Complaint to management company owned by residents (me)?

Coupon-mad

No, there isn't.  No residential estate needs any PPC.  Ever.

Maybe the approach should be to review the way the bays are marked...can any more be added...are any more needed for visitors that could restore harmony.  Back to basics, with the focus being on making the site work in the interests of the residents.

Le_Kirk

@Umkomaas & @Coupon-madI couldn't find what an FRO is (meaning) other than the rude version of F Right Off

That's the one!

NeilCr

@WokAlot

Fair point about knocking on the door. I've had that and it can get a bit annoying - I had one guy once who wanted me to go round and fix his Sky box! 

Perhaps give your phone number/email address to the MA and ask them to get a director contact you. That's mainly how we work but we do have a strong and proactive MA. 

Just to say, fwiw, C-M and I disagree (amicably I hope) on the need for a PPC. I, very much, agree that they shouldn't be there but I can see situations where they could be of use. Personally, I don't see any harm in suggesting alternatives to a PPC. C-M's suggestions wouldn't work on our estate - they might elsewhere. Parking posts are another possibility.

https://bisonsecurityposts.co.uk/products/fold-down-parking-driveway-post?variant=28960484622388&utm_medium=cpc&utm_source=google&utm_campaign=Google%20Shopping&gclid=Cj0KCQjw6ar4BRDnARIsAITGzlCtJJ-uQJEuI_DfHmI_wIJAkKfKhbrSEMrUcDDpuJAC-mxPkENpF_4aAsBKEALw_wcB

These are what we offered our owners

Half_way

[quote]under GDPR you can store/process someone's personal data on a legal basis.[/quote]

The big one is you can store personal data, but only if you have a justifiable reason to do so, and any data held must be accurate.

So in this case, you have informed/reminded the parking company that they have no just cause to access/process your data with regards to pursuing a parking charge notice ( as you have  a prior right to the space - its yours not theirs)

and that you parked with out permission ( permit) is therefore inaccurate

WokAlot

I haven't made much progress with this.  I thought I would pursue PCM further until I got a firm no until I went to the management company.

I spoke with PCM the other day, after getting a letter informing us that the charge was now at £100 instead of £60.  They told me I could submit another appeal using the same online form as the first one and I could attach a copy of my lease.  Then if my lease says I own my parking bay they would cancel the PCN.  I told them my lease says I have the right to park in my bay but not that I own it, to which they told me that it is up to the land owner then if they require a permit and issue PCN etc.  Obviously not true!

So my question is.  Is it worth trying this or am I just arming them with a copy of my lease?

If I do send them my lease what sort of text should I send along with it?  I was thinking of something along the lines of:

 "You can see from my lease (attached) I have the right to park without permit or charges in the space shown.  My lease has primacy of contract.  If you do not cancel the PCN now prove you have primacy of contract by providing the following:

The full contractual trail including the land owners agreement.
The vote from the residents agreeing to ammend the leases with 70% attendance and no more than 30% dissaproval.
A copy of the contract which has primacy.
Any other evidence to show you have primacy of contract."

What do you think?  Thanks in advance again to anyone who can help.

Fruitcake

It depends how you want to play this. You could send them the relevant parts of the lease that you have already shown us, the whole lease, or tell them they must have a copy of the lease or head lease because a reputable company would have checked on the rights of residents before scamming them.

Personally I would supply the relevant parts only. If they want the while thing then it's up to you, but I would tell them it contains sensitive and personal information, and anyway they should have the relevant information already as I mentioned above.

Le_Kirk

WokAlot said:

The vote from the residents agreeing to amend the leases with 70% attendance and no more than 30% disapproval.
A copy of the contract which has primacy.
Any other evidence to show you have primacy of contract."

It is 10% disagreeing not 30%.

Umkomaas

Le_Kirk said:

WokAlot said:

The vote from the residents agreeing to amend the leases with 70% attendance and no more than 30% disapproval.
A copy of the contract which has primacy.
Any other evidence to show you have primacy of contract."

It is 10% disagreeing not 30%.

And I think it's 75% in favour. But OP it's best you check out the precise requirements in the Landlord and Tenants Act, then you can quote categorically. Quoting inaccurately exposes a weakness in arguing your corner. 

Le_Kirk

Umkomaas said:

Le_Kirk said:

WokAlot said:

The vote from the residents agreeing to amend the leases with 70% attendance and no more than 30% disapproval.
A copy of the contract which has primacy.
Any other evidence to show you have primacy of contract."

It is 10% disagreeing not 30%.

And I think it's 75% in favour. But OP it's best you check out the precise requirements in the Landlord and Tenants Act, then you can quote categorically. Quoting inaccurately exposes a weakness in arguing your corner. 

You are right @Umkomaas don't know how I missed that!

Fruitcake

It's Section 37 of the L & T Act that you want.

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1987/31/contents

Part IV Variation of Leases

1. Applications relating to flats

1. 35.Application by party to lease for variation of lease.

2. 36. Application by respondent for variation of other leases.

3. 37. Application by majority of parties for variation of leases.

(5)     Any such application shall only be made if—

(a)     in a case where the application is in respect of less than nine leases, all, or all but one, of the parties concerned consent to it; or

(b)     in a case where the application is in respect of more than eight leases, it is not opposed for any reason by more than 10 per cent. of the total number of the parties concerned and at least 75 per cent. of that number consent to it.