IMPORTANT REMINDER: Please make sure your posts do not contain any personally identifiable information. If you are uploading images, please take extra care that you have redacted all personal information.

Court Report - Guildford - Another UKCPM Claim Bites The Dust

Case No.: E4GF9T29 – UK Car Park Management Ltd. -v- Miss C, before District Judge Trigg

Claimant represented by Mr Ajike, solicitors’ agent
Defendant attended in person, with lay representative Mr Bargepole

Order: Claim dismissed, Claimant to pay Defendant’s witness costs of £105.40 within 21 days.


Miss C had been a leaseholder of the flat at New Central, Woking, since 2011, and UKCPM were brought in to operate a permit scheme in 2013. The underground car park can only be accessed by means of a key fob, issued to all residents. Some spaces are numbered, and allocated to specific flats, while the rest are unmarked, and available on a first come, first served basis. She had parked in one of these.

Her lease grants her a right to park, subject to vehicles being taxed and roadworthy, with no commercial vehicles, caravans or trailers permitted.

The Claimant’s case was that, because the lease has a clause saying that the landlord, or managing agent, can impose regulations for the efficient management of the estate, this entitled the Claimant to rely upon that, and the terms of its signage.

Our case was that any such regulations had to be consistent with the lease terms, and this was not, it would have required a properly executed variation of lease. We relied on Jopson, Noor, and Parkinson. Alternatively, the Claimant’s signage stated ‘Authorised Vehicles Only’, and she was de facto authorised by virtue of possessing a key fob.

The DJ was well up to speed on all these issues, having heard many similar cases previously, and she ruled that any regulations imposed must be reasonable. It was not reasonable to attempt to penalise a leaseholder who was parking in accordance with the terms of her lease. If she had been parking in someone else’s marked bay, or blocking an exit, the Claimant may have an arguable case, but in this case they didn’t. The sign also did not create any contractual liability, so the claim must fail.

For Mr Deep's benefit, we did apply for further costs for unreasonable behaviour, but the DJ ruled that was a high threshold which had not been met in this case, although she did comment that the WS filed by Gladstones was 'very poor'.

I have been providing assistance, including Lay Representation at Court hearings (current score: won 56, lost 14), to defendants in parking cases for over 5 years. I have an LLB (Hons) degree, and have a Graduate Diploma in Civil Litigation from CILEx. However, any advice given on these forums by me is NOT formal legal advice, and I accept no liability for its accuracy.
«13

Replies

  • onlyfoolsandparkingonlyfoolsandparking Forumite
    1.8K Posts
    1,000 Posts Third Anniversary Name Dropper
    ✭✭✭
    Fantastic!! and another kick in the face for Gallstones
  • beamerguybeamerguy Forumite
    17.6K Posts
    Part of the Furniture 10,000 Posts Photogenic Name Dropper
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    Well done BP

    Given the poor claims in general from Gladstones, could there be a case to have them sanctioned under the Mental Health Act ??

    It is no wonder that Gladstones have turned themselves into a huge joke
  • waamowaamo Forumite
    10.3K Posts
    10,000 Posts Seventh Anniversary Name Dropper
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    Fantastic!! and another kick in the face for Gallstones

    I honestly think they don't care. It's a money tree for them. Even when they lose they charge the client for their time.
  • beamerguybeamerguy Forumite
    17.6K Posts
    Part of the Furniture 10,000 Posts Photogenic Name Dropper
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    waamo wrote: »
    I honestly think they don't care. It's a money tree for them. Even when they lose they charge the client for their time.

    Probably right ..... give a thought to the dummy PC's as it's only back street legals that are available to them
  • beamerguybeamerguy Forumite
    17.6K Posts
    Part of the Furniture 10,000 Posts Photogenic Name Dropper
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    Important thread so bumped

    The rubbish Gladstones again
  • RedxRedx Forumite
    38.1K Posts
    Eighth Anniversary 10,000 Posts Name Dropper Photogenic
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    it never ceases to amaze me that these parking companies believe it is their right to harass residents once they have a parking contract of sorts


    they think that a captive audience is fair game, well its not and it shouldnt be either, so they deserve a good kicking at each and every opportunity


    well done BP and Miss C
  • edited 21 November 2018 at 7:31PM
    Coupon-madCoupon-mad
    105.7K Posts
    Part of the Furniture 10,000 Posts Name Dropper Photogenic
    ✭✭✭✭✭✭
    edited 21 November 2018 at 7:31PM
    I believe PPCs should be banned from all residential sites.

    They have no place there whatsoever, not even in a location where it's near a station or airport, etc.

    All they need is a gate/key fobs for residents, or parking posts. Maybe a few polite PRIVATE LAND - RESIDENTS ONLY signs as a deterrent, too. No scammer needed at all.

    Maybe the only way to achieve that is for more people to take a leaf out of Sassii's book and sue the Managing Agents and refuse to have the costs added to leaseholder fees later, make them suck it up and realise what they are doing to residents. I hope Sassii succeeds.
    PRIVATE 'PCN'? DON'T PAY BUT DON'T IGNORE IT (except N.Ireland).
    CLICK at the top of this/any page where it says:
    Forum Home»Motoring»Parking Tickets Fines & Parking - read the NEWBIES THREAD
  • Snakes_BellySnakes_Belly Forumite
    3K Posts
    1,000 Posts Fourth Anniversary Photogenic Name Dropper
    ✭✭✭✭
    I can't understand how any solicitor would want to take on cases like this. It can't do their career any good. It's a bit sad if you have to work at the a-se end of your profession.

    Nolite te bast--des carborundorum.
  • beamerguybeamerguy Forumite
    17.6K Posts
    Part of the Furniture 10,000 Posts Photogenic Name Dropper
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    I can't understand how any solicitor would want to take on cases like this. It can't do their career any good. It's a bit sad if you have to work at the a-se end of your profession.

    I like your thoughts but these people are not real solicitors, they are rogue traders who attracts other rogue traders like a magnet

    Gladstones carries no respect, they have killed off any reputation they may have had and above all a company nobody can trust.

    It's a sad tale about Gladstones, they did it all by themselves by inventing the great IPC scam and a fake IAS.

    Government know about them, the courts know about them, the SRA know about them, we know about them

    It's now a case of getting this scam closed down
  • Coupon-madCoupon-mad
    105.7K Posts
    Part of the Furniture 10,000 Posts Name Dropper Photogenic
    ✭✭✭✭✭✭
    Another UKCPM case bit the dust today, at Liverpool (a truly scamming PCN):

    https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.php?t=5858504

    How Judges entertain these cases and do not sanction the Claimants for unreasonableness in these cases is anyone's guess - read that one and the fact there was ONE photo, from the back, while the driver turned and used a bay to give way to another leaving driver...

    Seems like fraud to me.
    PRIVATE 'PCN'? DON'T PAY BUT DON'T IGNORE IT (except N.Ireland).
    CLICK at the top of this/any page where it says:
    Forum Home»Motoring»Parking Tickets Fines & Parking - read the NEWBIES THREAD
This discussion has been closed.
Latest MSE News and Guides

NS&I to change Premium Bond prize rate

It will rise to 1.40% from June

MSE News

Compers of the MSE Forum:

Show us the prizes you've won recently

Join the MSE Forum discussion