The contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999?

Winterday22

Hi all. I am in court next month and have already submitted my witness statement to the court and claimant. My car was parked in a friend's parking bay without a permit back in 2015. One of my arguments in my WS is this:


3. This Tenancy agreement in force on the date of the material event, at clauses 4.8, 4.9 and 4.10, contains terms and conditions regarding parking of motor vehicles, this does not include displaying a permit, and does not require tenants to pay penalties to third parties for breach of terms and conditions. Any breach of the terms is, therefore, a matter between the landlord and the tenant, and only the landlord may seek a remedy for any breach. On Page 2 of the Tenancy agreement, it states “The contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 does not apply to this tenancy. This means that other people cannot enforce any rights or obligations under the tenancy other than you and us.” The Claimants signage at the location is not capable of varying the terms of the tenancy, and consequently has no effect. There is not now, nor has there ever been a signed deed of variance changing the terms of this Tenancy. A copy of the lease is evidenced at Exhibit XXX


I have read up a bit on The contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999. Can anyone tell me, if the tenancy specifically says that this Act does not apply - does this go in my favour?

Fruitcake

I can't see why it shouldn't apply. I would think it would be an unfair contract term if it didn't.

Do you need to quote every part of the tenancy agreement in your case?

Have you read other residential cases such as shown here, especially that of Jopson vs Homeguard?

http://parking-prankster.blogspot.com/2016/11/residential-parking.html

Winterday22

Thank you Fruitcake, that link was really helpful. Whilst I have done all I can paperwork wise, I need to swot up a bit on other residential cases prior to my hearing.


I only quoted that specific part of the tenancy as it was hiding on a page that wasn't about parking and I only found it at the witness statement stage - so it wasn't originally mentioned in my defence (although the parking section of the tenancy was already put forward so hopefully the Judge will allow it).


I had just never heard about this Rights of Third Parties Act before and wondered if it had much standing in the courtroom if a tenancy outright stated that the Act did not apply to it.

nosferatu1001

Yes, of course it does. it measn that the third party has no rights to involve themselves in the lease your friend has.

DOes this apply to another thread? Low post count.

Winterday22

Hi - no other post from me. I've been using this forum for help for a while and looking at other people's cases but didn't start my own post about my ticket unfortunately as I had already submitted my defence by then. I'm currently looking at all the forum posts with cases that have been to court and reported on by people so I can get a sense of what to expect in a couple of weeks - it's been a great help so far.

Coupon-mad

Which PPC, is it maybe PCM or UKCPM, they often ruin residential sites.

Winterday22

It's Premier Parking Solutions and BW Legal have been dealing with it. They have been relentless - I did think they would drop it as they did write to me a while back after I had submitted my defence asking for the tenancy agreement then. I ignored them and submitted it when it got to the witness statement stage and now they're trying to say in their own WS that I have been unreasonable and purposely withholding information. I know it's their job to try and discredit me - it has been stressing me out though. I can't wait until it's over with.

Umkomaas

I ignored them and submitted it when it got to the witness statement stage and now they're trying to say in their own WS that I have been unreasonable and purposely withholding information.

If their client had undertaken proper due diligence in setting up their arrangements with the MA, they surely would have had the lease legally checked, and should still hold a copy. They only needed to ask their client (Premier Parking Solutions) for a copy!

Winterday22

Oh ok. That's great. I was worried it would be brought up and go against me at the hearing!

The_Deep

There are several "Primacy of Contract" cases reported within the Parking Prankster blogs. Have you rad this?

https://parking-prankster.blogspot.com/2016/11/residential-parking.html

[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Also, as nine times out of ten of these tickets are scams you might like to consider complaining to your MP, it can cause the scammer extra costs.

Parliament is well aware of the MO of these private parking companies, many of whom are former clampers, and on 15th March 2019 a Bill was enacted to curb the excesses of these shysters. Codes of Practice are being drawn up, an independent appeals service will be set up, and access to the DVLA's date base more rigorously policed, persistent offenders denied access to the DVLA database and unable to operate.

Hopefully life will become impossible for the worst of these scammers, but until this is done you should still complain to your MP, citing the new legislation.

[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2019/8/contents/enacted[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]

Just as the clampers were finally closed down, so hopefully will many of these Private Parking Companies.[/FONT]


Also, as