Claim Form, 2 contract breaches, own parking space, no permit displayed, Link Parking

Fruitcake

With regards to a costs hearing, it is the correct term. My understanding is that if the claimant discontinues at the last minute, you are requesting that a hearing for you to claim costs is still heard, even if the original claim is not heard. I hope that makes sense.

Para 7, perhaps add that varying an existing lease without approval via the ballot described in your para 9 is called " a derogation of grant". A leaseholder's rights cannot be removed or varied without approval via such a ballot.

Para 9, the claimant can't organise a ballot to vary your lease because they were never a party to it.
The landowner can, and the MA may be able to conduct a ballot if authorised by the landowner.
S37 of the L & T Act states a ballot of all landlords as well as all leaseholders must be carried out, so I would include that comment, or quote the precise wording from the Act, then state that no ballot has ever taken place, therefore no variation of lease has taken place/was never permitted, or words to that effect.

Elo88

All updated accordingly and sent as sugested in NEWBIES to CCBCAQ email.

Wish me luck, I will update this post for others in similar situation.

Once again thanks all for your help

Elo88

Hello again,

Sent my defence on 23 June, it is reflected on MCOL website, I also got a letter from court that my defence was received. Other than that it's completely quiet. It will be 3 wks this wednesday. Is this normal?

Thanks

KeithP

Elo88 said:

Hello again,

Sent my defence on 23 June, it is reflected on MCOL website, I also got a letter from court that my defence was received. Other than that it's completely quiet. It will be 3 wks this wednesday. Is this normal?

Thanks

Didn't that letter from the CCBC say the Claimant had 28 days to consider your Defence?

What you don't know is when the CCBC sent a copy of your Defence to the Claimant. 

It follows from that that it is not known when the Claimant has to respond to the CCBC. 

Further, we don't know what delays there are in the CCBC that means they don't send you a DQ as promptly as you might like.

Can I suggest that you keep checking your MCOL Claim History and as soon as you see that the CCBC has sent a DQ to you, you are ready to download a DQ, complete it and fire it back to the CCBC, remembering to send a copy to the Claimant of course.

Elo88

Thanks for quick response.

It does say they have 28 days to respond to court, yes. I needed to be sure I'm not missing any steps

Once it comes I will do as explained below.

Coupon-mad

You will stick around and do the Government Consultation shortly, won’t you? As I keep posting on every thread, it will be publicised for responses soon, specifically to form next year’s policy about the lower level of parking charges.  

We need real people like you and us to be heard loud and clear and for reason to rise above the spamming from the industry, which I reckon will involve ‘landowners’ suggesting carmageddon. Wolves in sheep’s clothing, I predict, and I hope the Government can see through any false responses.

Elo88

Hello again, Just to triple check I am doing things right: My deadline for N180 is tomorrow, I filled it, scanned and sent to that same CCBCAQ email address as my defence. Also, on a separate email I sent it to BW Legal and CC'd Link Parking, giving them my court ref NO. I got an email confirmation from CCBCAQ that they received my email, but it's not yet reflected on MCOL, even though sent 24hrs ago. BW legal responded to me asking for all my details like they don't know what my email was about - is this their regular practise? Thanks!

Le_Kirk

Yep, looking good.  You only need to send the DQ to the claimant as advised on the original claim form - address for correspondence.  Solicitors often use the excuse that "we don't know what this is about" but if you put the court reference numbers on and they are the claimant, how can they not know?  If you have received anything from them by e-mail you can use that address to send the DQ.  MCOL sometimes takes a couple of days for it to show up, just keep checking every day.

Coupon-mad

I see that you haven’t mentioned the Consultation I told you was about to be open and that we now have a whole thread about - it’s OPEN and some of the proposals are appalling.

I hope you’ve seen the vital public Government Consultation and email to your MP that we are all discussing?  Please share on other forums, social media and certainly with your MP:

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6286801/government-consultation-re-private-parking-charge-levels-august-2021-please-bookmark-this-thread/p1

We are calling for everyone to do a full and robust response by email to the MHCLG, attaching evidence of what happened to you and what you think is wrong about £100 charges and fake debt recovery ‘fees’ that no PPC actually incurs or pays. 

We also need people to contact their MP to ask questions about why the MHCLG appear to have performed a U-turn on their March promise to cap parking charges, and why instead they propose to fund the race to court at £70 a time from victims

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/78517562/#Comment_78517562

To anyone reading this: PLEASE DO THIS IF YOU WANT CONSUMER VOICES TO OUTWEIGH THE PARKING INDUSTRY’S GREED. WHICH SEES THEM TRY TO CLAIM MORE THAN THE LAW ALLOWS, FROM A REGISTERED KEEPER,

It also breaks existing law. I just looked at the POFA Explanatory Notes (part of the legislation):

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2012/9/notes/division/5/1/3/3

221.Paragraph 4 provides that the creditor has a right to recover unpaid parking charges from the keeper of the relevant vehicle if the conditions set out in paragraphs 5, 6, 11 and 12 are satisfied. The creditor is not obliged to pursue unpaid parking charges through this scheme and may seek to do so through other means but they may not use the scheme provided for here to secure double recovery of unpaid parking charges (paragraph 4(6)), nor will they have the right to pursue the keeper, as opposed to the driver, of the vehicle where they have sufficient details of the driver’s identity. The right to reclaim unpaid parking charges from the vehicle keeper does not apply in cases where the vehicle has been stolen before it was parked, (paragraphs 4(2) to (3)), or in certain circumstances where the vehicle in question was a hire vehicle (paragraph 4(7)). The creditor may not make a claim against the keeper of a vehicle for more than the amount of the unpaid parking related charges as they stood when the notice to the driver was issued (paragraph 4(5)).

Elo88

Hello again,

I have recently received a WS from claiman't solicitor which refers to my defence in many points.

Need your opinion on this particular one:

They refer to the line of my lease which states:

(...) 4. The tenant must not leave or park so as to cause any obstruction in or on any parking spaces or passageways forming part of the Premises any motor vehicle, motorcycle, bicycle or other item belonging to or used by the Tenant or occupier of the Premises or by any of his or their friends, servants or invitees. The tenant must observe all regulations made by the Management Company from time to time relating to the parking of such vehicles. The tenant must not park any caravan or boat on any private garden or any parking space or on any other part of the Premises or the Estate.”

They say in response to the statement in bold above, that the estate managing company has contracted with Claimant to regulate the car park's T&Cs. They submitted a copy of an agreement between paries with T&Cs specified and say that this constitutes now Management Company's regulations so by terms of my lease I need to comply.

Worth mentioning it's dated 2016 and management company name is different - don't know that one, maybe they changed before I moved in.

What is your opinion on the above?