PCN(s) UKPC - Court Claim Form (WON)

Umkomaas

Super result. Very well done indeed. UKPC has form for playing outside the rules. They have come close to being kicked out of the business a number of times. How about a further 'shove' towards the cliff edge?

In view of this quite clear legal determination by the court, why not give UKPC a dose of their own medicine by making life very uncomfortable for them?  

Write to the DVLA and complain that a Judge has categorically stated that UKPC  had no authority to operate at this site. Ask that the DVLA investigates and reports back to you. In particular they should calculate how many charges have been issued, and as there is no valid landowner authority, UKPC should be required to cancel all charges for that site and repay motorists who have been misled and paid. Email in the first instance:

ccrt@dvla.gov.uk (and) 

KADOEservice.support@dvla.gov.uk 

Send to both. 

If you get a fob off from that approach, follow it up with a full blown Freedom of Information request. It will be more difficult for them to hide under FOI. 

https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/

You might also consider issuing the PPC a Letter of Claim prior to a possible county court claim for breach of the DPA. Read these:

http://parking-prankster.blogspot.com/2017...0-for-data.html

http://parking-prankster.blogspot.com/2016...orist-wins.html

https://www.parkingcowboys.co.uk/data-protection-act/

There has to be some process of backlash against PPCs to make them think twice before issuing tickets on a scattergun basis and their unchecked harvesting of personal data from the DVLA on an industrial scale. 

beamerguy

KnightRS said:

Case dismissed, boom!

Also awarded costs £215. Judge was amazing and she picked up immediately that the Claimant had no authority in the area I had parked.

BOOM BOOM .... Well done.   Wonder what daft legal did not have a clue ?? 

KnightRS

I'll write up a quick court result for you now and then later I'll upload my defence/witness statements etc. Chuffed to bits.

Quicky summary of claim:
UKPC were trying to claim £640 + £60 court fees and £70 solicitor costs in relation to 4 parking tickets I had refused to pay in summer of 2019. This was in relation to the offence "Parking in a roadway"

Defence / Witness Statement:

In my defence and witness statement I focused around the lack of signs, the fact that it was an overly inflated claim with fanciful costs, the fact that one day their ticket inspector even allowed me to park in the location, etc.

Unfortunately, during this i had moved addresses. I sent my Witness Statement to the Claimant with a cover letter detailng my new address and even sent this to the court. Seems like nobody received it during the pandamic and it was probably about a week before the hearing (I didn't even know the date and time of the hearing), I sent an e-mail to the court requesting an update. This is when they informed me of the date and time of the hearing and the fact they hadn't received anything from me. The Claimant then sent me their bundle electronically and I sent my Witness Statement to the court and the Claimant a week before the trial.

Upon examining the Claimant's witness statement they included the contract. The contract only had one map within it, this map had a section of the area with red lines and borders, this was the area they were authorised to enforce, a page or two before the map it had words to the effect of "The outlined area is the area you own and you would like UKPC to manage" - this was a section of the estate I did not park in.

In the witness bundle there was another map which was included OUTSIDE of the contract and further down in the statement. This map was explained in their exhibit to show where I had parked my vehicle. Now interestingly, they edited this map to show lines and borders which weren't in the first map. Furthermore, the map inside the contract was produced through Google Earth whereas the map outside of the contract had clearly been produced via Google Maps. They were stating that there is ample signage located throughout the estate - however, it was quite clear that their signage was located in the section of the area they were entitled to enforce, in reality there was one sign in the area I had parked, which was unlit, on the opposite side of the road and near bushes. (No idea why the sign is there since they don't have authority to enforce that section of the area).

My eyes lit up when I saw their contract and I immediately made a further statement detailing this, heck I even went out and recorded me driving into the estate and driving out and sent all of the further material to the court and the Claimant. Luckily due to the telephone hearing, they allowed for further evidence to be submitted as long as it was 48 hours prior, so on the day of the hearing this was accepted evidence.

Court day:

So the judge called me an hour after my appointment slot, I was a nervous wreck this point. However, she was very polite and from the get go informed me that the burden of proof sat with the Claimant and not myself.

It took about 10 minutes, the first question was from the Judge to the Claimant's solicitor (SCS Law). She immediately asked about the contract stating that the defendant's vehicle was not parked in the area they were contracted to enforce.

The solicitor stated that he had noted this and took instructions and the map that was actually needing to be referred to was later down in the witness statement (the one that showed where my vehicle had parked).

The judge did not accept this and stated that the map was quite clearly outside of the contract and she said that she was not satisfied the Claimant had proved their case.

I was trying to butt in as I wanted to point out the fact that two different systems were used to produce those maps so it was clear that the second map had nothing to do with the contract. However, the judge stated that I didn't have to say anything further as she was going to make a short judgement.

She read out a summary which it appeared she had already prepared. Long and short of it is that she dismissed it on the basis that there was no contract I had entered, as there is inadequete signage and the fact that they were not allowed to enforce in the area I had parked in any case. She also mentioned that "Parking in the roadway" wasn't even a terms and condition in the contract or on the signage". She quoted various bits and pieces from my statement around this and dismissed the claim.

So, I didn't really get much say in it which I suppose was good. The judge then moved onto costs, now SCS Law were claiming a furhter £560 in costs if they had won. The judge read out my cost schedule in which I had included loss of earnings, document photocopying and unreasonable behaviour, I kept this at £432 due to the fact that I felt harassed by them sending about 20 or more letters before they eventually decided to take me to court - the fact that these letters were threatening in nature and the fact that my privacy has been breached, I stated that the Claimant should've known that they were not allowed to enforce in the area and they have disregarded this and breached my privacy going to the DVLA.

The judge asked what the Claimant's solicitor thought about this - he responded with saying that this was the procedure and that it wasn't threatning in his opinion. I was then allowed to speak - I said to the judge "Ma'am, the Claimant was quite ready to claim costs of £560 if they had won, it was harassing, it did take a lot of my personal time and they've quite clearly breached my privacy by going to the DVLA, they should have known they were not allowed to enforce in the area" - with that the judge found that the behaviour was indeed unreasonable and ordered them to pay costs totalling £215 (the judge took into account my salary as well).

And that was that! I do intend to go public with this and also complain to DVLA and even IPCO regarding the breach of privacy. I am waiting for the official court result to come through. The claim ref is F1HW66QF. In the next few days I'll post my Defence / Witness Statements too.

I would really like to thank you guys here. You have been great and the advice you have offered has been amazing. Without joining this forum there was no doubt I would have given in and paid the money, or even if I had defendant I'd probably had lost as I wouldn't of picked up on these issues!

I did include two news articles in my Witness Statement about UKPC being banned by DVLA twice and the fact that they had previously been known to enforce outside of their boundary. The judge had read these and I guess maybe that's why she wasn't prepared to accept the Claimant's argument to refer to the map outside of the contract!

Coupon-mad

My eyes lit up when I saw their contract and I immediately made a further statement detailing this, heck I even went out and recorded me driving into the estate and driving out and sent all of the further material to the court and the Claimant. 
And that was that! I do intend to go public with this and also complain to DVLA and even IPCO regarding the breach of privacy. I am waiting for the official court result to come through. The claim ref is F1HW66QF. In the next few days I'll post my Defence / Witness Statements too.

Brilliant - go for it and please publicise it (the Daily Fail love these cases). 

I have the email address of the Sunday Times lady who reports about rogue private parking cases, would you like it?

Certainly show your evidence in a formal complaint to the DVLA and copy in Steve Clark at the BPA. This conduct requires sanction points - yet again - no doubt another little slap on the wrist for this ex-clamper...shall we take bets?  I say five sanction points and no ban and frantic 'group lifting of the carpet' ably assisted by the DVLA who will send their usual template reply to your complaint.

KnightRS

Coupon-mad said:

My eyes lit up when I saw their contract and I immediately made a further statement detailing this, heck I even went out and recorded me driving into the estate and driving out and sent all of the further material to the court and the Claimant. 
And that was that! I do intend to go public with this and also complain to DVLA and even IPCO regarding the breach of privacy. I am waiting for the official court result to come through. The claim ref is F1HW66QF. In the next few days I'll post my Defence / Witness Statements too.

Brilliant - go for it and please publicise it (the Daily Fail love these cases). 

I have the email address of the Sunday Times lady who reports about rogue private parking cases, would you like it?

Certainly show your evidence in a formal complaint to the DVLA and copy in Steve Clark at the BPA. This conduct requires sanction points - yet again - no doubt another little slap on the wrist for this ex-clamper...shall we take bets?  I say five sanction points and no ban and frantic 'group lifting of the carpet' ably assisted by the DVLA who will send their usual template reply to your complaint.

Yes indeed, may I please have the e-mail address?

Well, it'll go public - so hopefully anyone else who has received PCNs around this area can also challenge it!

Coupon-mad

Email address for the Sunday Times supplied.

Umkomaas

Great court report, thank you very much for that. Now time to go for the jugular. Fill yer boots. Keep us informed of progress. 👍

Snakes_Belly

Well done and thanks for the report. Love reading the reports and always good to end the week on a win.

beamerguy

Great report and a massive well done.  Go for the juggler now.   Wonder if SCSLaw will charge UKPC £560 ?

As it's not the first time that SCS have screwed up for UKPC, it's no wonder UKPC are using CST now  haha, talk about "the frying pan and the fire"

This was a very serious scam claim so what is Clark of the BPA going to do about this ???
AS IT WAS A FAKE CLAIM, and just as serious as UKPC faking timestamps, the time is now for the BPA to expel UKPC and be done with.

If Mr Clark fails again, there is every good reason to question government about the credibility of this ATA WHO WITHOUT DOUBT have scammers as members
Not in the interest of the public

Le_Kirk

Good report and well done once again.  Do you mean IPCO or in fact ICO - Information Commissioner's Office for data breach?