Letter Before Claim - SCS Law & UKPC - Please Advise

CVKTA

Hi all,
Thanks for your replies, after re-examining the 'contract' it is specifically between Persimmon and UKPC. It was only valid between September '14 and September '15....however I've just realised that all PCNs fell between that time period unfortunately. There is definitely no printed name, and that coupled with a very suspect looking signature....
In reference to The Deeps comments i didn't mention IIMU, (IANAL), that this claim falls to be considered under contract law. but I most certainly will once I've drafted my response and posted it here for you good people to vet!
The lease most certainly does not mention a permit or a charge for not paying one so hopefully your short and curlies comment is accurate!
Again, the signature does not look at all like mine, is it worth me sending a copy of my license (which of course contains my signature) within my reply to refute this, or shall i let them prove the fact?
Thanks
CVKTA

nosferatu1001

Why are you saying the signature looks like yours, for a contract you didnt sign between the PPC and Persimmoin, who you didnt work for?
I really struggle with this
Why do you think it is your signature? PLEASE EXPLAIN THIS CLEARLY.

The_Deep

Aa you are not a party to the contract, why do you think that you may have signed it? It makes no sense.

CVKTA

Hi both, after further inspection. This agreement was not signed by myself. I feared that I may have, but the agreement and signatures are between UKPC and Persimmon and THEY have signed it as 2 separate parties - NOT ME!
Apologies for the confusion.

CVKTA

Once I've replied to their letter, I expect that the will respond informing me that I have entered a contract with them (UKPC) by entering the car park and in turn passing the signage.

My understanding is that the consideration from me is to display the permit in return for their services?
Are they labouring under a misapprehension because I already enjoy unfettered access to the parking space, (as per my lease) making the 'contract' void due to a mistake on their part, by not understanding or fully appreciating my Lease with the Freeholder....?

nosferatu1001

You cannot enter a contract if they have nothing tol Offer you.

They provide you with absolutely no services at all. You offer no consideration as they have no offer. If someone parks in your space, YOU dont get anything. The company does not remove the vehicle.

Coupon-mad

CVKTA wrote: »

Hi both, after further inspection. This agreement was not signed by myself. I feared that I may have, but the agreement and signatures are between UKPC and Persimmon and THEY have signed it as 2 separate parties - NOT ME!
Apologies for the confusion.

I already told you this in post #11.

Are they labouring under a misapprehension because I already enjoy unfettered access to the parking space, (as per my lease) making the 'contract' void due to a mistake on their part, by not understanding or fully appreciating my Lease with the Freeholder....?

It's not a mistake or misapprehension. It's all about greed and intimidation to extract money from people; nothing to do with parking management, and not a mistake.

It's deliberate or negligent. It always is. I hope you've read some of the shedloads of other residential cases on here where we have discussed all this a thousand times?

Parking firms just don't care about the rights of residents, and they hope most victims won't realise their existing rights and easements take precedence.

PPCs bully people and sue people and they make millions from this sort of scam.

CVKTA

Thanks Coupon-Mad.
Once I've written a response, I'll post it here for critiquing
CVKTA

CVKTA

Hi all,

See below for my first draft of response to these nefarious scoundrels.

Please critique before I send a final draft.

Thanks as always..

I write further to your correspondence dated 14th February 2019. I have now read through your information and ‘evidence’ bundle.
As per your comments, I have studied my lease and have attached a copy of the relevant sections for your perusal even though I am absolutely under no obligation to do so. Part 2, ‘Rights Granted to the Lessee’ states that as the Lessee within this residential complex, I have: “The exclusive right to park one private motor vehicle on the parking space (or each of the spaces as may be the case) tinted in green an Plan 1 or as allocated by the Lessor or the Management Company in writing from time to time”.
Attached you will also see a copy of ‘Plan 1’. The Lease that I hold is wholly between Persimmon Homes and me, the Lessee. Nowhere within the terms of the lease is there any mention of any terms which would fetter or restrict my enjoyment of my property.

Whilst operating your enterprise, I’m sure your client has become quite versed regarding the concept of ‘Primacy of Contract’ within Residential Parking cases. However, for the avoidance of doubt, the idea behind primacy of contract is that a contract cannot be unilaterally altered by one party without the permission of the other. Thankfully, I am armed with my lease agreement and those terms contained therein.
Under the Landlord & Tenant Act, any variation of a lease has to be through consultation and strict agreement. This never occurred; therefore my lease with Persimmon Homes cannot have been varied.
Moreover, I invite you to consider the principle of ‘derogation of grant’: The rule that a party should not derogate from its grant embodies a general legal principle that, if the landlord agrees to confer a benefit on the lessee, then the landlord should not do anything that substantially deprives the lessee of the enjoyment of that benefit. There is considerable case law which supports my view that the freeholder, in engaging with a contract with you client, has placed on leaseholders an onerous burden of having to display a permit at the risk of incurring a charge if they fail to do so. This is sufficiently intrusive as to override the grant of my parking space, effectively restricting and charging for a right previously enjoyed, without the required consensus and deed of variation.
Please review the following pertinent court decisions:
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.

With reference to the ‘CONTRACT FOR THE SUPPLY OF WARDEN CONTROL’ document within your evidence bundle, may I clearly point out that as stated by yourself in your previous letter, this is a “Redacted contract of authority between UK Parking Control Ltd and Persimmon Management Ltd c/o Mainstay Residential”.
Your client holds a contract with Persimmon, for supply of Warden Control, not with me. Why would I be in the least part interested in a document which has nothing to do with my leasehold agreement signed by two parties neither of whom is me?
Furthermore, the contract that you client holds with Persimmon in fact states a clear start date of September 2014, which is a full three months after I took ownership of the property and began enjoying the rights to my lease. My Lease is in fact dated 20th June 2014. As the lease between Persimmon and I was already in effect, no third parties such as your client, who have never been party to my lease, have any claims of anything against me in respect of my proprietary rights or interests.
Under contract law, I’m sure your client is also aware that as a party already entered into a signed agreement, I cannot be offered or entered into any form of contract via signage or otherwise for a service that I am already enjoying the use of, as per my lease agreement. What am I asserting is simply this: since, by virtue of the terms my lease agreement, I had been already afforded the right to park a motor vehicle in the parking space (I again refer you to the copy of ‘plan 1’) there can be no contract as your client claims simply because there is no ‘quid pro quo’, i.e. no consideration provided to me and I certainly provided none.
A permit had always been displayed, merely as a courtesy, on my vehicle while I park in my allocated parking space. This does not constitute the acceptance of any onerous ‘contract’ with your client. The signage onsite is there only to form a contract with non-residents and residents who do not own a car parking space.
I will end my response by advising you that the issue of unnecessarily penalising residents lawfully parking on their own property is not being ignored by parliament and our legislature. Notwithstanding the likelihood of an imminent introduction of legislation protecting people against unlawful parking charges (I refer your client to: Parking (Code of Practice) Bill 2017-19 which has passed its third reading in the House of Lords on 4th March 2019) I will also report the matter to my constituency’s MP.
Yours Sincerely,

CVKTA

Coupon-mad

Ooh, too red to read, reminds me of football teams I don't support!

Please put it in black and not bold font.