Alliance Parking - A S Parking

Umkomaas

Good evening all, 
Another update on the parking dispute, I know its been a while and you've probably lost interest now!   so apologies about this!

In the time you have been away from the forum we have dealt with over 2,500 other cases, so you'll forgive us if we cannot even remember your case!

As far as I am aware, we have managed to get 2 of the 3 PCN's cancelled through speaking to property managers etc... 

Well done, hopefully these will each come through. 

As well as this I attached my reply (defence?), as followed:

Have you received a formal court claim from the Northampton CCBC?  I must say that what you have written above is not a defence. Sorry.

Side note* - If you look at the link to their county court pack, they've put in bold print: 'The charge is disproportionate to any loss:  The Supreme Court of Appeal ruled that the charge need not represent any loss.' but failed to provide a case?! Is this one of those rare judgements or is it common law?

That judgment was the most important case in the history of private parking in 2015. Have you heard of Barry Beavis?

I'm a bit concerned as to exactly where you are with this. You refer to the PPCs 'county court pack', why would they send you this if you're still at LBC stage.

If you look at the link to their county court pack

360ollie

Umkomaas said:

As well as this I attached my reply (defence?), as followed:

Have you received a formal court claim from the Northampton CCBC?  I must say that what you have written above is not a defence. Sorry.

Side note* - If you look at the link to their county court pack, they've put in bold print: 'The charge is disproportionate to any loss:  The Supreme Court of Appeal ruled that the charge need not represent any loss.' but failed to provide a case?! Is this one of those rare judgements or is it common law?

That judgment was the most important case in the history of private parking in 2015. Have you heard of Barry Beavis?

I'm a bit concerned as to exactly where you are with this. You refer to the PPCs 'county court pack', why would they send you this if you're still at LBC stage.

If you look at the link to their county court pack

No, no formal court claim has been sent to me by the CCBC. So I’m not sure why I am getting this LBC letter again?

The letter that I received was headed with ‘letter of claim’.  It says that I need to make payment within 30days in order to avoid CC proceedings.

The letter then provides me with information on the the country court pre-action protocol. 

The letter states “in order to comply with Pre-action protocol, the CC require us ‘the claimant’ to provide you ‘the Defendant’ with a response pack’ which may be download here: www.alliance-parking.co.uk/county-court.”... “should you wish to defend the claim via a county court hearing, in order for you to comply with pre-action protocol, the CC requires you to complete and return the ‘reply form’ encompassed within the ‘response pack’ and to do so within 30days.”... “your response should comprehensively detail your reason/S for withholding payment and should include any evidence that you intend to rely on in your defence”... then it goes into talk about ADR which I don’t want to do as there is additional costs to that.

I sent this back last time, marking the boxes where I intend to defend the claim + the section where they need to send me more details about the claim (as my comment before your reply - information, photos, contract).

I then attached my response which I mistakenly marked up as my ‘defence?’ in my last comment before Umkomaas’ reply - this was not marked up as ‘defence’ in my reply to Alliance Parking.

Is the reason for withholding payment (in my last post) grounds for a defence though if the case reaches CC?

I’m very muddled, they’ve sent me 2 ‘letter of claims’, and I have yet to receive anything from the CCBC? The only thing I’ve sent back to them (alliance) was that I intend to defend and that I need more information + reasons why i am withholding payment. 

- I presume I should have waited until the CCBC sent me the documents before sending this back to Alliance Parking?

Sorry, I am unfamiliar with Barry Beavis case, is this a case I’m to rely upon or is that a case they are claiming as a grounds for a claim on their website which is irrelevant because they are harassing/ acting in a predatory way because I am a legitimate visitor/ my girlfriend was a resident?

What is my next move, do I just wait for the CCBC send documents?

Umkomaas

There have been a number of reports of LBCs sent out after which nothing further occurred (possibly it was just another level of 'frightener' - who knows), but then followed by a second LBC, much further on in the process - which seems to be where you are now. It needs to be dealt with as per the NEWBIES FAQ sticky, second post. 

Read that section very carefully because it details every step you need to take from the issue of the LBC, right up to any hearing, some time in the future - maybe autumn or winter time. Do not fill in any of the forms they have attached - the sticky explains. 

ParkingEye v Barry Beavis, heard at the Supreme Court almost 6 years ago, determined (among other things) that 'the charge is disproportionate to cost' has little traction any more in private parking cases. Google will find you a synopsis somewhere if you wish to read further, but you need to forget the 'disproportionate to cost' angle. 

360ollie

I requested a SARs, so will see if I get this in the next month.

will update shortly, thanks!

Le_Kirk

360ollie said:

I requested a SARs, so will see if I get this in the next month.
will update shortly, thanks!

You submitted a SAR and you should receive the data within 30 days, if not, a complaint to the ICO is in order.

360ollie

Le_Kirk said:

360ollie said:

I requested a SARs, so will see if I get this in the next month.
will update shortly, thanks!

You submitted a SAR and you should receive the data within 30 days, if not, a complaint to the ICO is in order.

Umkomaas said:

There have been a number of reports of LBCs sent out after which nothing further occurred (possibly it was just another level of 'frightener' - who knows), but then followed by a second LBC, much further on in the process - which seems to be where you are now. It needs to be dealt with as per the NEWBIES FAQ sticky, second post. 

Read that section very carefully because it details every step you need to take from the issue of the LBC, right up to any hearing, some time in the future - maybe autumn or winter time. Do not fill in any of the forms they have attached - the sticky explains. 

ParkingEye v Barry Beavis, heard at the Supreme Court almost 6 years ago, determined (among other things) that 'the charge is disproportionate to cost' has little traction any more in private parking cases. Google will find you a synopsis somewhere if you wish to read further, but you need to forget the 'disproportionate to cost' angle. 

I have received the SAR report, detailing every correspondence as well as the images. 
This is the only photo they have at the time. The text is small and barely readable at the bottom. Can I use this as part of a defence? 
Edit: I have the original that they sent and it is barely readable if I zoom in (a lot)
Edit2: this is the reason for rejecting my appeal:
Your appeal was declined as your permit is/was only valid for W***ick Estates Bay 'Number xx'
 (as detailed on the permit);
you were parked in a bay that is reserved for residents of the 'Llais Tawe' estate.

The reference numbers of outstanding Parking Charges in your name are xxxx, xxxx, xxxx.

Each of the above Parking Charges are £160 each, there is no calculation as each charge is a single item of £160; as per

the contract onsite.

Your total outstanding balance is £480 (3 x £160).

For the avoidance of doubt, we are not seeking interest.

We also had 'visitor' badges and had access to the 'visitor' bays. 

360ollie

I have enhance this one more for ease of reading, still very blurry, and only just readable if you zoom in 300% on PDF which is what they sent to me