UKPC/SCS County Court Claim - Help urgently requested

Focus19

So, my mother decided that she would, after all, go to the court, and I am going with her as her Lay Representative. Date is tomorrow afternoon.

Unfortunately I had to go away again, so I’ve been spending today going over everything in a rush, printing out extra sets of documents and trying to pull things together.

I have gone through the pack from the claimant’s solicitor and made notes which I will type up into a coherent document, but as I haven’t had the time to create a skeleton argument, I will have to present my points against theirs as verbal arguments tomorrow.

The case they are using to support their argument is UKPC v Peenith. I’ve searched here, but although the case is mentioned here and there, I can’t find any significant text on arguing against it, so if anyone could point that out to me, I’d be most grateful. From my own review of the three main points it refers to, the first and second appear to be irrelevant to our case, and the third is basically where the judge accepts that the UKPC signage did constitute a contract offer (although accepting that an alternative judge thought otherwise). This case, however, does not seem to refer at all to primacy of contract, such as where a tenant or leaseholder with an existing contract parks in the area in question. Therefore it seems to me that this case is a weak one to bring when we are citing cases which specifically do not accept that UKPC signs can overrule tenancy agreements. However, I would be grateful for any feedback from the forum experts as to the relevancy of Peenith in our circumstances (primacy of contract via tenancy agreement being our main argument).

A couple of additional questions:

1. Quoting from advice linked via the Newbies thread:

The usual procedure is that the Claimant gives a summary of their case, then the Defendant gives a summary of theirs. The Judge may interrupt at any point, and ask questions of either side. Having heard from both sides, the Judge will then sum up and give Judgment (a bit like Lord Sugar on The Apprentice, so keep quiet during this). If he finds for the Claimant, you will have to pay the amount on the Claim Form, plus a hearing fee (£25 if the claim is under £300).

The amount on the original Claim Form included costs of around £70 in addition to the £640 being claimed by UKPC for 4 PCNs, but the packet received from the solicitors now includes a claim for costs of around an additional £500! This has sent my mother into something of a spin, as I’d advised her as per the quoted text above (i.e. that if we lost we’d basically only have to pay what they were claiming anyway). Could I please get some advice as to the legitimacy of this enormous extra claim for costs! Has anyone seen any reports as to whether anyone has had to pay this large extra amount if they’ve lost?

Also, regarding the documents that have to be taken to court, the court letter stated that originals have to be taken. Does this include taking the original parking permit (rather that a PDF or photo), as ironically this could put my mother in the position of getting yet another PCN for not displaying her permit because she had to take it to court!

beamerguy

The amount on the original Claim Form included costs of around £70 in addition to the £640 being claimed by UKPC for 4 PCNs, but the packet received from the solicitors now includes a claim for costs of around an additional £500!

This must be abuse of process and you need to say to the judge that SCS has not explained or substantiated these costs which is not in proportion to the parking tickets.

Look at how the courts view abuse of process
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6014081/abuse-of-process-district-judge-tells-bwlegal

If you can the get attention of the judge, refer him to the two recent cases where the claims were thrown out

good luck

Focus19

Thanks for the reply.

They have created a breakdown of how they reach that enormous cost estimate (largest amounts are a Fixed Fee for drafting the various responses to our case + Advocate Fee for attendance at the hearing), but that thread is very helpful, and I will definitely use it, particularly as their claim includes the £60 extra per PCN which they claim they paid to DRP (but which we know they did not).

I still can't believe the courts are entertaining claims from these fraudsters!

Still interested as to whether anyone has seen if any Defendants have had to pay these kinds of inflated costs in cases brought by the parking companies. Any feedback on that - either yes or no - would be greatly appreciated.

nosferatu1001

You need to read, and understand, CPR27.14(2)(g)

The "costs" they are going for are ONLY allowable *if the court finds the defendant was UNREASONABLE* This is a hgh bar
You MUST resist the imposition of these costs IF you lose

You MUSt go hard on the primacy of contract; it is a matter o ftrite law that if they can offer yo nothingyou dont already possess, there can be no contract. There cannot be a meeting of minds and no intention to create any contract, and no offer was ever made that woul dbe accepted. It is perverse to think otherwise.

Focus19

Thank you. Will make sure those arguments are added to my documents. We are going hard on primacy of contract, but your argument provides extra clarification.

Will definitely fight costs hard if we lose. Can costs awarded still be fought after the case, or once the judge decides, is that it?

I feel strongly that these punitive costs claimed are just another attempt at bullying by UKPC/SCS.

Quentin

Once the judgement is made then effectively the decision on what is ordered is final.

Appeals are possible but not cost effective!!

nosferatu1001

Once done, its done.

Ask their rep how they intend to claim those costs when the small claims track explicitly bars them from doing so. If they mention CPR27.14(2)(g) then ask how your conduct met the definition of "unreasonable". They will not be able ot provide a suitable answer - as you have met deadlines, you have provided a sensible defence (primacy of contract) etc.

Focus19

Just back from court - we won!

The judge dismissed the claim entirely based on primacy of contract. I will come back and write up fuller details when I can, but just about to go out for a celebratory beverage. I am completely exhausted.

One quick additional question for the forum: After we came out of the chambers, the rep for UKPC said that his client may still decide to appeal. Are they able to do that after dismissal of a claim from the Small Claims Track? If so, any thoughts?

Thanks so much to everyone here who has helped with this case, and generally to everyone who posts all the useful information here which enabled us to fight this.

Quentin

As previously posted, you can appeal a county court judgement, but not easy to do, (and not cheap!!)

This guy probably wanted to rain on your parade!

Won't be the first time they lost!

beamerguy

Focus19 wrote: »

Just back from court - we won!

The judge dismissed the claim entirely based on primacy of contract. I will come back and write up fuller details when I can, but just about to go out for a celebratory beverage. I am completely exhausted.

One quick additional question for the forum: After we came out of the chambers, the rep for UKPC said that his client may still decide to appeal. Are they able to do that after dismissal of a claim from the Small Claims Track? If so, any thoughts?

Thanks so much to everyone here who has helped with this case, and generally to everyone who posts all the useful information here which enabled us to fight this.

Well done:beer:, a case that SCS should never have brought.

Of course if they want another pop, they can but the answer will be the same. Anyways relish in the fact that if there is a next time, you will be going for the juggler with abuse of process

STUPID SCSLAW even thinking that UKPC were right.

No oysters and champers for UKPC tonight or the legal they use