PCN in resident parking bay

keriseason

Hi all, and thanks in advance for taking the time to read and reply. 

Situation: A guest of mine received a PCN from Parking & Property Management Ltd for parking without a permit in my parking bay of my car park in my development. £100 and £60 if paid within first 14 (2 days left for that). 

Context: I’m aware the company patrols the roads within the development and the car park, but given car park requires fob access I didn’t think they’d even be checking the inside of the car park (I’ve lived here for a while and hadn’t seen a patrol of the inside so never even thought about the permit when a guest has been over and parked in my bay. On the p&p website the evidence is photos taken from smart phone of the patroller of the car from various angles not displaying the permit, and of the signage that displays t&cs close to the car.

Homework so far: Contacted management company about it - they say they brought in parking enforcement after residents complained about other people parking in their bays, and weren’t of much help (i’ll tackle the management company about the use of the company separately..)

I’ve read previous threads and looked at my lease, and believe they have no authority given primacy of contract. Lease says the following (and I’m not aware of any amendments made to it since)

“Parking space” the parking space numbered 155 on Plan 1

1. The right for the tenant and all persons authorised by him (in common with all other persons entitled to the right) at all times for reasonable purposes connected with the residential use of aoocuption of the Property and Parking Space only yo go pass and repass with or without vehicles (as appropirate) over and along the Buildings Common Parts and External Landscape Areas over which the tenant requires rights in connected with the Estate together with the rights set out in clause X of the transfer dated Y made between A & B referred to in title number C. 

8. The right to park one vehicle not exceeding two and one half tonnes gross unladen weight in the Parking Space

(I can’t see anything about future changes to the lease..)

My understanding of the next steps I should take: Guest should wait for a NtK, and then appeal. Is this correct? 

Issue here is guest doesn’t really want to wait around for letters to be sent (concern that escalation will affect credit rating) and wants to take action within the 14 days. 

Could someone explain the reasoning for waiting for a letter and whether anything is lost by responding to the PCN now? 

My appeal draft for review: I couldn’t find a template so drafted something based on what I could find in existing posts. Should I appeal as myself (the leaseholder, not owner of the car) or as the guest who I have given permission to park? Not sure how to do it, as the parking spot isn’t there’s its mine, but I’ve let them park there?

Hi, I am writing to appeal PCN X dated Y location Z for reason: Not displaying a valid permit

Please withdraw the parking charge as I had parked a guests car in my own bay (or alternatively: I was parking in the bay of a family member) where the lease says the following (also attached):

[insert lease text from above]

It is therefore denied that the parking of vehicle X in my own parking space was in breach of any parking conditions or wea not permitted to park in circumstances where an express permission to park had been granted permitting the above mentioned vehicle to be parked by the current occupier and leaseholder of [address], whose tenancy agreement permits the parking of vehicle(s) on land. I aver that there was an absolute entitlement to park deriving from the terms of the lease, which cannot be fettered by any alleged parking terms. The lease terms provide the right to park a vehicle in the relevant allocated bay, without limitation as to type of vehicle, ownership of vehicle, the user of the vehicle or the requirement to display a parking permit. 

Given the primacy of contract, there is a large body of case law which establishes this: 

In Saeed v Plustrade Ltd [2001] EWCA Civ 2011 it was found the managing agent could not reduce the amount of parking spaces available to residents. In Jopson v Homeguard [2016] B9GF0A9E, on appeal it was found that the parking company could not override the tenant's right to temporarily stop near the building entrance for loading/unloading.

In Pace v Mr N [2016] C6GF14F0 [2016] it was found that the parking company could not override the tenant's right to park by requiring a permit to park.

In Link Parking v Ms P C7GF50J7 [2016] it was also found that the parking company could not override the tenant's right to park by requiring a permit to park.

If this appeal is not granted then please provide me with registration number so that I can continue my case with POPLA. 

Sincerely X. 

Thanks very much in advance for your input. 

Redx

The PCN is a driver PCN , not an NTK so any response is to a windscreen ntd

POFA protects a keeper but does not protect an admitted driver

The Newbies advice should be followed , especially plan A so get it cancelled via the MC asap whilst it's still an NTD

Any deviation from the advice here is foolish , stick to the script

Chances are any appeal will be rejected , regardless , there is no profit in acceptance , it's their business model

Do not use any words that imply who was driving , not to anyone and especially not to the PPC , use the word WE instead

Popla is not an option for an IPC member

The credit rating is not affected , that is a foolish assumption

Losing in court is when a CCJ occurs , which should be paid off in full within one month to expunge it and prevent credit rating issues

Fruitcake

The NEWBIES explains why it is best to wait for an NTK where an IPC scammer is involved.
The default position is not to reveal the driver's identity in case the NTK is non PoFA compliant.
Identifying the driver in certain circumstances can be advantageous, such as an own space case, but there is no reason to rush this.

Personally I would wait to see if the NTK is or isn't PoFA compliant then decide whether to out the driver or not.

Coupon-mad

Hmmm, I would appeal yourself, now (asap)...this could be fun!  Send them up a blind alley. 

Don't say if you are the keeper, or driver, or anything like that - and don't wait for the NTK to go to him.  Appeal now online. Check to see if they ask you to say if you are the keeper (you really want an 'other' option) and quote your lease and say you are the resident and have primacy of contract and that car was authorised to park and the PCN should be cancelled.

Tell us what they come back with.  If the online appeal doesn't let people appeal without ticking 'driver' or 'keeper' then send the appeal as a letter by post, this week.  Get proof of posting from the PO counter (free - a 'certificate of posting' receipt) and for the love of God, no sending it recorded/signed for!

Issue here is guest doesn’t really want to wait around for letters to be sent (concern that escalation will affect credit rating) and wants to take action within the 14 days. 

He's wrong - no need to worry.  There is no effect on his credit rating even if he was sued and was one of the 1% here who don't win in court (because he'd pay within 28 days, less than the claim).

D_P_Dance

Have you read this?

http://parking-prankster.blogspot.com/2016/11/residential-parking.htmlantsot

What does your lease/AST say about parking? Does it mention the need to display a permit? then it may take primacy over the self serving TnC of the scammer, and interfere with your lawful right to “quiet enjoyment” of your property, possible an offence under The Landlord and Tenants Acts.

Nine times out of ten these tickets are scams, so consider complaining to your MP., it can cause the scammer extra costs and work, and in some cases, cancellation.

Parliament is well aware of the MO of these private parking companies, many of whom are former clampers, and on 15th March 2019 a Bill was enacted to curb the excesses of these shysters. Codes of Practice are being drawn up, and an independent appeals service will be set up,


Hopefully life will become impossible for the worst of these scammers, but until this is done you should still complain to your MP, citing the new legislation.

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2019/8/contents/of these Private Parking Companies.

Just as the clampers were finally closed down, so hopefully will many of these Private Parking Companies.

keriseason

D_P_Dance said:

Have you read this?

What does your lease/AST say about parking? Does it mention the need to display a permit? then it may take primacy over the self serving TnC of the scammer, and interfere with your lawful right to “quiet enjoyment” of your property, possible an offence under The Landlord and Tenants Acts.

Hi yes I have read it and my original post has the exact wording of my lease where I believe there is primacy. 

keriseason

Coupon-mad said:

Hmmm, I would appeal yourself, now (asap)...this could be fun!  Send them up a blind alley. 

Don't say if you are the keeper, or driver, or anything like that - and don't wait for the NTK to go to him.  Appeal now online. Check to see if they ask you to say if you are the keeper (you really want an 'other' option) and quote your lease and say you are the resident and have primacy of contract and that car was authorised to park and the PCN should be cancelled.

Tell us what they come back with.  If the online appeal doesn't let people appeal without ticking 'driver' or 'keeper' then send the appeal as a letter by post, this week.  Get proof of posting from the PO counter (free - a 'certificate of posting' receipt) and for the love of God, no sending it recorded/signed for!

Issue here is guest doesn’t really want to wait around for letters to be sent (concern that escalation will affect credit rating) and wants to take action within the 14 days. 

He's wrong - no need to worry.  There is no effect on his credit rating even if he was sued and was one of the 1% here who don't win in court (because he'd pay within 28 days, less than the claim).

Thanks very much for your reply. Can you explain your reasoning for appealing? This seems to go against all the very strong advice on this forum including your own (based on sig) so am interested in the rationale (I'd of course prefer to just appeal and prevent unnecessary further aggro but have now been conditioned to see it as a bad move based on everything I've read on here in the past couple of days). 

The online appeal doesn't allow for the an other (the options are copied below), and additionally the back of the windscreen notice under 'Appeals' makes reference that written correspondence must include 'your name, address, the name and address of driver (if different)....' 

Driver of vehicle at time of incident

Registered Keeper

Driver of Loan vehicle

Representative with letter of authority

Coupon-mad

You appealing when you can't be liable (with careful wording talking about being a resident and showing an excerpt from your lease to keep their little appeals clerk busy and distracted) takes them up a blind alley if they follow you.  Then you can appeal to the IAS and prove you were neither the driver nor keeper. 

And on that basis, PPM should crawl back under their stone.

If they don't fall for it then you've lost nothing but have shown them that you have primacy of contract.    They would then get the DVLA data of the keeper and would bother that person.  

I see the first plan as better. Post the appeal snail mail at a PO counter (only) and get FREE certificate of posting (receipt) and don't send the darn thing 'signed-for'...obviously!

My signature only says ignore PPCs if you are in NI...you are not in NI are you?

nosferatu1001

BVecause we want to see what they do when directly presented with I am the landholder, YOU arent permitted to be there. 
Look who wrote the newbies thread....she knows what shes doing
You do not have to give the address of the driver. G'tee you. They have no right ot make this info a condition of an appeal.

D_P_Dance

Here is one landowner who took exception to UKPC ticketing him.  Unfortunately for the scammer Mr D is a barrister.

https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/324523-ukpc-liable-for-trespass-success/