Multiple county court claims?

wotnott

In my letter (not yet sent) I have raised the issue of due diligence, but without as yet going so far as to say "I would expect CPM to have a copy of my lease". This was just erring on the side of caution, since freedom of information is not an area where I claim particular expertise.

To confirm, a parking operator (or anyone) has the right to obtain my lease from the Land Registry? I believe this is the case.

It does seem a point worth making, as long as I am sure what I am saying is valid.

nosferatu1001

1) this isnt freedom of information or DPA or anythign else.
2) You can tell the sols you would expect their client to have already revieed leases, as these are available from the land registry and would be expected of any competent organisation.

ANy long term lease is available frmo land registry, for a fee. Not much. £10 or less from memory.

wotnott

Thanks. I have re-worded my letter accordingly.

In this letter, which I will send soonish (probably tomorrow morning at the latest), I state that I am now going to counter-claim against CPM for trespass. This is partly on the basis of R Davey vs UKPC, which seems fairly comparable to me. If anyone here has reason to think that such a claim would not work, please let me know.

wotnott

Letter sent.

wotnott

Draft of the next letter (this time to CPM):

"[On specified dates] your company affixed [quantity / details] Parking Charge Notices to my vehicle while it was parked in my parking space at [location]. This parking space is my property. It is clearly demised to me in my lease. If you are in doubt about this I would refer you to the lease itself, which I presume you would have reviewed as part of your due diligence process before deciding to operate a parking business at the property.

You have pursued me for payment of these charges since that time, as have your appointed agents Debt Recovery Plus and Gladstones Solicitors. On [date] I made a payment of [x] to Debt Recovery Plus after repeated threats of legal action.

I had thought this payment would bring the matter to a close, but I have continued to be pursued for payment of the other [quantity] PCNs. Having made every effort to avoid litigation you leave me with little choice but to respond.

Your position is that we have entered into a contract because of the presence of your signage in the car park (for instance from Gladstones' letter dated [date]: “You were offered use of the Land by way of signage”.) This is not the case. I have a legal right to park on my property. I have leasehold title, exclusive occupation and the right to quiet enjoyment. You, however, do not have the right to enter my property to affix notices to my vehicle.

Please pay me [x] to reimburse the direct loss which I have incurred as a result of your actions. This is a conservative figure and does not include stationery or postage costs, or of course any allowance for my time. If payment is not received within 14 days of the date of this letter I will commence legal proceedings against you for trespass.

I would be agreeable to mediation and would consider any other system of Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) in order to avoid the need for this matter to be resolved by the courts.

I refer you to the Practice Direction on pre-action conduct under the Civil Procedure Rules, and in particular to paragraphs 13-16 which set out the sanctions the court may impose if you fail to comply with the Practice Direction."

wotnott

No response to Letter Before Claim. I have submitted a claim via MCOL.

wotnott

This is going to court.

I have seen a few references to case D7GF307F (UKCPM v Mr D, Deputy District Judge Skelly, 1 February 2018, Clerkenwell) which sounds relevant.

Googling has not led me to source of these references. Does anyone know where any detail on this case can be found?

Coupon-mad

There is no transcript for it.

Bargepole reported the case, and it is therefore true, but there's no proof. Not that you file evidence anything like yet.

What's the date on your claim form and have you done the AOS online already?

wotnott

I am the claimant, not the defendant.

Coupon-mad

Ah, good - unusual!

Please pay me [x] to reimburse the direct loss which I have incurred as a result of your actions.

What was the 'direct loss' you are claiming for and have you already served a LBC and detailed particulars of claim?

Show us what you plan to say, or have already stated.

I am sure you know, these are important to argue well, based on specific loss and also distress (citing the DPA for misuse of data, and the Protection from Harassment Act) and interference with the amenity and rights within with lease. Tort of trespass as well.

In Roger Davey v UKPC, his quantified loss was the cost of an injunction he paid for to stop UKPC touching his car in his owned space. Are you up for that route?