PCN fine for parking in own space (leasehold flat)

KR2997

Hi all,

I realise this is similar to a few other threads. The reason for starting this one is that I wasn't sure my situation was completely the same, for one particular issue.

Context is:

I own a leasehold flat, and my lease states I have use of a certain numbered space. The landlord of the development informed everyone that ParkDirectUK would be covering the area (to prevent people stealing spaces etc) but I wasn't asked to sign anything at any point.

I was parking in my space, but one day obscured the permit, and was issued a PCN by Park DirectUK. I appealed, it was rejected, although I forgot to include a returns address so they didnt actually post me a response. After realising, I called up, told them my address, and they said they would post me the outcome. They forgot, and 2 weeks later I received the £100 demand, saying I had X amount of days to pay, blah blah. I called up to check why I didnt receive an appeal response, they apologised and emailed it to me, allowing me the 2 week grace period of £60 again.

I was going to pay the ticket, until I started reading up, and found a concensus that the lease tends to trump these companies right to make me pay. I called the landlord company, the rep had a look through the lease and told me that although my right to park in the space is in my lease, they tecnically own the space, can take it away/close it for construction works etc. She said therefore that any contract they agree with park direct is enough to impact my space and make me liable for, only needing to send an email to inform me. This is where I believe my case is a bit different.

This is my only PCN, so I understand the chance of them seeing through on threats is tiny and wouldn't make sense. However for the sake of £60, I am wondering if it is worth the hassle/risk? I also don't know if my lease/ parking space is strong enough to trump their service. The management/ landlord company seem to strongly advise I pay, although I don't understand why. I have read that it is possible to appeal to another body, but unsure if I can do this in time and still pay £60 if it fails?

Any help would be very much appreciated. Thanks!

Le_Kirk

Before they allowed the vultures to "manage" your parking (for which you have primacy of contract), did they carry out a consultation with residents/leaseholders/owners and receive 75% consensus with no more than 10% dissenters?

Redx

also, what does your lease say about parking ?

what does it say about the M.A. being allowed to vary it without issuing a new lease ?
and the M.A. should be aware that any parking regime is not there to punish the residents and they should have a clause that allows them to cancel any tickets they deem are not justified, like yours, so do not let them off the hook

these M.A. get it wrong all the time and are liable for the actions of the contractors they employ, so INSIST that they cancel it immediately

beamerguy

KR2997 wrote: »

This is my only PCN, so I understand the chance of them seeing through on threats is tiny and wouldn't make sense. However for the sake of £60, I am wondering if it is worth the hassle/risk? I also don't know if my lease/ parking space is strong enough to trump their service. The management/ landlord company seem to strongly advise I pay, although I don't understand why. I have read that it is possible to appeal to another body, but unsure if I can do this in time and still pay £60 if it fails?

Any help would be very much appreciated. Thanks!

Even if you paid, it would not immune you to more tickets. The MA has seriously got this wrong and with their suggestion to pay, rather suggests the MA is on a commission ???

Does the MA understand that should court action arise, you and the residents can call upon them as a witness to explain their actions to a judge.

You need to get all the residents together with the MA to insist this PPC is tamed and be put on a whitelist ... permit showing or not.

Read this
Residential Parking
https://parking-prankster.blogspot.com/search?q=RESIDENTIAL

Get this pinched in the bud now because it will get worse

It has been pointed out on this forum that having a private parking company on a residential site will de-value properties and that would be the fault of the MA

KR2997

Thanks both. There was no concensus, just an email/ newsletter sent around. Thanks @Redx will check lease tonight. RE liability, what is to stop them saying it isn't their problem, they are the landlord therefore we have to comply to contracts agreed with them, and they have no power now to cancel the ticket?

KeithP

KR2997 wrote: »

...what is to stop them saying it isn't their problem, they are the landlord therefore we have to comply to contracts agreed with them?

That simply isn't true.

Your lease gives you the right to park there.

They cannot strike a deal with a third party that then charges you for something that you already have.

That is crazy.

Half_way

AS principal, they will be jointly and severally liable for the actions of their agents.
If they have taken this company on what they have rights to do, then it is not your problem, ( in theory) but the management companys problem in getting this resolved ( ie removal of PPC)



What was in the email/letter you received?

beamerguy

KR2997 wrote: »

and they have no power now to cancel the ticket?

Who is the boss here ????? The MA or Park DirectUK

Of course they can cancel ........ the MA is ripping you off

NeilCr

Half_way wrote: »

What was in the email/letter you received?

Yes. This.

I'd normally expect a letter like that to come from the MA. OP who is the landlord/freeholder? It will be them who would employ the MA. It is a possibility (only that) that it is they who have the contract with the PPC not the MA.

KR2997

You guys are amazing, and have truly filled me with righteous fury. To think i was going to pay them! RE the letter, I cannot find it, but have asked them to email me a copy. I remember it was along the lines of "We are doing this, send us your Car registration so we can get you a permit".

This is the email i was planning to send them, once I had a look over the lease. I couldn't find anything to back up their claim they owned the space either, but I found it hard to read.

"I am continuing to investigate this issue. As mentioned, the principal rather than the price is the issue, and I am mindful that this could only continue. Seeing as this is where I live and we have paid a lot of money to do so, I believe it is necessary to consider this issue now.

The below is not an attack on you personally - but Notting Hill (N.H) is fully liable for the contractors they employ, and therefore this action does not rest on the residents shoulders.

I have looked into the lease, but was unable to find the clause stating that Notting Hill owns the space, just that "may temporarily close such for repairs maintenance or other works". I also was unable to find any clause which would justify my having to adhere to the regulations of a third-party contracted without my agreement. It stipulates I can only park in my numbered space, which I did. I even thought the presence of the signs and ParkDirect is a nuisance and annoyance, which goes against 2b) in “Mutual Covenants”. I cannot find anywhere where it stipulates that the landlord can strike a deal which charges me for something I already have, permit or no permit.

If there is somewhere in our lease which states you are not jointly liable for the actions of the agents/ contracts you employ which affect us, please could you send me this? Similarly could you please indicate the part of the lease which states where N.Hill is able to employ any kind of service to charge me for the space I already purchased, and that I must adhere to their rules.

I am also aware that, should court action arise, myself and the residents can call upon Notting Hill as a witness to explain their actions to a judge, which I would certainly do. For example, I don’t understand why there wasnt there a clause in the contract with ParkDirectUk to cancel any tickets you (N.H) deem weren't justified? As I understand it, this is general practise to avoid people like me, who make a mistake but not actually inconvenience anyone, to not have to suffer at the hands of a contract which was not pre-agreed by myself or any other resident. Also, why wasn't it put to residents to provide a consensus in favour of this PPC Service?

I can see no evidence in my lease to obligate me having to respect the regulations of a private company which N.H has contracted outside my permission, or that of other residents. Therefore I strongly insist that N.H contact Park Direct to cancel this ticket, as I find it hard to believe as the contractor, they have no power over the agent they have allowed to operate on our premises.

Please let me know honest thoughts, and thanks!

KeithP

Do you want to include a line in there somewhere about how this situation will reduce the value of your investment?

Who in their right mind would want to purchase such an infested residence?