Residents parking - UKCPM - Claim Form

pogo88

Hi All,

Firstly, thanks to all contributors for the invaluable info and advice in this forum, it does shows the scale of the problems with these PPCs and the shameful practices with which they operate, I really wish I had come across this earlier in the process. However, that ship has sailed and I believe I will now need to defend my case at the county courts. I would, therefore, be very grateful for any advice or support which will help me through this.

So…I have been issued with a Court Claim Form (Issued 08 Nov 2018) which relates to 2xPCNs issued in Apr 2017 by UKCPM for ‘Not Displaying a Valid Parking permit’ whilst parked in the allocated parking bay of my apartment block. I was parked in my allocated parking bay, in a vehicle that is registered with UK CPM for that particular bay. The permit was displayed in my car, but had slid down the dashboard so that it may have been partially obscured.

I appealed to UKCPM and the IAS and this was obviously rejected. They said there are numerous signs displaying the conditions of parking (which there are) and that I had breached that contract by not displaying my permit correctly. I will double check the wording of this signage to see if there are any issues there which can help with my defence. Ever since I received the PCNs, I have been speaking with my Property Manager, Pinnacle, to ask if they could leverage their relationship with UKCPM to cancel the PCNs. Unfortunately, when they eventually got around to speaking to them, UKCPM advised that whilst they were willing to cancel these PCNs as a “goodwill gesture”, they were unable to do so on this occasion as my debt had already been passed onto their debt collectors and that it was now out of their hands. But, as a result of my case, they had agreed to bring in a policy between UKCPM and Pinnacle that would allow them to cancel PCNs issued to residents who prove they held valid permits at the time of offence.

Another factor that might complicate my case, is that I had another PCN issued to me in Nov 2016. This progressed, through mistakes and a misunderstanding of the process on my part, all the way to a default CCJ being raised against me. At which point I reluctantly paid the outstanding amounts. Will this work against me in my present case? Will they see this as some form of admission of guilt? I really want to fight this all the way, but just wanted to gauge if there would be any realistic chances of me defending my current claim with UKCPM.

I think my next step is to acknowledge the claim form and then work on building a defence? Nowhere in my lease does it state I am required to display a permit in order to park in the allocated bays and UKCPM were brought in without any consultation with the residents. I will also try to look at the mandates in place between UKCPM, the property manager and the freeholder of the parking area to see if there are any areas where the delegation of authority has not been instructed properly. But to be honest, I do struggle with a lot of the legal language that these documents sometimes contain.

I have tried to take in as much of the info from the FAQs and numerous other related posts, but I apologise if some of my questions have already been raised before.

Thanks in advance,
P

KeithP

pogo88 wrote: »

So…I have been issued with a Court Claim Form (Issued 08 Nov 2018)...

With a Claim Issue Date of 8th November, you have until Tuesday 27th 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 Tuesday 11th December 2018 to file your Defence.

That's over four 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 suggested here:

Print your Defence.
1. Sign it and date it.
   
2. Scan the signed document back in and save it as a pdf.
   
3. Send that pdf as an email attachment to CCBCAQ@Justice.gov.uk
   
4. 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'.
   
5. Log into MCOL after a few days to see if the Claim is marked "defended". If not chase the CCBC until it is.
   
6. Do not be surprised to receive a copy of the Claimant's Directions Questionnaire, they are just trying to put you under pressure.
   
7. Wait for your DQ from the CCBC, or download one from the internet, and then re-read post #2 of the NEWBIES FAQ sticky thread to find out exactly what to do with it.

The_Deep

Why do you display a permit to park in a space which is allocated to you under your lease/AST. Whst does your lease/AST say about the need for a permit?

Nearly all of these own space claims get thrown out of court as your lease?/AST has primacy, google Primacy of Contract, have you read this?

http://parking-prankster.blogspot.com/2016/11/residential-parking.html

also read this

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?377246-UKPC-liable-for-trespass-**SUCCESS**

This is an entirely unregulated industry which is scamming the public with inflated claims for minor breaches of alleged contracts for alleged parking offences, aided and abetted by a handful of low-rent solicitors.

Parking Eye, CPM, Smart, and others have already been named and shamed in the House of Commons as have Gladstones Solicitors, and BW Legal, (these two law firms take hundreds of these cases to court each week, hospital car parks and residential complex tickets have been especially mentioned. They lose most of them, and have been reported to the regulatory authority by an M.P. for unprofessional conduct

The problem has become so widespread that MPs have agreed to enact a Bill to regulate these scammers. It has even been suggested that some of these companies have links with organised crime.

Watch the video of the Second Reading and committee stage in the House of Commons recently. MPs have a very low opinion of this industry.

http://parliamentlive.tv/event/index/2f0384f2-eba5-4fff-ab07-cf24b6a22918?in=12:49:41

https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2018-07-19/debates/2b90805c-bff8-4707-8bdc-b0bfae5a7ad5/Parking(CodeOfPractice)Bill(FirstSitting)

and complain in the most robust terms to your MP. With a fair wind they will be out of business by in the not too distant future..

rst A\\ST s. y

Coupon-mad

Ever since I received the PCNs, I have been speaking with my Property Manager, Pinnacle, to ask if they could leverage their relationship with UKCPM to cancel the PCNs. Unfortunately, when they eventually got around to speaking to them, UKCPM advised that whilst they were willing to cancel these PCNs as a “goodwill gesture”, they were unable to do so on this occasion as my debt had already been passed onto their debt collectors and that it was now out of their hands. But, as a result of my case, they had agreed to bring in a policy between UKCPM and Pinnacle that would allow them to cancel PCNs issued to residents who prove they held valid permits at the time of offence.

Good, you need to get all that in writing as evidence for the later, WS stage. It shows there is absolutely NO legitimate interest in charging you, or pursuing you, and that the charges are punishment, and fail to disengage the penalty rule (unlike the Beavis case). Without a legitimate interest and relevant obligation/contract there is no cause of action and they lied about debt collector stage, which costs them nothing and the case is NEVER 'out of their hands' at that nothing stage!

They could have cancelled your PCNs all along and they lied to Pinnacle. This has come to court with no legal backing of any commercial justification (unlike in Beavis) and you have primacy of contract as a resident and cannot be penalised like this.

BTW this is all Pinnacle's fault for contracting these ex-clamper thugs to be there, they have no place at all near residents cars you know and you have no reason to have to display a stupid permit and accept the risk of fines from a third party, for parking at your own home.

Another factor that might complicate my case, is that I had another PCN issued to me in Nov 2016. This progressed, through mistakes and a misunderstanding of the process on my part, all the way to a default CCJ being raised against me. At which point I reluctantly paid the outstanding amounts. Will this work against me in my present case?

No, they won't even know.

On the contrary, why not use your anger about that money to fire you on to WIN this time, and to show unreasonableness in not cancelling these PCNs when they could, and pointing out to the Judge at the hearing a huge list of unreasonable conduct, including where Gladstones will drop the ball (late Witness Statement is often the case) such that you wish to reclaim costs on the indemnity basis?

You need to read the threads by Sassii who has twice got 4 figure sums from Gladstones parking cases by listing his/her costs by the hour and by showing a list of unreasonable conduct that tipped the balance to allow punitive costs to be granted. I encourage you to focus on that and try, because you could even recoup more than the CCJ you ended up paying, if you can convince the Judge that the Claimant has acted 'wholly unreasonably' at all stages, including in the pre-action stage by lying to Pinnacle and trying to use you as an example - that's not a reason to continue to pursue you.

The_Deep

I too own a property that was, up until recently, managed by Pinnacle, Hurst. They were thrown out by the Residents' Association as they were not up to snuff.

ISTR that they were not at all in favour of having PPCs around, in fact they told me that they would never invite these scammers on to my complex. In view of this I should suggest to them that they ditch this company at the earliest opportunity. They do not manage parking, they scam residents.

This is an entirely unregulated industry which is scamming the public with inflated claims for minor breaches of alleged contracts for alleged parking offences, aided and abetted by a handful of low-rent solicitors.

Parking Eye, CPM, Smart, and others have already been named and shamed in the House of Commons as have Gladstones Solicitors, and BW Legal, (these two law firms take hundreds of these cases to court each week, hospital car parks and residential complex tickets have been especially mentioned. They lose most of them, and have been reported to the regulatory authority by an M.P. for unprofessional conduct

The problem has become so widespread that MPs have agreed to enact a Bill to regulate these scammers. It has even been suggested that some of these companies have links with organised crime.

Watch the video of the Second Reading and committee stage in the House of Commons recently. MPs have a very low opinion of this industry.

http://parliamentlive.tv/event/index/2f0384f2-eba5-4fff-ab07-cf24b6a22918?in=12:49:41

https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2018-07-19/debates/2b90805c-bff8-4707-8bdc-b0bfae5a7ad5/Parking(CodeOfPractice)Bill(FirstSitting)

and complain in the most robust terms to your MP. With a fair wind they will be out of business by in the not too distant future..

pogo88

Thank you all for the responses, encouragement and advice. I am determined to fight this as far as I can, so I will spend the next couple of weeks building my defence to try and win this thing and push back against these people.

The_Deep wrote: »

Why do you display a permit to park in a space which is allocated to you under your lease/AST. Whst does your lease/AST say about the need for a permit?

Nowhere in my lease, that I can find, can I see any mention of parking permits and that it is a requirement to park in the apartment complex.

Coupon-mad wrote: »

Without a legitimate interest and relevant obligation/contract there is no cause of action and they lied about debt collector stage, which costs them nothing and the case is NEVER 'out of their hands' at that nothing stage!

They could have cancelled your PCNs all along and they lied to Pinnacle.

Thanks, this is what I always thought but was not certain of.

Coupon-mad wrote: »

Good, you need to get all that in writing as evidence for the later, WS stage. It shows there is absolutely NO legitimate interest in charging you.

Will I need to approach my contacts at Pinnacle to sign off a witness statement for this? I have already an email from Pinnacle which confirms this change of policy:

“I can confirm that going forwards if a resident accidentally forgets to display their permit but they can prove that they are parked within their own allocated bay that if a ticket is issued this will be cancelled.
Please note however that this policy has been implemented since the issues you experienced and cannot be back dated.” – Senior Property Manager, Pinnacle (05 Mar 2018)

Given I will not be paying any of the outstanding amounts, I'm assuming that the opportunity for UKCPM cancel the claim against me has now passed and that this will now definitely progress to a court hearing? I am willing to argue my case at a hearing, as daunting as it seems to do this, as I really do believe the practices of UKCPM have been grossly unfair and I know there are plenty of residents who have just paid their PCNs as they didn’t want to escalate their concerns. Reading the posts of others who have shared their experience of this has really helped.

Thanks
P

Umkomaas

I am willing to argue my case at a hearing, as daunting as it seems to do this

KeithP always links this YouTube video to help assuage fears that a small claims court hearing is 'daunting'.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n93eoaxhzpU

pogo88

Hi All,

I have been reading back through past correspondence I've had with the PM in regards to UKCPM and came across the below statement:

"Just to confirm our conversation last week, UK CPM were instructed by Pinnacle as managing agents to monitor the car park at Regents Place, due to issues with residents being unable to park in their own bays when other residents or visitors had used them. UK CPM issue all permits directly to residents and have signage in place to ensure everyone knows that a valid permit must be displayed at all times. There is no formal contract that I can send you but as above can confirm that UK CPM monitor the car park on behalf of Regents Place Management Co Ltd." - Senior Property Manager, Pinnacle (11 Sep 2017)

I will clarify if she meant she could not provide a copy of the contract at the time, or whether she meant there is no formal contract at all with UKCPM. Surely if its the latter, then UKCPM will have had no authority at all to be managing the car park at all? Is it usual that a PCN can be brought in without some form of legal contract, specifying the concise terms and conditions under which they can operate?

Thanks

The_Deep

Pinnacle seem to be under the impression that a permit carries some weight, it does not.

Unless your lease/AST mentions the requirement for a permit, no permit is necessary. Your lease gives you all the protection you need against these scammers.

Threaten Pinnacle with a counter claim against the PPC for interfering with your leasehold right to quiet enjoyment of you property in which you will include them.

pogo88

Hi All,

I'm looking at the details of my lease and I was wondering if I could ask for your help in confirming my understanding of these are correct.

Under the 'Definitions' section of the lease, it states:

'"Lessee's Parking Space" means the car parking space marked with the number 15 on the car park plan or such parking space as is allocated by the manager for use by the Lessee from time to time but subject to variation from time to time or at any time during the Term in accordance with the provisions of the Sixth Schedule hereof'

In the Fifth Schedule it also states, under 'Rights included in the demise':

"9. The right (once constructed) to the exclusive use of the Lessee's Parking Space for the purpose of parking a private roadworthy and taxed motor vehicle not exceeding three tonnes
gross laden weight or motorcycle subject to the provisions of the Sixth Schedule and clause 8.12 hereof and the Developer's Regulations from time to time in force"

Clause 8.12 states:

"That the Manager shall have the right to allocate an equitable alternative Lessee's Parking Space and (if any) associated Lessee's Storage if it becomes reasonably necessary to do so with the intention that any storage and parking space having the same number on the Car Park Plan shall be treated as one whereby the Manager is able to allocate an equitable alternative Lessee's Parking Space without associated Lessee's Storage in the event the new space does not have associated storage notwithstanding that the old space did"


Then in the Sixth Schedule, the only relevant points I could find states, under 'Rights to which the demise is subject':

"3. The right for the Lessor at any time or times hereafter without obtaining the consent of or paying compensation to the Lessee:

3.2 And for the Manager to alter the layout and/or extent of the Accessways and/or the Landscaped Areas and/or and/or the Car Park and/or the Maintained Property and/or the Development provided always that nothing in this paragraph shall enable or entitle the Lessor to obstruct or impede or make materially less convenient the means of access to the Demised Premises and/or the Lessee's Parking Space and/or the Lessee's Storage (if any)"

"11. The rights in this Sixth Schedule may be exercised by the Lessor the Manager the Community Energy Company the Energy Service Company (unless such right is stated to be for the Lessor only) and by anyone else who is or becomes entitled to exercise them and by anyone authorised by the Lessor or the Manager or the Community Energy Company"

Finally, within the definitions section, it also states that:

"'Development Regulations' means any reasonable regulations made by the Manager from time to time for the proper management and use of the Development"

As far as I understand, there is nothing in the above that gives the manager any authority or right to unilaterally appoint a PPC who believe they can then impose their own set of parking rules upon us residents.

The two lines which have me a little worried are those contained in the definitions section. The definition for 'Development Regulations' does seem rather vague and open for interpretation. Am I right i assuming that it is for the claimant to evidence and prove that their practices are in fact 'Reasonable'?

Many thanks

KeithP

pogo88 wrote: »

Finally, within the definitions section, it also states that:

"'Development Regulations' means any reasonable regulations made by the Manager from time to time for the proper management and use of the Development"

The two lines which have me a little worried are those contained in the definitions section. The definition for 'Development Regulations' does seem rather vague and open for interpretation. Am I right i assuming that it is for the claimant to evidence and prove that their practices are in fact 'Reasonable'?

It certainly is not 'reasonable', nor is it 'proper management' for the Manager to hire someone to persecute the residents.

pogo88 wrote: »

As far as I understand, there is nothing in the above that gives the manager any authority or right to unilaterally appoint a PPC who believe they can then impose their own set of parking rules upon us residents.

That's right.


There also is nothing there that mentions permits and the display of them