UKPC County Court Claim - Defence review requested

Tetch20

I’d very much appreciate it if this Defence could be checked by any of the experts here with the time to do so.

The circumstances are as follows:

I am a resident and leaseholder at the location in question. A number of years ago, the management company took it upon themselves to contract with UKPC for management of the parking on the estate. I had lived at this address for a considerable time prior to this without UKPC being on the scene, and regularly parked in the spaces I used when I received the PCNs without problem. 

All residents have access to garages, however, many choose instead to park in the unallocated parking bays on the estate. UKPC has issued passes to be displayed in any cars parked in these bays. They display the usual UKPC signage. Residents generally choose to display the passes in order to avoid the aggravation of dealing with a UKPC PCN if it’s not displayed.

From time to time I borrowed my mother’s car and parked it outside my address in one of the unassigned parking bays, and it was her vehicle the PCNs referred to here were attached to.

Due to the extreme harassment normally employed by UKPC, I advised UKPC that I was the driver of the vehicle (my mother was very upset that she was getting harassing letters). We are now at the stage where they have issued a County Court Claim against me for the recovery of the charges they are claiming from me for 3 PCNs (one from 2014 and two from 2016). Claims are being handled by SCS.

Issue Date of the Claim from Northampton was 27 Nov. I submitted my AOS on 8 Dec. I’m not clear if the 27 Nov date is included in the 5 + 28 days I have to submit my Defence, so I either have until this afternoon (29 Dec) or tomorrow afternoon to do so. Would greatly appreciate confirmation from those informed on this whether or not the 27th is included or not.

Using the advice here, I am intending to utilise the suggested template defence posted by Coupon-mad, as UKPC are, of course, claiming the additional £60 on top of the £100 allowed. As I am a leaseholder, I am also intending to defend my right to park based on the language in my lease. This does not refer to any specific right to park. The only language I can find in the lease that appears to be relevant is:

1. One general clause as follows: “No motor vehicle shall be left parked on the roads or access ways shown on the plan.” - and

2. (What would appear to be the most relevant clause amongst those in the section referring to my rights as Leaseholder) “The right at all times with or without vehicles to use the roadways on the Estate and the garage forecourts leading to the property.”

For one of the PCNs, I was parked in a marked bay, but forgot to display the pass. For the other two, I was parked in a spot which had always been used by residents to park as it is next to the marked bays, but is not itself marked as a bay (it’s not, however, the roadside or in any way obstructing access for other vehicles). I had my pass displayed on those two occasions, so UKPC are claiming based on the fine print that I wasn’t parked in a “marked bay”.

With regard to the lease’s mention of the Covenants of the Management Company, there are clauses referring to the various duties to maintain the common areas, grounds etc, but no reference to their rights or duties to in any way control parking.

I have the following drafted for the non-template paragraphs, and would appreciate feedback and any advice as to whether this + the other template paragraphs is sufficient at this time:

2. It is admitted that the Defendant was the driver of the vehicle in question but liability is denied.  

3. It is denied that the Defendant was in breach of any parking conditions or was not permitted to park, as a permission granting use of the roadways on the Estate had been granted to the Defendant, permitting the above mentioned vehicle to be parked. The Defendant is the current occupier and leaseholder of [address], whose lease agreement grants such permission. The Defendant avers that there was an absolute entitlement to park deriving from the terms of the lease, which cannot be fettered by any alleged parking terms. A copy of the lease will be provided to the Court, together with witness evidence that prior permission to park had been given.

4. The Defendant avers that the operator’s signs cannot (i) override the existing rights enjoyed by residents and their visitors and (ii) that rights of use cannot retrospectively and unilaterally be restricted where provided for within the lease. The Defendant will rely upon the judgements of Pace v Mr N (2016) and of Link Parking v Ms P (2016). The Court will be referred to further similar fact cases in the event that this matter proceeds to trial.

4.2 Accordingly it is denied that:

(i) there was any agreement as between the Defendant or driver of the vehicle and the Claimant

(ii) there was any obligation (at all) to display a permit; and

(iii) the Claimant has suffered loss or damage or that there is a lawful basis to pursue a claim for loss.

5. The Defendant avers that the residential site that is the subject of these proceedings is not a site where there is a commercial value to be protected. The Claimant has not suffered loss or pecuniary disadvantage. The penalty charge is, accordingly, unconscionable in this context, with ParkingEye distinguished.

Many thanks in advance for any assistance provided.

Le_Kirk

When the management company "took it upon themselves" to employ a parking scammer, did they carry out a consultation amongst the residents/leaseholder culminating in a vote for which more than 75% voted YES whilst not more than 10% voted NO.  If not, the PPC has no legal standing.

KeithP

Tetch20 said:

We are now at the stage where they have issued a County Court Claim against me...

Issue Date of the Claim from Northampton was 27 Nov. I submitted my AOS on 8 Dec. I’m not clear if the 27 Nov date is included in the 5 + 28 days I have to submit my Defence, so I either have until this afternoon (29 Dec) or tomorrow afternoon to do so. Would greatly appreciate confirmation from those informed on this whether or not the 27th is included or not.

With a Claim Issue Date of 27th November, and having filed an Acknowledgment of Service in a timely manner, you have until 4pm on Wednesday 30th December 2020 to file your Defence.

That's tomorrow.

To file a Defence by email, look at the second post in the NEWBIES thread.

Don't miss the deadline for filing a Defence.

D_P_Dance

Read these and complain to your MP

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

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

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3229165/Is-PROOF-private-parking-firms-scamming-motorists-Drivers-say-timings-photos-doctored-legally-parked-cars-issued-fines.html

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

Tetch20

Le_Kirk said:

When the management company "took it upon themselves" to employ a parking scammer, did they carry out a consultation amongst the residents/leaseholder culminating in a vote for which more than 75% voted YES whilst not more than 10% voted NO.  If not, the PPC has no legal standing.

No, they did not. Thanks for that info. Is there anything I should add - or search for - referring this to add to the Defence I'm submitting at this time? Is there some kind of legal precedent to present confirming no legal standing? If not, is there something I should do regarding this going forward? 

Keith P - thanks for the clarification. I definitely won't miss that deadline. I'm just waiting for feedback from here to email it as per your guidelines. If what I have at the moment seems fine, I'll submit it asap.

Le_Kirk

Tetch20 said:

Le_Kirk said:

When the management company "took it upon themselves" to employ a parking scammer, did they carry out a consultation amongst the residents/leaseholder culminating in a vote for which more than 75% voted YES whilst not more than 10% voted NO.  If not, the PPC has no legal standing.

No, they did not. Thanks for that info. Is there anything I should add - or search for - referring this to add to the Defence I'm submitting at this time? Is there some kind of legal precedent to present confirming no legal standing? If not, is there something I should do regarding this going forward? 

You can read the whole legislation here: -
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1987/31/contents

Fruitcake

Le_Kirk said:

Tetch20 said:

Le_Kirk said:

When the management company "took it upon themselves" to employ a parking scammer, did they carry out a consultation amongst the residents/leaseholder culminating in a vote for which more than 75% voted YES whilst not more than 10% voted NO.  If not, the PPC has no legal standing.

No, they did not. Thanks for that info. Is there anything I should add - or search for - referring this to add to the Defence I'm submitting at this time? Is there some kind of legal precedent to present confirming no legal standing? If not, is there something I should do regarding this going forward? 

You can read the whole legislation here: -
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1987/31/contents

Para 37 of the above Act is the part you want.

What is the date of the alleged events in 2014? In other words, are they within six years of that date for issuing the claim for that alleged event?