PPC taking me to court for PCN on land belonging to landowner who hadn't heard of them..

bobsnotmyuncle

I have seen lots of post on here which has asked for PPC provide proof of premission to operate.
I assumed it was a technicality that would have them digging in to there filing cabinets to check they had the paper work.
I couldn't believe it when I recently spoke to the Landowner of a leased overflow carpark and found out that they did not know who the company were and I never been contacted by them.
I'm not comfortable going to too much detail on the forum with the case pending.
I will certainly be refactoring my defence..

WE WON!

KeithP

You say you have 'a case pending'.

What stage are you at?

Have you received a County Court Claim?

Filed a Defence?

Are you even asking for help?

bobsnotmyuncle

have court date.
submitting witness statements this week.

bobsnotmyuncle

It wasn't the main argument in my defence so now need to make so I think as they are acting contrary to the code of practice

Egbert_Nobacon

If I were the landowner I would not be best pleased to have a PPC operating without my permission.

A witness statement from the landowner would be very useful.

bobsnotmyuncle

I would like to check my understanding that it the landowners permission that must be given not a tenant.

I've been looking at the POPLA defence:

(newbie so can't post link)

I was wondering if there was a different one for a court defence, especially if you know this to be the case that they are in breach

.

Coupon-mad

A tenant leaseholder has title in their own right.

You said it was leased, so unless the lease has any restrictions that apply, then the tenant leaseholder company can appoint a PPC as they have leasehold title.

bobsnotmyuncle

They weren't best pleased.. Trying to avoid dragging them into it but will do if necessary.
The other interesting thing is that the overflow although adjacent with no barrier between has a different address and postcode to the main car park. The PCN has the address of main carpark.
The ANPR camera's picked me up on the entrance to the overflow and exiting from the other one...
I can't see how the PCN can be valid in these circumstances as it only had the one address, which wasn't the one where I temporarily parked.

bobsnotmyuncle

Thanks Coupon-Mad. I had assumed title related to the Land Registry.
Would it still be the PPC's responsibilty to prove the tenancy or just that they had permission from the Landowner?

bobsnotmyuncle

Apologies Coupon-mad, I have had a long day...
It is not a leasehold. They rented the extra parking from the neighbouring property.

Umkomaas

bobsnotmyuncle wrote: »

They weren't best pleased.. Trying to avoid dragging them into it but will do if necessary.
The other interesting thing is that the overflow although adjacent with no barrier between has a different address and postcode to the main car park. The PCN has the address of main carpark.
The ANPR camera's picked me up on the entrance to the overflow and exiting from the other one...
I can't see how the PCN can be valid in these circumstances as it only had the one address, which wasn't the one where I temporarily parked.

ANPR cameras will never know where you parked, just that you passed them and your movement was recorded - in and out. The time in between they deem to be the period of 'parking'. So you need to factor that into your thinking.