PCN received after friend parked car in my private parking space

NeilCr

Vermicious_Knad said:

Thanks @Umkomaas that really helps i thought i was going to have to dig for that 🙏

NeilCr said:

Who is the landowner?

Have you confirmed it's a ManCo?

Yes, it's a manco, resident directors are very elusive, MA refuses to name them simply saying they agree to keep the scam PPC in place. As a tenant allegedly I am not entitled to contact them directly and have to go through the MA.
Its pretty much past that point anyway now, more of a prepare for court thing. 
Be interested to know if I have to go to court 6 times or if they would consider rolling it all into one. 
Thats said these scum will leave more PCNs by then anyway! 

You could find who the directors are. There will be company details out there - usually the company  name is along the lines of the name of the development. So Smith Road Estate will likely have a ManCo called Smith Road Management Company

Realistically, as you say, this is going to end in court. In general it is right that ManCo will deal with the owners - as opposed to the tenants - which is why I have been wondering about getting the LL involved. Personally, though, I am more than happy to engage  with a tenant - but the answer may be that we need to talk to the owner. 

Le_Kirk

"I would like to complain about the predatory behaviour of a Private Parking Company operating on your land. Since moving into the development I have received fake parking charge notices demanding payment of £100 each.
The defence case was that any such regulations................
The District Judge was well versed on the issues and predatory tactics employed by the claimant.........

I would explain the bits about defence and district judge as, if I were to receive that letter, it would confuse me, giving no introduction before writing about defence and judge etc.  Also, bearing in mind what NeilCr writes (and he is experienced in the ways of MAs and ManCos) maybe a precis of the judgments etc as a way of toning it down.

Le_Kirk

Its pretty much past that point anyway now, more of a prepare for court thing. Be interested to know if I have to go to court 6 times or if they would consider rolling it all into one. Thats said these scum will leave more PCNs by then anyway! 

Depending upon what stage you are at with each case, whenever you contact the CCBC for sending defences/DQ or local court (when it is allocated), list all the case numbers and ask that they be consolidated as a way of reducing cost and not wasting the court's time.

NeilCr

Le_Kirk said:

"I would like to complain about the predatory behaviour of a Private Parking Company operating on your land. Since moving into the development I have received fake parking charge notices demanding payment of £100 each.
The defence case was that any such regulations................
The District Judge was well versed on the issues and predatory tactics employed by the claimant.........

I would explain the bits about defence and district judge as, if I were to receive that letter, it would confuse me, giving no introduction before writing about defence and judge etc.  Also, bearing in mind what NeilCr writes (and he is experienced in the ways of MAs and ManCos) maybe a precis of the judgments etc as a way of toning it down.

And directors are volunteers too. The letter has gone - and been received - but I agree with your comments about toning it down. If I'd have got that (and if it was the first time I'd have heard about it) not sure I'd have started with a sympathetic stance

Couple of other things. AFAIK the police give out a crime number if you report a crime. Doesn't mean much more than that. And I'd be careful about comments about the MA getting backhanders

From what I see, the way to play this is on signage, primacy of contract, etc. The normal defence stance for own space cases. I'd avoid a slanging match or slinging mud

Vermicious_Knad

Turns out the ManCo directors are the exact same people who are the landowners anyway. All in it together. 
@Le_Kirk thanks for the note about consolidation, makes sense a court would not want their time wasted with this nonsense over and over. 

NeilCr

Vermicious_Knad said:

Turns out the ManCo directors are the exact same people who are the landowners anyway. All in it together. 
@Le_Kirk thanks for the note about consolidation, makes sense a court would not want their time wasted with this nonsense over and over. 

Well yes they would be

In a ManCo all the individual property owners have a share in the freehold. The directors are their "representatives" who make the decisions. Your landlord is a part of this and a landowner too. It's a reason for trying to go through them to get this sorted

Vermicious_Knad

Hi all,

Hope you are keeping well in this strange new world we seem to be living in!
Had a strange development with one of my many PCNs which i would like some advice on, cant work out what the PPC are up to or whether they are just attempting to even more fraudulent than ever!

The PCN in question was a non-windscreen PCN (my only one out of 6) given to me on 24/2/2020.
Letter arrives soon after dated 4 days after that (28/2/2020) with Parking Charge Notice at the top. I presume this is their NtD. It states they have requested my details from DVLA through reasonable cause blah blah. It then quotes POFA 2012
Paragraph 9(2)(f) and their right to recover parking charges from me after 28 days if they dont know who the driver is, etc etc.
I appeal it (just to show willing to the judge when the time comes) to receive the usual rejection for no valid reason.
I have recently changed the registered address of the vehicle on 6/3/2020 although the vehicle has remained parked in the same residential space with permit displayed etc.
20/3/2020 i receive a new postal PCN with my new registered address this time not quoting POFA 2012 at all.
Any ideas what these idiots are up to?
Not sure why they would resend the postal PCN.
Their website and so called evidence initially didnt match either of the two postal PCNs and claims the alleged parking event happened 3 hours before the time on the PCN.
I just checked the website again to find that they have "amended" the evidence and it no shows the alleged parking event on a different time and day to either of my postal PCNs and the screenshot i have of their "evidence" originally.

Am i missing something or are these cheeky chaps just considerably more incompetent than i thought?

Umkomaas

Letter arrives soon after dated 4 days after that (28/2/2020) with Parking Charge Notice at the top. I presume this is their NtD. 

That will be a NtK (Notice to Keeper, letter through the post, confirmed by them quoting para 9(2)(f) ), usually after a camera capture.  A NtD is a ticket attached to your windscreen. 

I have recently changed the registered address of the vehicle on 6/3/2020 although the vehicle has remained parked in the same residential space with permit displayed etc.
20/3/2020 i receive a new postal PCN with my new registered address this time not quoting POFA 2012 at all.
Any ideas what these idiots are up to?

Looks like a brand new PCN, which will need dealing with as per the NEWBIES FAQ sticky, first post. If you check the PCN reference numbers, if they're different to the others, you've got yet another to deal with. 

Vermicious_Knad

No same number. 
I've appealed it already and been rejected. 
Online evidence has been altered, the evidence photos posted by the ppc are now 4 days after the alleged event.
Same PCN doctored evidence. 

Umkomaas

Vermicious_Knad said:

No same number. 
I've appealed it already and been rejected. 
Online evidence has been altered, the evidence photos posted by the ppc are now 4 days after the alleged event.
Same PCN doctored evidence. 

All good evidence for any court case, including for any punitive Costs Order you put forward for the Judge to consider. .