Evidence bundle in relation to private parking ticket due by 18th December 2020

Fruitcake

Just a quickie. Is there any reason why you have redacted the name and company of the person who created the WS? 
Luckily we know it is A Oliver of Gladstones Ltd, but redacting anything other than YOUR personal data does not help the regulars.

The signature is obviously a facsimile, an electronic copy or even a photocopy. There is no proof that A Oliver actually produced the WS, or even knows of its existence.

We need to see the scammer's Exhibits as well, especially the agreement they refer to in para 2 i).

Clumsy101

Thanks @Coupon-mad. 
Grateful if you could let me know if the following wording is ok:

1.         Furthermore, The Parking Restrictions, as stated in the letter, do not mention anything about having to display a physical permit. The clause states ‘Parking for valid PCM permit holders only within marked parking areas. I believe I was a valid permit holder as I was granted the right to park and was told by the estate agents, facilitating the parking arrangement, that the permits were digital. I had duly passed my vehicle registration details to the estate agent as part of the arrangement which had been passed on to the defendant (attach evidence).

2.         In addition, even if it is accepted that I fall in the category of people that were not ‘permitted’ to park then the signs displayed at the property offer no contract to people without a permit. The contract offer is only extended to those with a permit, therefore, there is no consideration flowing between the parties and the signs are prohibitive and do not offer a contract to those without a permit. In the absence of any consideration no contract exists.

3.         This was reflected in the “PCM vs Bull” case, where Defendants were issued parking tickets for parking on private roads with signage stating “no parking at any time”. District Judge Glen in his final statement mentioned that “the notice was prohibitive, and didn’t communicate any offer of parking and that landowners may have claim in trespass, but that was not under consideration”.

4.         The claim is for breach of contract. However, it is denied any contract existed.

@Fr@Fruitcake apologies I was under the impression that all identifiable info has to be redacted. I am reattaching the WS with the landowner authroity and the stock signanage image. The only thing I have removed is the parking tickets and NTK they attached.

KeithP

And now you have published all your identifiable information!! Crazy!!

Full name, Claim Number, all the PCN numbers...

Do you have no privacy concerns?

KeithP

As you have shown us your full name, please consider the following...


You appear to have based your forum username on your real name. You may want to get your forum username changed to something completely anonymous.

To help with that, have a read of this item from the Forum's FAQs:

Can I change my username?

In most circumstances, we don't allow this.

The only reason we will change your username is if it puts your privacy at risk e.g. you've inadvertently registered using your name, email address or something which gives away your identity within your username.

If you fall into this category, email forumteam@moneysavingexpert.com your current username, the email address you registered with and three alternative usernames in order of preference.

Le_Kirk

Don't start a sentence with "furthermore" unless you are following on from a previous point, in which case it should be with that previous point.

Clumsy101

KeithP said:

And now you have published all your identifiable information!! Crazy!!

Full name, Claim Number, all the PCN numbers...

Do you have no privacy concerns?

To be brutally honest I had no idea claim number and PCN numbers are sensitive. I have taken it down, attaching the new version here.

KeithP

sabahat101 said:

KeithP said:

And now you have published all your identifiable information!! Crazy!!

Full name, Claim Number, all the PCN numbers...

Do you have no privacy concerns?

To be brutally honest I had no idea claim number and PCN numbers are sensitive.

The parking companies are know to trawl this forum just waiting for people to trip themselves up.

With that information they can identify you and your parking incidents. By reading the rest of the thread they can possibly find further information that helps them hang you.

Clumsy101

Thanks @KeithP. I have emailed forumteam@moneysavingexpert.com

Coupon-mad

4.         The claim is for breach of contract. However, it is denied any contract existed with this Claimant.  My contract was between me and the estate agent who, I was assured, had added my numberplate to an exempt list for the site (digital permits) and the Claimant has not shown any evidence to the contrary.

(By the way, A Oliver ''works'' for PCM, not Gladstones):

http://parking-prankster.blogspot.com/2015/05/is-it-pcm-uk-who-make-up-stuff-all-time.html

Fruitcake

I've just realised that you have already shown us the scammer's WS and *cough* Landowner Authority and we have already commented on it.

In your WS you didn't mention that there is no company called PL Management registered at Companies House. Of the six companies with PL Management in their company name, Dallas Craik does not appear in the lists of People registered at Companies House as a person with authority to sign a contract on behalf of their employer.

Did you also mention that the company named on the (alleged) Landowner Authority does not state in what capacity the company is acting? None of the following have been ticked/circled/highlighted.

FREEHOLDER
LEASEHOLDER
MANAGER
MANAGING AGENT