Important update! We have recently reviewed and updated our Forum Rules and FAQs. Please take the time to familiarise yourself with the latest version.
residential parking - Recieved PCN for not displaying my Permit
94 replies
3.5K views
Quick links
Essential Money | Who & Where are you? | Work & Benefits | Household and travel | Shopping & Freebies | About MSE | The MoneySavers Arms | Covid-19 & Coronavirus Support
Replies
3) The signs which was displayed on the 25th January were not compliant with current regulations.
The parking industry is unregulated. Check the IPC CoP and see if they have breached that. If they have then they (may) have breached their KADOE agreement with the DVLA in order to get your personal details. This should then constitute a DPA/GDPR breach.
Have you heard back from the DVLA yet?
In addition, the signs (probably) cannot form a contract with a motorist and would be a separate breach of the KADOE contract. Again check what the CoP says.
If you have pics of the signs before the date of the alleged event, post them here for the regulars to have a look at.
I am no expert, but that looks like you are making a complaint or telling a story. You have also shown the scammers much of your evidence, but I don't think that goes in the LBA.
I have no idea what format a LBA should take, but see if you can find a proforma somewhere, possibly on the legalbeagles website.
What kind of ‘proposals’ are you looking for?
I’m not a legally trained expert in this stuff, but to me your reasons for bringing this seem a bit jumbled. Maybe you should segment each reason and give details under each.
Are you sufficiently knowledgeable about this area of law to argue it in court?
If, in your LBA you are suggesting that you are seeking financial recompense, have you looked at the requirements of the Pre-action Protocol for Debt Claims (PaP) which might help you shape the LBA and ensure you miss nothing out?
https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/pdf/protocols/debt-pap.pdf
Your draft needs thorough proofreading, as, from my skim, there are spelling and grammatical errors.
Give a man a fish, and you feed him for a day; show him how to catch fish, and you feed him for a lifetime.
Just a few changes to grammar and spelling.
Signage: -
This is the signs which were displayed unto the 12th March 2019. The larger sign, 'Private Road Carparking for residents and Visitors only' has been there since before I moved in (December 1995). I had parked within the parameters of this sign. In order for CMS's sign to become enforceable, then this one should have been removed, as it is the older, larger and more clearer sign.
This is a close up of CMS's sign, notice that there is a piece of paper stuck over their old company's details, the text is small and not clear. It is also displaying a company number which is not tied to a current registered address. last photo evidence taken 12 March 2019
This is a new sign which appeared on the 20th march, some 12 days after CMS gave evidence to the IAS to say it was displayed in January 2019.
The DVLA stated that its down to the IPC and not them... The IPC are not investigating any breaches to its CODE.
I believe 0844 numbers are classed as premium rate numbers which are now prohibited. Only a minor thing but it is all ammo for your LBA.
I am writing in compliance with the Practice Direction on Pre-Action conduct with regards to the following matters which has arisen between us.
On the 25th January 2019 at 14:56, you alleged I had breached a contract by parking behind my home of 23 years. This triggered you to issue a ‘PCN’ which was issued on the 30th January 2019.
My complaint
1) On the 25th January 2019, at ‘**********’ You placed a PCN on my vehicle for an alleged breach of contract.
You lifted the Windscreen Wiper. You never had my permission to touch my vehicle. Therefore, you trespassed on my property.
2) I had parked within the confines of my Primary Contract, my Tenancy Agreement, dated 04th December 1995. This gives me unfettered rights to park in my carpark without the need for a ‘Permit to park’ scheme.
This cannot be changed by the operator, nor my Landlord without my permission of which I have never given. CMS have tried to enter me into a contract to which I have not agreed.
3) The signs which were displayed on the 25th January were not compliant with current regulations.
Therefore, you had no legal right to manage/ enforce parking conditions at our scheme.
4) On the 30th January 2019, you issued me with a Parking charge Notice (invoice) which was invalid as the information it contained was not up-to-date. The PCN contained an address which you have not owned/ Occupied since 23rd January 2018.
Therefore, any invoice issued by CMS from ‘55 Leonards Road West, Lytham, St Annes, Lancashire, FY8 2PF’ post 23rd January 2018 is invalid.
5) On the 08th March 2018, you supplied evidence to the ‘Independent Appeals service’ of which signs were displayed at our scheme.
You gave false evidence, as the sign which you stated was displayed on the 25th January was not displayed until the 20th March, some 12 days after you gave evidence and 54 days after the alleged contravention. My last photographic image of the old sign carries the metadata, with the date/ time that the photo was taken - 12th March 2019 at 08:34.
6) On the 12 April you instructed a Debt Collector, ZZPS, to enforce a Debt which was not owed. ZZPS put a further £60 onto the alleged £100 Parking Charge, bringing the total to £160.
I had already submitted my valid appeal, which I believe this was not taken seriously. The debt was increasing causing me distress.
7) On the 23rd April I received a ‘Final Response’ Letter from ZZPS stating that the next course of action would be to instruct a Solicitor to recover the alleged debt.
I was threatened with Court Costs and Solicitors Fees along with Statutory Interest. This also was causing me distress
8) On the 10th May, after several complaints to the IPC the PCN was cancelled.
I believe this was only because I was not happy with their response and requested for permission to disclose information and enquired how to escalate my complaint.
Summary
CMS gave false evidence against to the IAS, regarding signage. I believe this was to ensure the legitimacy of your PCN due to CMS’s actual signs were not complying with current regulations.
CMS is operating illegally by issuing PCN’s from an address of which they no longer Own/ Occupy. This breaches sections 86 and sections 87 of the Companies Act 2006. Therefore, any PCN issued from this address since 23rd January 2018, are not valid and motorists should be informed and refunded (if paid.) Please see below for details of the Companies Act 2006.
The entrance sign shows the BPA roundel. CMS as an IPC member is purporting to be a member of a different ATA in breach of their CoP and thus a further breach of their KADOE.
CMS’s signs contain a contact number beginning with 0844… I believe 0844 numbers are classed as premium rate numbers which are now prohibited.
Legality of CMS’s Registered Address: -
CMS have broken the following regulation as set in ‘Companies Act 2006.’ Which states: -
2006 c. 46. Part 6, General, Section 86: -
A company's registered office-
A. company must at all times have a registered office to which all communications and notices may be addressed.
CMS have issued an Invoice from an address they no longer occupy breaking the following regulation as set in the ‘Companies Act 2006.’ Which states: -
2006 c. 46. Part 6, General, Section 87: -
Change of address of registered office-
(1) A company may change the address of its registered office by giving notice to the registrar.
(2) The change takes effect upon the notice being registered by the registrar, but until the end of the period of 14 days beginning with the date on which it is registered a person may validly serve any document on the company at the address previously registered.
(3) For the purposes of any duty of a company—
(a) to keep available for inspection at its registered office any register, index or other document, or
(b) to mention the address of its registered office in any document, (this includes invoices)
If you dispute my claim, then could you please respond within 28 days with full details. I look forward to hearing from you. Should I not receive a response to my letter within this timeframe, then I anticipate that a legal claim will be commenced forthwith.
What are you intending to sue for
What is your loss.
However, my main aim is to prove that this company has been operating illegally since 2018. Therefore, any PCN from that date which has been paid should be refunded to the motorist. In mot sure if the civil courts has the power to grant such a request.
I also wish to show the whole process up, as I have been denied a fair right of appeal by both the operator and the IAS/IPC. The fact they submitted/ accepted false evidence proves this.
I would like this company removed from our scheme, which the land owner is reluctant to do.
This company should have its membership to the ATA removed for its conduct.
This is the second company to be allowed to manage our scheme. The first was MPC, whom was ousted as a 'cowboy' company by the BBC. I received death threats for fighting their £385 clamping/ towing fee.
Both MPC and CMS operate in the same way... Both operating without a current, active ;registered address'.
Give a man a fish, and you feed him for a day; show him how to catch fish, and you feed him for a lifetime.