LBC - stage 2 response help please

Coupon-mad

The firms who infest residential sites are generally the worst rogue ex-clampers.   

Sad but true; these cash cow sites attract them like flies round a dustbin.  The people who live there are a captive audience of victims, and some just don't have the ability or knowledge to fight, nor understand that these are not fines.

I'm hoping the Government have realised that fact and robustly protect residents in the new statutory framework and Code of Practice, otherwise nothing will improve and we sill start to see people lose all hope and suffer mental health issues due to being aggressively pursued for hundreds of pounds of multiple unfair tickets (which I am sure they already have, and there have been reported suicides).

What is needed, is simply a requirement upon operators to exempt residents from day one, including retrospectively, and not to use paper permits.  Residents and their cars can easily be added to a white list, given the PPCs operate around 90% of sites with white lists.  It's normal and within the inexpensive software they use.  No resident should have to display a flimsy paper permit, at all, and they should also have the ability to quickly update the white list if, for example, they use a courtesy or hire car one week.

D_P_Dance

Residents need to take a stand.  Some years ago the new very confrontational MA at one of my properties tried to impose a scammerr on the residents.  I stood up to them and they backed down.

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/5927955/my-management-company-wants-to-bring-in-cpm/p1

Jenni_D

Interesting read. That thread is now closed but doesn't end the story ... care to elucidate please?

Umkomaas

Jenni_D said:

Interesting read. That thread is now closed but doesn't end the story ... care to elucidate please?

Not another thread where the OP failed to update those who provided advice to them? 😄

Pat26

Pat26 said:

Reworded to provide the facts (please note this is LBC to Gladstones and their client is PCM):

"In the notice provided by your client the reason for issue is parked in a bay without displaying corresponding permit to the bay in which the vehicle was parked.

There is no requirement in my lease to display a permit when parking in a Visitor's Parking Space. 

In accordance with Section 37 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1987 a lease cannot be varied without a ballot of all landlords and leaseholders and any variation to my lease has to be notified in writing by the Landlord to me as the Tenant. The Landlord has not notified me of any variation therefore my lease remains as originally provided to me. My lease has primacy of contract over your client’s notice or any other contract I am not party to that may be used by your client with regards to this matter."

I was hoping for a review/advice on my third response to LBC. Is there anything I should add?

Coupon-mad

You could add that their client must have checked the Head Lease before enforcement commenced, to avoid penalising residents who already had rights and easements, so you require disclosure of the discussions with the Managing Agents at the time and a copy of the Head Lease the parking firm considered. Or didn’t they not bother, just convinced the MA to sign up and thought they’d deal with any ‘noise’ from residents when it happened?

Pat26

Coupon-mad said:

You could add that their client must have checked the Head Lease before enforcement commenced, to avoid penalising residents who already had rights and easements, so you require disclosure of the discussions with the Managing Agents at the time and a copy of the Head Lease the parking firm considered. Or didn’t they not bother, just convinced the MA to sign up and thought they’d deal with any ‘noise’ from residents when it happened?

Thanks @Coupon-mad. I just sent the response earlier because I didn't want to miss the 30 day (Friday) deadline. I could send an additional response given the headache this is causing the residents, probably a breach of "quiet enjoyment" clause of our lease but I don't think Gladsotnes would listen nor care.
The amusing thing is that the Managing Agent (MA) has assigned a Parking Company (PC) to make sure the residents and their visitors don't have to put up with allocated spaces stolen by outsiders. However very frequently we have vehicles blocking the gate to the residents parking area forcing the residents to use a visitor car park. Numerous residents have had their own spaces taken up by some unknown vehicle. PC is no where to be seen at these times. 
Apologies for the rant. The land is still in the late stage of development and RSA isn't fully formed but one for the next meeting with LL, MA and the residents.

Coupon-mad

The land is still in the late stage of development and RSA isn't fully formed but one for the next meeting with LL, MA and the residents.

You MUST gather evidence to get the PPC removed and not replaced. 

The residents should be up in arms. You don't need nor want the aggressive crap from any PPC in a residential car park.  They do more damage to the residents than good. Remove them (which PPC?).

Le_Kirk

However very frequently we have vehicles blocking the gate to the residents parking area forcing the residents to use a visitor car park. Numerous residents have had their own spaces taken up by some unknown vehicle. PC is no where to be seen at these times. 

They probably belong to the PPC!

Pat26

An update: I  replied to Gladstones with the response I mentioned in my previous post and I have now received "red letter" with the subject "DO NOT IGNORE THIS NOTICE – COURT PROCEEDINGS ARE IMMINENT".
The letter goes on to say that my "representations" do not amount to a defence.  
I am in the process of drafting another reply. Probably no use but I will. Repeating and summarising everything I have said so far.
I also met with the managing agent who refused to cancel the charges. I explained the circumstances of my covid situation, self isolation which caused the overstay in the visitor bay and that I have evidence to prove the overstay. MA said PCM should've considered this favourably. I said they didn't. I asked to see the contract they have with PCM. They said it's private. I said my lease says nothing about permits so what do they have in their contract with PCM about residents parking, use of their allocated spaces and the visitor's bay. Apparently all that is private. I asked if I can get a solicitor to look at the contract. The MA said write to them with the details of my PCN and charge and they will see what they can do!