UK CPM/Gladstones Case - Jack Chapman threads - Student in need of help!

Fruitcake

The signature page states that the proprietor is the landowner or legal occupier, but those are different entities.
If the contract was with the landowner, why not say so? Why say it could be someone else such as a tenant or leaseholder who may not have permission from the landowner to employ a scammer.

You need to identify the landowner beyond doubt. If it is not Ringley Ltd then you say so, stating the scammers have not proved there actually is a contract with or flowing from the landowner.

If the scammers try to produce an unredacted contract for the court, you complain this is an ambush because it breaches the CPR, and puts you at a disadvantage because you have not had an opportunity to inspect the evidence and research it's veracity.

Hamman27

Le_Kirk said:

Hamman27 said:

Hi all, just an update. I believe that Ringley Ltd are the proprietor of the site but how can I confirm this?

Land Registry, Companies House or local council to see who pays the non-domestic business rates.

Hi, I have tried to figure this out but cannot seem to be able to. Can you provide a guide to doing this? Is the managing agent not able to enforce this as won't they technically be the leaseholder, a.k.a the legal occupier? 

Hamman27

Fruitcake said:

The signature page states that the proprietor is the landowner or legal occupier, but those are different entities.
If the contract was with the landowner, why not say so? Why say it could be someone else such as a tenant or leaseholder who may not have permission from the landowner to employ a scammer.

You need to identify the landowner beyond doubt. If it is not Ringley Ltd then you say so, stating the scammers have not proved there actually is a contract with or flowing from the landowner.

If the scammers try to produce an unredacted contract for the court, you complain this is an ambush because it breaches the CPR, and puts you at a disadvantage because you have not had an opportunity to inspect the evidence and research it's veracity.

They have provided it to the court but not me. Which CPR are you referring to?

Le_Kirk

Hamman27 said:

Fruitcake said:

The signature ................

They have provided it to the court but not me. Which CPR are you referring to?

CPR = Civil Procedure Rules

Le_Kirk

Hamman27 said:

Le_Kirk said:

Hamman27 said:

Hi all, just an update. I believe that Ringley Ltd are the proprietor of the site but how can I confirm this?

Land Registry, Companies House or local council to see who pays the non-domestic business rates.

Hi, I have tried to figure this out but cannot seem to be able to. Can you provide a guide to doing this? Is the managing agent not able to enforce this as won't they technically be the leaseholder, a.k.a the legal occupier? 

What have you tried to figure out?  Auntie Google finds several Ringley Ltd references.  You know where the site is.  Do you know which council it comes under?  If so, go to the council web site and see if you can see the section regarding business rates.  For Land Registry, go to: -
https://eservices.landregistry.gov.uk/eservices/FindAProperty/view/QuickEnquiryInit.do <<<<This is a link
and put in the post code.  This will find all the entries for that site.  Then you can decide if you want to pay £3 for the register details.

Hamman27

Le_Kirk said:

Hamman27 said:

Fruitcake said:

The signature ................

They have provided it to the court but not me. Which CPR are you referring to?

CPR = Civil Procedure Rules

Thanks for the response! I meant which specific civil procedure rule was being referred to so I can look it up in the white book. 

Also, in relation to the land registry website, I can only get information for the individual properties. I am unable to find information on who owns the road itself.

I have contacted HM Registry by telephone and found that the proprietor is actually E&J GROUND RENTS NO. 23G LIMITED and has been since 15/05/2017. My parking ticket was received on 07/11/2018. Unfortunately, I do not know how I can get physical documentation proving this company is the owner of the road itself.

Also, can someone refer me to the authority that states that the Parking Enforcement Contractual Agreement must be with the Landowner and that it cannot be with the leaseholder in order for it to be enforceable in the courts.
I want to thank everyone again for helping me with this, the court date is looming.

Fruitcake

Hamman27 said:

Le_Kirk said:

Hamman27 said:

Fruitcake said:

The signature ................

They have provided it to the court but not me. Which CPR are you referring to?

CPR = Civil Procedure Rules

Thanks for the response! I meant which specific civil procedure rule was being referred to so I can look it up in the white book. 

Also, in relation to the land registry website, I can only get information for the individual properties. I am unable to find information on who owns the road itself.

I have contacted HM Registry by telephone and found that the proprietor is actually E&J GROUND RENTS NO. 23G LIMITED and has been since 15/05/2017. My parking ticket was received on 07/11/2018. Unfortunately, I do not know how I can get physical documentation proving this company is the owner of the road itself.

Also, can someone refer me to the authority that states that the Parking Enforcement Contractual Agreement must be with the Landowner and that it cannot be with the leaseholder in order for it to be enforceable in the courts.
I want to thank everyone again for helping me with this, the court date is looming.

I have no idea if anything is written in law, but you are dealing with land ownership and authority for an entity to do something on that land.
It is logical to me that only the landowner can authorise somebody to carry out actions on their land. This could be done directly with the person carrying out those actions. Alternatively it could be done via an agent, but the original authority must be from the landowner giving the agent authority to act for the landowner.
So, either the landowner can authorise the parking scammer to scam on on the site in question, or the landowner can authorise an agent to engage a scammer to scam on the site in question.

What you need to do is put this argument to the judge, and convince her or him that it is obvious that the contract must be with or flowing from the landowner. The scammers must either have a contract to scam with the landowner, or have a contract with an agent allowing them to engage a scammer to scam.

You have only been provided with the contract between the agent and scammer. You now know who the landowner is so you say to the court, there is no contract between the landowner and the agent allowing the agent to employ a scammer. You put the scammers to strict proof that there is such a contract, then let the judge decide.

As for the relevant part of the CPR, see if it is here.

https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part31

Johnersh

You do need proper disclosure to be able to defend the claim - ALL signs, statements, photos etc must be sent to you in good time.

I'm afraid I disagree with @Fruitcake here, at least in part (I do agree you should have disclosure and the CPR can help) 

Part 31 CPR (Disclosure) does NOT apply to small claims. If you turn to the small claims section of the CPR you'll see Part 31 is excluded. 

The point to raise is Part 1 CPR - dealing with cases justly and at proportionate cost and use of court resources. If you're ambushed, that is unfair. If you're denied the material needed until shortly before trial, that compels a hearing when you might have resolved matters sooner with proper disclosure - a waste of time and money.

A managing agent is perfectly entitled to contract as agent for those that appoint him. What the MA can rarely do is agree to a contract that fundamentally affects the land rights of a tenant over the land, which is where it often comes unstuck.

Both signatories of a corporate entity need to be directors or authorised senior personnel. Again, that is often ambiguous from disclosure or simply not complied with. 

Hamman27

Hi all. I just wanted to thank everyone that helped me with the case. I had the trial earlier in the week. The evidence they provided was not sufficient to allow their claim to succeed and they failed to attend the hearing to argue otherwise. As a result, the judge found in my favour and UKCPM's claim was dismissed within 15 minutes. 

I will provide further details of the claim and points argued if anyone requires them and I have attached a copy of my Skeleton.

Ferrybird

Congratulations.
I like the layout of your SA, concise and to the point. Thanks for sharing!