UKPC LBC Residential parking

Coupon-mad

@Coupon-mad sorry, just to clarify, are you saying that I can email my WS to the courts on the 28th (deadline)?

Of course, we've done this for six months.  Have you not read other court claim threads at all, everyone does it this way during COVID because the hearings are remote (by phone) and electronic evidence is accessible to a Judge working from home.

I thought I had found but subsequently lost a thread referring clauses in the lease which SCS will no doubt rely on to show that the leaseholder didn't have "unfettered" rights to park. As they clearly have not consulted the lease is it enough to state that? I would like to strengthen that argument if possible.

Read the thread by @Lamilad and quote that court case/claim number (transcript is being ordered).

xscape

Thanks, I have realised that I hadn't pointed out that my hearing (as far as the allocation notice is telling me) is in person. I will clarify with the court.

Coupon-mad

No, it is the same and has been for 6 months - COURTS ARE ACCEPTING STUFF BY EMAIL.

CONVERTING TO A TELEPHONE HEARING HAPPENS WITH ABOUT A  WEEK TO SPARE SOMETIMES.

IT IS HIGHLY UNLIKELY TO BE IN PERSON.

Did you click on Lamilad's name I gave you and read his recent thread?  You need to.

xscape

Great, thanks. Yes, I am reading the thread now. 

xscape

OK, I am struggling with distilling the points from Lamilad thread because the circumstances refer to exclusive rights to park in a space, opposed to the provisions in my lease.

The ‘Rights granted to the Tenant/lesee’ within the ‘Lease’ state “The right (in common with all others entitled to the like right) to park one fully taxed and licensed private motor vehicle temporarily on any one of the visitor parking spaces marked “VP” on the plans (if any) on a “first come first served” basis subject to availability but not in excess of twenty four hours in any period of (48) hours (if any)”

Particularly concerning is a clause:
 'must not park or allow to be parked any car, van or other vehicle on any part of the reserved property or the development or the estate (other than in such places (if any)) as shall be provided therefore and save only to such extent and subject to conditions as may be permitted by law and by such other regulations as may be imposed by the Lessor or its managing agents'.

I have provided the following response,  having not seen the claimants WS leaves me at a disadvantage here.

Any assertion from the claimant that they have the right to impose further regulations under additional clauses in the lease derogates the rights afforded to me.

Conditions that fundamentally affected the way in which I was permitted to use the visitor space, such as requiring the use of a permit, would have to be explicitly stated within the lease or could only be added afterwards by way of a Deed of Variation. The lease also contains the following definitions [exhibit].

Definitions 1.30 "Regulations"

means any reasonable regulations made by the Lessor from time to time for the proper management and use of the Development and/or the Reserved Property and do not

unnecessarily restrict the enjoyment of the Premises.’

Covenants by the lessor 6.1 

The Lessee paying the Rent and performing and observing the covenants on the part of the Lessee herein contained shall and may peaceably and quietly hold and enjoy the Premises during the Term without any lawful interruption or disturbance from or by the Lessor or any person or persons rightfully claiming under or in trust for it.

The predatory practices of a for-profit parking scheme, targeted at residents and visitors are at odds with the right to peaceful enjoyment and contradictory to the terms of the lease concerning the right to park.

Feeling less confident the more I dig.

Coupon-mad

The predatory practices of a for-profit parking scheme, targeted at residents and visitors are at odds with the right to peaceful enjoyment and contradictory to the terms of the lease concerning the right to park.

That's true.  It is going to be down the the Judge's interpretation of it all, though.

D_P_Dance

That's true.  It is going to be down the the Judge's interpretation of it all, though.

But judges are accountable.  I complained about one and was awarded £100 compo.  Never be afraid to be assertive.

xscape

They didn't send their WS until yesterday which I received today.

 I also received a letter from the court.
UPON the Claimant not complying with Paragraph 12 of the Notice to Small Claims Track
Order of deputy district judge dated x
It is ordered that
1. the claim is struck out
2. the hearing is vacated

Le_Kirk

That sounds like a result!  Well done.

D_P_Dance

They have wasted your time, now consider how you may waste theirs, read this,

https://www.citizensadvice.org.uk/law-and-courts/legal-system/small-claims/making-a-small-claim/