BigDosser Claim Defence Help - Gladstones. Help appreciated.

Umkomaas

Fruitcake said:

Please show us the scammers witness statement. I am especially interested in the alleged contract. Is it with the landowner or with an alleged agent of the landowner? If the latter, is there a contract between the landowner and the agent allowing the agent to employ a scammer?

And from recent cases, the date of the contract and, if pre-2012, any mentions of PoFA and/or the IPC. 

Coupon-mad

If you searched the forum for Jack Chapman and found nothing, you are either searching wrong (you aren't searching the entire MSE site and articles, are you?), or not realising that the stupid new forum search takes you to the end of a thread, and that you have to hop back to page one to read a thread. 

There are dozens of WS that mention Jack Chapman that you can copy.

BigDosser

Umkomaas said:

Fruitcake said:

Please show us the scammers witness statement. I am especially interested in the alleged contract. Is it with the landowner or with an alleged agent of the landowner? If the latter, is there a contract between the landowner and the agent allowing the agent to employ a scammer?

And from recent cases, the date of the contract and, if pre-2012, any mentions of PoFA and/or the IPC. 

It's between the college (site of the car park) which is referred to as the client, and UKCPM, referred to as the company. It says the client is the owner of the site or is entitled to enter into the agreement. The address of the "Company" is different to the address used on the footer of the contract, which has been blacked out on page 2 but not on page one. 
Also, the signature, name and address for both "client" and "company" have been blacked out, but the date is July/August 2017. 

nosferatu1001

Post up pics 
so far there is nothing to suggest it's been validly executed, meaning it's not a contract. 

BigDosser

Number 1/2

BigDosser

Number 2/2 - the blacked out lines are on the original

Castle

I can't see any mention of UKCPM having the authority to issue court claims in that "contract".

Coupon-mad

And why does it say 'UK CAR PARK MANAGEMENT LTD top right but the agreement is between the client and UK CAR PARKING MANAGEMENT LTD?

They don't know their own company name, or the agreement was in the name of a different entity than is on the signs.  This is a significant error in that contract that some Judges would consider fatal.

It also talks about the Independent Parking Committee CoP even though the IPC changed its name in 2016.

nosferatu1001

Echo the above
THey do not have th eright to issue parkign charges in their own name, they are not entitled to offer parkign either. 
Theyre offering something -a licence to park - that is not theirs to offer. 

nosferatu1001

As the names have been blanked, there is no evidence that the contract has been validly executed by a DIRECTOR. 
OP - see all the threads where S44 is mentioned. You must must must undersrtand that a "contract" like this is not valid because it does not complywith the required rules. If they have no contract with the landowner, tehyre stuffed. The added issues - that the company contracting (...parking...)is not the company on the signs (...park...), that the company contracting is not given any rights to offer parking, is not given the right to take a motorist to court in their own name etc are also points. they are not the same point, but each is separate and each is a hurdle for the claimant to get over

Thats an appalling contract. It doesnt even set out the governing jurisdiciton, no glossary of terms, no severability clause etc. Whoever drated that is an idiot. Im not a contract lawyer, just an auditor, but I know a bad contract when i see one...