Help! Have followed advice so far...but worried

Fruitcake

I know this is a lot of last minute information so I suggest you make things brief when commenting on the scammer's WS in your own.

The claim is in the name of UK Car Parking Management, Company Number XXXXXXXXX but the contract in the claimant's WS, exhibit GSL 1, i) is with a completely different, and dormant company called UK Car Park Management, Company Number YYYYYYYY.

In addition, the alleged contract has been redacted such that the signatories cannot be identified and this goes against the findings in the persuasive appeal court judgement Hancock v Promontoria (Chesnut) Limited *(include the case number and quote the judges findings in bold from the link in my previous post.)*

Also, the contract has not been signed in accordance with Section 44 of the Companies Act 2006, *(then copy and paste from my previous post.)*


The contract ran for eighteen months which would have been from July 2016 to December 2017, but the alleged parking event was in September 2018. The scammers have not provided any proof that client and company sought an extension to the contract after eighteen months, or that the contract did indeed continue on a rolling monthly basis. It must have terminated at some point for UK Car Park Management to have become dormant. Can anyone shed light on when that happened?


I'm not sure if it is possible to imply that a company cannot receive monies whilst dormant. I wonder if there is any way of complaining to Companies House or suggesting this company is actually active. Is it also possible to make HMRC aware that a dormant company might be involved in receiving payments?

A couple of minor things. 
Page 10 shows a stock image of a sign but there is no proof that such a sign exists on the site in question. None of the signs shown in the scammer's WS are legible so are incapable of forming a contract with a driver.

Coupon-mad

Lotuslady said:

Hiya Coupon-Mad,

Apologies, been searching the forum for “Parking” thing.. not found anything yet... had ANOTHER look at contract just now and can see you must have a real eagle eye as can see the first paragraph says UK car Parking Management.. bingo! Just got to work out how to word it if I cannot find on forum.. no luck so far!

Found the case won last week on this EXACT point, the thread by @BigDosser:

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/77397677#Comment_77397677

Copy what he said! 

Read about his win and what the Judge said!  Send him a pm for moral support.

Lotuslady

Fruitcake and Coupon-mad, you are genius... thankyou sooo much! I have been picking apart all the other parts in their WS late last night and found a few other gems... a way to go yet...(Ie it was dark.., sign I have some months later is not what's in their exhibit, plus am showing their “plan” to have dots on indicating signs that aren’t actually there - PLUS £60 unlawful amount added inflated to £74.64 @ Claim form stage...
can anyone please advise if it is really necessary to go over every single point in my WS after these very important points mentioned above (no contract as wrong company + fax signature) am worried my WS will be Very long and epic! Thankyou so much for your time and brilliant help.. you are invaluable! 

I think am going to have to drop this over to court in person now (have checked already) and email Gladstones theirs and yes they will accept theirs by email....this is some task!

Fruitcake

There's more.

The judge in this case said this about a signatory on an alleged contract. Claire Williams could not have signed the contract on behalf of the owner because she is not a director of the owner". The relevant post was made on the 7th of July at 4.53pm.
Neither of the signatories in your case are directors of the either the landowner or parking company owner.

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6024485/lbc-stage-but-who-is-my-parking-contract-with/p4

District Judge Middleton Truro County Court 3/7/20, case number F1DP92K

The post by bargepole at 6.44 today in this thread is interesting as well. I've asked for the case details so if they are posted in time, you can add that judgement as well.

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6175896/redactions-in-disclosure/p2

Edit.

bargepole has added the judgement PDF in a post at 10.15 am that includes the information you need about the case. Quote the case number and the comments from bargepole's post from 6.44 am, and include the PDF as an exhibit.

Fruitcake

With regards to the WS, obviously you need the points about the contract. See if it can be reduced in size without affecting the content. For example, you could remove the quoted part of the Companies Act underneath the link, but leave the comments about how the contract fails the requirements of the Act. Then have the Act to hand on the day so you can quote the relevant section from it if required.
Can less important points be removed or abbreviated? 

nosferatu1001

You msut must must raise that the contract is in the name of a company that cannot contract with anyone as it is dormant. 
I dont know when it went dormant - but if it was before the contract was signed, the contract could never in any way be valid, as a dormant company cannot make contracts. 

Castle

Companies House shows that UK Car Parking Management Ltd, (Co Number 11881490), was incorporated on 14th March 2019 and dissolved on 13th August 2019. Therefore, it didn't actually exist when the "contract" was apparently signed; unless of course,the dates are false.

(The logical answer is that it's a typo; but nevertheless, IMO renders the "contract" null & void).

Lotuslady

Wow, my head is pinning with taking all this stuff in.. it’s great work though thankyou all...
Am amending my WS as best I can in light of last info from you all.. Not sure I need to put any more in at mo, taking a breather so can think straight. 

nosferatu1001

Reread and take it slowly - its all logical
The company named in the contract is dormant, and didn't even exist when the contract was signed
The company named in the contract isnt the company claiming against you. So the company claiming against you doesnt have authority to operate
The contract isn't even a valid contract even if the named company is considered a mistake, as it hasnt been signed in accordance with the company act
And so on 

Lotuslady

Hiya, thanks Nosferatu1001 and all for your reassurance and info.. have now finally “got” what you are all talking about re “dormant” company.. couldn’t see for looking!