Claim from form country court for unpaid PCN charges

alexrider

ParkingMad said:

The defendant’s vehicle was briefly stopped in communal area for unloading items (with hazard lights on) and carrying items to defendant’s property situated in 6th floor, as contractors were carrying out works in the property. The defendant had no option but to leave the vehicle in the communal area as the usual car park was closed by management company under guidance from Royal Berkshire Fire and Rescue service due to Grenfell fire safety regulations due to health and safety reasons.  The management company failed to provide alternative parking arrangements onsite for loading/unloading or for emergency use.

This situation has similarities with Kettel & Ors v Bloomfold Ltd [2012] EWHC 1422 (Ch) (25 May 2012). 

Explained here:

https://www.todaysconveyancer.co.uk/kettel-ors-v-bloomfold-ltd-2012-ewhc-1422-ch-25-may-2012/

You need this transcript as an Exhibit:

https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Ch/2012/1422.html

Examples of good recent WS are by @Nosy and @jrhys.

 

You also need to provide the transcript of Jopson, not just talk about it. 

And anyone working on a WS this year, should read the new Code of Practice from the DLUHC which is currently live and laid before Parliament as part of the already enacted Parking (Code of Practice) Act 2019 and find the bits that talk about the rights of residents in their leases.  And certainly append the full lease as an Exhibit too.  And of course use @bargepole's paragraph about the part of the new Code that bans 'debt recovery' fees as there is no evidence they were ever incurred and in any case, adding £60 or £70 per PCN is hugely disproportionate which is why the Govt has stepped in and banned it. The PAP is not intended to be abused by either party as a vehicle to drive up excessive and unnecessary costs, not that the debt collector was ever paid.

@ParkinMad Thans for the inputs,

I have provided following and providing transcripts, please let me know if this goes with my defence?

Defendant would like to bring it to courts notice that leaseholders has the right to access premises granted by the lease without interference of management company/landlord against the lease terms, in the case of Kettel & Ors v Bloomfold Ltd [2012] EWHC 14229Ch)(25 May 2012) the judge has ruled in favour of leaseholder for the interference with the easement granted by leases. Transcript of judgement provided as an exhibit.

with reagrds to Jopson, I have updated to provide case number and transcript ( somehow its missed in previous post)

with regards to new Code that bans 'debt recovery' fees, just wondering if this is relevant to my WS ? as this may be new legislation which was not in place whe the parking ticket was issued ?

Thanks

alexrider

Fruitcake said:

If you are a leaseholder then any variation of the lease must be agreed by ballot in accordance with the Landlord and Tenant Act 1987, Part IV, Section 37. All landlords and tenants must be balloted.

Thanks @Fruitcake Hope the following is sufficient, do I need to provide transcript of the  Tenant Act 1987, Part IV, Section 37?

An unregulated private parking company was introduced by XXXXXX- residential management company to manage communal spaces of flats without consulting landlords and leaseholders of the property. The landowners and management company failed to ballot all leaseholders in accordance with Section 37 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1987. A resident's lease cannot be varied without a ballot in favour as defined by the Act. Such a variation of lease is derogation of grant. A third party cannot takeaway or vary a leaseholder’s existing right to park.  Please find the communication from management company to confirm no ballot has taken place while introducing the external private parking company

KeithP

alexrider said:

with regards to new Code that bans 'debt recovery' fees, just wondering if this is relevant to my WS ? as this may be new legislation which was not in place whe the parking ticket was issued ?

@Bargepole's paragraph does include the words...

 Whilst it is accepted that the new statutory Code does not take full effect immediately, it clearly sets out the Government's intentions regarding private parking, and the Court is invited to strike out this element of the claim, irrespective of the determination of any other element.

alexrider

KeithP said:

alexrider said:

with regards to new Code that bans 'debt recovery' fees, just wondering if this is relevant to my WS ? as this may be new legislation which was not in place whe the parking ticket was issued ?

@Bargepole's paragraph does include the words...

 Whilst it is accepted that the new statutory Code does not take full effect immediately, it clearly sets out the Government's intentions regarding private parking, and the Court is invited to strike out this element of the claim, irrespective of the determination of any other element.

Just trying to undersatnd this in relation to my defence/WS, is raising objection on £239.78 charges  and this should be capped to certain amount, if I undersatdn correctly this is incase if the case doesnt go in faviout of me, reducing the fines to be the minimum amount based on recen ban ?

my claim was filed for :

Amount claimed : £164.78

Court Fee : £25.00

Legal Representative cost : 50.00

Sorry to be naive, but trying to understand myself before writing in witness statement, if not it will be difficlut for me to explain before judge, Thanks

Jenni_D

No evidence is sent with your defence ... evidence (exhibits) are included with your Witness Statement. (Just in case that's not clear for you).  

Le_Kirk

with regards to paragraph 2, I'm mentioning while providing reference will give exhibits with evidence, do I need to provide all the exhibit references in paragraph 2?

No, just explain that you will be using AR_001 to AR_999 where AR are your initials (change them to your real initials) and 000 to 999 is the sequence of numbers you used (change when you know the last one).

ParkingMad

my claim was filed for :

Amount claimed : £164.78

Court Fee : £25.00

Legal Representative cost : 50.00

Sorry to be naive, but trying to understand myself before writing in witness statement, if not it will be difficlut for me to explain before judge, Thanks

The £164.78 is broken down as

£100 PCN
£60 Debt collection fee 
£4.78 Interest

D_P_Dance

£60 Debt collection fee 

They have added what appears to be an extra unlawful amount for debt collection.

This amounts to double recovery and Judges all over the country are dismissing these spurious additions. Indeed some judges have dismissed entire claims because of this. Read this and complain to Trading Standards and your MP,

Excel v Wilkinson

At the Bradford County Court, District Judge Claire Jackson (now HHJ Jackson, a Specialist Civil Circuit Judge) decided to hear a 'test case' a few months ago, where £60 had been added to a parking charge despite Judges up and down the country repeatedly disallowing that sum and warning parking firms not to waste court time with such spurious claims.   That case was Excel v Wilkinson: G4QZ465V, heard in July 2020 and leave to appeal was refused and that route was not pursued.  The Judge concluded that such claims are proceedings with 'an improper collateral purpose'.   This Judge - and others who have since copied her words and struck dozens of cases out in late 2020 and into 2021 - went into significant detail and concluded that parking operators (such as this Claimant) are seeking to circumvent CPR 27.14 as well as breaching the Consumer Rights Act 2015.   DJ Hickinbottom has recently struck more cases out in that court area, stating: ''I find that striking out this claim is the only appropriate manner in which the disapproval of the court can be shown''.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/16qovzulab1szem/G4QZ465V Excel v Wilkinson.pdf?dl=0

However, VCS appealed this so it may not apply in all cases, read this

https://www.dropbox.com/s/ntksx9g7177ahyg/VCS v Percy v1 Amendments (2).pdf?dl=0Also read this

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6279348/witness-statements-2-transcripts-re-parking-firms-false-costs-recorder-cohen-qc-judgment-2021/p1

Also this,

"Abuse of process – the quantum

13. In addition to the disputed Parking Charge Notice claim amount of £100, the Claimant has added a sum of £60 that is disingenuously described variously as 'debt collection costs', ‘additional charges levied to cover the cost of recovery’, ‘additional administration costs’, ‘debt recovery costs’, ‘initial legal costs’ and ‘recovery costs’. The added £60 constitutes double recovery and the court is invited to find the quantum claimed is false and an abuse of process as was found by District Judge Claire Jackson (now HHJ Jackson, a Specialist Civil Circuit Judge) in Excel vs Wilkinson: G4QZ465V, a similar case in which £60 had been added to a parking charge, heard in July 2020 (the transcript of which is exhibit XX-04). The Judge concluded that such claims are proceedings with 'an improper collateral purpose'. Leave to appeal was refused and that route was not pursued."

Also consider complaining to The SRA about the solicitor, if one is involved They are fully aware of the unlawful nature of most of thse additions yet persist in adding them..

https://www.sra.org.uk/consumers/problems/

alexrider

Thankyou all for your valuable feedback, I have updated my WS as per your feedback and hopefully I have got it right now,

could you please review to see if I need to make any other updates pelase,

                          In The County Court of Reading    

           Claim No : XXXXX

 PARKING AND PROPERTY MANAGEMENT LTD                

                                                                                                                  (CLAIMANT)

 -AND-

XXXXXXXX  

                                                                                                            (DEFENDANT)   

WITNESS STATEMENT OF DEFENDANT

1.     I XXXXXXX, and I am the defendant against whom this claim is made. The facts below are true to the best of my belief and my account has been prepared based upon my knowledge.

 2.     In my statement I shall refer to exhibits within the evidence supplied with this statement, referring to page and reference numbers where appropriate. My defence is repeated, and I will say as follows:

 3.     The Defendant is leaseholder of the flat XXXXXXXXXX, please find the proof of title deed for XXXXXX with reference AR_001 and copy of lease for XXXXX reference AR_002.

4.     An unregulated private parking company was introduced by XXXXX - residential management company to manage communal spaces of flats without consulting landlords and leaseholders of the property. The landowners and management company failed to ballot all leaseholders in accordance with Section 37 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1987. A resident's lease cannot be varied without a ballot in favour as defined by the Act. Such a variation of lease is derogation of grant. A third party cannot takeaway or vary a leaseholder’s existing right to park.  Please find the communication from management company to confirm no ballot has taken place while introducing the external private parking company reference AR_003 in page 3, 5 and 6 in particular related to ballot voting .

5.     XXXX car park was closed on 18th September 2019 by XXXXX– residential management company under guidance from Royal Berkshire Fire and Rescue service due to Grenfell fire safety regulations due to health and safety reasons. And reopened only on 15th October, Copies of communication regarding car park closure from management company  and Royal Berkshire Fire and Rescue service provided reference AR_004.

6.     XXXXX - residential management company failed to facilitate alternative arrangements onsite for loading/unloading/ emergency purposes or lifted restriction regarding the third party unregulated private parking company restrictions. Copies of communication attached related to the conversation with management company reference AR_003 page 5 and 6.

7.     On 18th of September 2020 Defendant stopped the car briefly in communal area whilst items were being unloaded and carried into the defendant’s property (as the usual car park was closed and no alternative option was available onsite). Please note every care was taken to stop the car to a side where it was not obstructing or causing inconvenience to anyone or blocking access to other premises or emergency vehicle access. Defendant would like to bring it to courts notice that loading and unloading is not parking. In the persuasive appeal court case of (Laura) Jopson vs Homeguard (Services Ltd) case number 9GF0A9E the judge stated in paragraph 19 of the case that loading and unloading is not parking. The defendant’s case is no different. The defendant’s vehicle was briefly stopped whilst items were being unloaded and carried into the defendant’s property.

Transcript of judgement provided as an exhibit reference AR_005.

8.     On receiving of notice of Parking Charges from Parking and Property management company Defendant contacted the XXXXX- residential management company explaining parking charges levied on leaseholder under circumstances the car was stopped for unloading the material while the usual car park was shut. The management company said that they cannot intervene as it is dealt by external parking management company and to be discussed with parking company

9.     Defendant had appealed to the Parking management company explaining the circumstances mentioned where the car was stopped briefly to unload the material, however parking management company have rejected the appeal and passed on the law firm.  Please find the copied of appeal and rejection attached reference AR_006.

 10.   Defendant would like to bring it to courts notice that leaseholders has the right to access premises granted by the lease without interference of management company/landlord against the lease terms, in the case of Kettel & Ors v Bloomfold Ltd [2012] EWHC 14229Ch)(25 May 2012) the judge has ruled in favour of leaseholder for the interference with the easement granted by leases. Transcript of judgement provided as an exhibit reference AR_007.

 11.   In addition to the disputed Parking Charge Notice claim amount of £100, the Claimant has added a sum of £60 that is disingenuously described variously as 'debt collection costs', ‘additional charges levied to cover the cost of recovery’, ‘additional administration costs’, ‘debt recovery costs’, ‘initial legal costs’ and ‘recovery costs’. The added £60 constitutes double recovery and the court is invited to find the quantum claimed is false and an abuse of process as was found by District Judge Claire Jackson (now HHJ Jackson, a Specialist Civil Circuit Judge) in Excel vs Wilkinson: G4QZ465V, a similar case in which £60 had been added to a parking charge, heard in July 2020 (the transcript of which is exhibit AR_008). The Judge concluded that such claims are proceedings with 'an improper collateral purpose'. Leave to appeal was refused and that route was not pursued."

 12.   I believe that the facts stated in this witness statement are true.  I understand that proceedings for contempt of court may be brought against anyone who makes, or causes to be made, a false statement in a document verified by a statement of truth without an honest belief in its truth.

Please note that I have also recieved a letter from court stating that my hearing is moved to physical in court rather than online as previosluy scheduled for same date 18th of March, Im planning to send WS and evidence via emil and hard copied via post, I would like to clariy  if I can send soft copies via google drive link, if not whast the best way to send big attachments via email,

Thanks in advance

go-on-then

9.  Copies  not copied ? 

10.  Have  not  has ?