi all!

Apologies for not updating on this, my colleague went on holiday and did not leave me with any paperwork to pursue the matter on her behalf. She returned this week and has a claim made on the 16/10/2018. I acknowledge it for her today. I will ask her to forward me the tenancy agreement and any other correspondence and will keep you all updated. Thanks for the suggestions.

KeithP

[STRIKE]Are you saying that the Issue Date on the Claim Form is 16th October 2019?

If so, then are you sure the Acknowledgement of Service has been accepted?
It should have been done by Monday 5th November, after which time the Claimant was able to request a Judgment by Default.

If the AoS has been accepted, check on MCOL, then you should continue with the Defence.

If the AoS has been accepted, you then have until 4pm on Monday 19th November 2018 to file your Defence.

Less than two weeks. Loads of time to produce a good Defence, but don't leave it to the very last minute.


When you are happy with the content, your Defence should be filed via email as described here:

1) Print your Defence.
2) Sign it and date it.
3) Scan the signed document back in and save it as a pdf.
4) Send that pdf as an email attachment to CCBCAQ@Justice.gov.uk
5) Just put the claim number and the word Defence in the email title, and in the body of the email something like 'Please find my Defence attached'.
6) Log into MCOL after a few days to see if the Claim is marked "defended". If not chase the CCBC until it is.
7) Wait for your Directions Questionnaire and then re-read post #2 of the NEWBIES thread to find out exactly what to do with it.[/STRIKE]

Money...MATTERS

KeithP wrote: »

Are you saying that the Issue Date on the Claim Form is 16th October 2019?

Sorry I just double checked with my colleague and it was issued on the 23/10/2018. Thanks KeithP

KeithP

Money...MATTERS wrote: »

Sorry I just double checked with my colleague and it was issued on the 23/10/2018.

Then please disregard my earlier post.

With a Claim Issue Date of 23rd October, you have until Monday 12th November to do the Acknowledgement of Service, but there is nothing to be gained by delaying it. To do the AoS, follow the guidance offered in a Dropbox link from post #2 of the NEWBIES FAQ sticky thread.

Having done the AoS, you then have until 4pm on Monday 26th November 2018 to file your Defence.

Nearly three weeks. Loads of time to produce a perfect Defence, but don't leave it to the very last minute.


When you are happy with the content, your Defence should be filed via email as described here:

1) Print your Defence.
2) Sign it and date it.
3) Scan the signed document back in and save it as a pdf.
4) Send that pdf as an email attachment to CCBCAQ@Justice.gov.uk
5) Just put the claim number and the word Defence in the email title, and in the body of the email something like 'Please find my Defence attached'.
6) Log into MCOL after a few days to see if the Claim is marked "defended". If not chase the CCBC until it is.
7) Wait for your Directions Questionnaire and then re-read post #2 of the NEWBIES thread to find out exactly what to do with it.


Important: everywhere I have used 'you' or 'your' I do of course mean the Defendant.

Coupon-mad

I hope the Defendant was the named person who acknowledged it on MCOL, not you? Not your own Govt Gateway account in your name, as you are a stranger to the matter.

Just checking that first.

Show us the Defendant's draft appeal asap in the next fortnight, based on the dozens of similar ones available at the drop of a hat by reading & searching the forum an not reading anything older than 2017.

Please do also use the 2nd post of the NEWBIES thread at every stage before posting, as your questions are answered there about all stages of the defence process right through to Witness Statement, evidence and hearing.

Money...MATTERS

Coupon-mad wrote: »

I hope the Defendant was the named person who acknowledged it on MCOL, not you? Not your own Govt Gateway account in your name, as you are a stranger to the matter.

Just checking that first.

I set up an account for her and used her details; I can see she is melting inside and really can't take this on right now. I'm just hoping that she will provide me with the correspondence that she has received so that I can at least start the process. I hope when it comes to court she'll be ready.

Money...MATTERS

Afternoon all!

Ok, so my colleague tells me that the parking scheme was introduced to her area in June 2012 - 6 months after she had moved into her flat provided by a housing association. The only clauses that refer to parking says that:

You must not park anywhere except in a garage, on a parking space or hardstanding, or on a drive.

You must not park without a valid parking permit, or allow your visitors to park without a permit if there is a parking scheme where you live.

Tenants were provided a permit 3"by 2" with no means of securing it. My colleague advises that the permit was always on display except when it would drop through the dashboard which is no fault of her own.

I am waiting for her to give me a bit more details about the parking area but here is the first draft defence:



In the County Court

Claim No: xxxx

BETWEEN:

XXX (Claimant)

and

XXXXXX (Defendant)

Defence

1. The Defendant denies that the Claimant is entitled to relief in the sum claimed, or at all.

2. The Defendant is an Assured Non-Shorthold Tenant and moved into the property at ADDRESS in DATE, and at some point after that, a parking firm was imposed on the residents, which everyone naively believed were there to stop trespassers, not look for reasons to penalise genuine residents with no way for the Managing Agents to cancel these penalties.

3. The Defendant's tenancy has primacy of contract over any restrictions the Claimant places on the land.

3.1. There are no terms within the Defendant's tenancy conditions requiring tenants to display parking permits or park in a marked bay, or to pay penalties to third parties, such as the Claimant, for non-display of same, and there is a large body of case law which establishes this.

In Pace v Mr N [2016] C6GF14F0 [2016] it was found that the parking company could not override the tenant's right to park by requiring a permit to park.

In Link Parking v Ms P C7GF50J7 [2016] it was also found that the parking company could not override the tenant's right to park by requiring a permit to park.
NEED MORE INFO HERE COLLEAGUE: Describe the parking area!!!

3.2. Even if the Defendant was displaying a permit, they were only doing so as a courtesy as the Managing Agents had issued them one day and asked everyone to do so, and at no point was anyone warned that these 'permits' in fact masked an onerous obligation which could give rise to a penalty. At no point did residents realise they were having a contract foisted upon them. At no point did the Managing Agents remove the easements and rights of way already granted, and at no point did the Managing Agents seek authority to alter the tenancy agreement to impose a parking regime and remove the unfettered parking rights and easements that had already passed to the Defendant as a Assured Tenant.

3.2.1 Additionally the Claimant cannot definitively assert that a valid permit was not clearly on display. The permits provided by the Claimant are not fit for purpose as there is no means to securely affix the small 3” by 2” permit anywhere in a vehicle and it is prone to move and/or fall through no fault of the drivers.

3.3. The Defendant avers that the operator’s signs cannot override the existing rights enjoyed by residents. Accordingly it is denied that:

3.3.1. there was any agreement as between the Defendant or driver of the vehicle and the Claimant.

3.3.2. the Claimant has suffered loss or damage or that there is a lawful basis to pursue a claim for loss.

3.4. It is further denied that the signage is clearly displayed. The signs in this car park are not prominent, clear or legible from all parking spaces and there is insufficient notice of the sum of the parking charge itself.

4. The Claimant has taken over the location and runs a business as if the site were a public car park, offering terms with £100 penalty on the same basis to residents, as is on offer to the general public and trespassers. However, residents are granted a right of way and parking terms under a new and onerous 'permit' cannot be re-offered as a contract by a third party. This interferes with the terms of lease, of which this parking firm is not a party to, nor will they have bothered to check for any rights or easements that their regime will interfere with (the Claimant is put to strict proof).

5. The Claimant may rely on the case of ParkingEye v Beavis [2015] UKSC 67 as a binding precedent on the lower court. However, that only assists the Claimant if the facts of the case are the same, or broadly the same. In Beavis, it was common ground between the parties that the terms of a contract had been breached, whereas it is the Defendant's position that no such breach occurred in this case, because there was no valid contract, and also because the 'legitimate interest' in enforcing parking rules for retailers and shoppers in Beavis does not apply to these circumstances. Therefore, this case can be distinguished from Beavis on the facts and circumstances.

6. The Claimant, or their legal representatives, has added an additional sum of £60 per original £100 parking charge, for which no explanation or justification has been provided. Schedule 4 of the Protection Of Freedoms Act, at 4(5), states that the maximum sum which can be recovered is that specified in the Notice to Keeper, which is £100 in this instance. It is submitted that this is an attempt at double recovery by the Claimant, which the Court should not uphold, even in the event that Judgment for Claimant is awarded.

7. For all or any of the reasons stated above, the Court is invited to dismiss the Claim in its entirety, and to award the Defendant such costs as are allowable on the small claims track, pursuant to Civil Procedure Rule 27.14. Given that the claim is based on alleged contractual parking charges of £xxx - already significantly inflated and mostly representing profit, as was found in Beavis - but the amount claimed on the claim form is inexplicably £xxx.xx, the Defendant avers that this inflation of the considered amount is a gross abuse of process.

8. Given that it appears that this Claimant's conduct provides for no cause of action, and this is intentional and contumelious, the Claimant's claim must fail and the court is invited to strike it out.

9. In the alternative, the Court is invited, under the Judge's own discretionary case management powers, to set a preliminary hearing to examine the question of this Claimant's substantial interference with easements, rights and 'primacy of contract' of residents at this site, to put an end to not only this litigation but to send a clear message to the Claimant to cease wasting the court's time by bringing beleaguered residents to court under excuse of a contractual breach that cannot lawfully exist.

I believe that the facts stated in this Defence are true.


………………………………………………………. (Defendant)