Please Help - 3 County Court Claims covering 11 Parking Control Management resi parking tickets

Redx

fazzyp1000 said:

Johnersh said:

This is about what is easier for you. Its worth mulling over carefully. 

I can see merit in your point, especially if you intend to deal with the precise facts on each day in your evidence. 90 mins to deal with 33 PCNs would-be inadequate.

Might be worth changing your thread title because your exposure on this is very significant. 

Do bear in mind that if you did go down on them all, that is also to risk more costs/hearing fees. Although you might also have saved yourself the additional £60 plus interest on each PCN... 

Thank you. 

Sorry my wording wasn't clear. I have received 3 court claims from them, which comprise of 4 PCNs, 3 PCNs and 3 PCNs, so 11 PCNs in total across the 3 claims.
(There are also a further 8 PCNs that I have received from them, that they have not yet hit me with Court Claims for). So my total potential is exposure is 19.

When I were a lad , 4 + 3 + 3 = 10 , not 11 ( did you make a typo there ? )

fazzyp1000

Hi all,

To update on this, I so far have just the 1 Court data and I'm waiting for court dates on the further 2 claims.

I've also since received a 4th claim from the same company, so I am now filing my defence for that....

I have 2 questions:

1) On the 4th claim, they have included a PCN that I have no record of and that was not referenced in their response to my SAR.
I have written to them asking for details, but it looks like they omitted this from their response to my SAR. Do you have any suggestions for how to use this to my advantage?

2) I have got hold of the contract that exists between the parking company and the managing agent of the flat development. I am no lawyer but to me it seems to very basic and basically just says they have authority to operate and that they will issue PCNs following the IPC and AOS code of practice.
Is there anything here that I might be able to use in my defence? E.g. if I can demonstrate any failures in following the IPC and AOS code of practice (e.g. they do not offer grace periods) then does that mean that they have not been acting in accordance with their contract?

Thanks again in advance

Coupon-mad

Add Henderson v Henderson cause of action estoppel wording (search the forum).  They can't split alleged debt up across several claims turning on precisely the same duplicate facts.

Redx

1) complain to the ICO , once you serve a supplementary SAR obtaining the PCN details , documents and pictures

2) you should always aver that the claimant has failed on contract law and not following the IPC CoP etc , that goes without saying

Plus add the Henderson estoppel paragraph that coupon mad mentioned , plus asking the court to combine all claims if none are struck out due to estoppel

Fruitcake

Please show us the alleged landowner contract. Only redact your (or the leaseholder's) personal data.

Have you identified and complained to the landowner, who is likely a completely different entity to the managing agent?

fazzyp1000

Thank you everyone - I will follow all suggested steps and I'll also find a way to share a redacted version of the contract on here.

I haven't personally complained to the landowner (I only complained to the managing agent, who said they don't have the power to cancel tickets). however this is currently a topic of conversation in the Residents Association who want to challenge the status quo and overthrow the parking company; there are a number of unhappy residents like me who don't like being charged penalities for parking in their own bay

Coupon-mad

Very good!

But don't let anyone look for an alternative parking firm.  You do not need it at all.

Let's be clear, there are NO fair and decent PPCs that operate in residential car parks and you do not need one.   Your own polite signs and if anyone wants more of a barrier, cheap parking post is all any of you need.

fazzyp1000

I just wanted to post an update on this and to say a massive thank you to everyone on this forum for all of their support and advice. This ended up becoming 4 court claims covering ~ 15 tickets and thank God I won all 4!

1) Claimants representative didn't show up so I won by default

2) Judge ruled against the claimant and found their claim to be wholly unreasonable and against the spirit of their contract to operate. (Their main argument was that my permit was obscured. The killer point from the judge was that the signage says a valid permit must be displayed; it does not say it need be 100% readable). Judge also awarded £200 fixed costs
3 and 4 consolidated claims) Judge ruled against claimant. These claims were based on using a temporary parking bay without a parking session being registered. However the claimant seemed to be ignorant of the rules which allowed residents to use VP bays for 30 minutes without registering a parking session. The Claimant argued their case terribly and didn't even mention that in some of the instances I was photographed in a bay for more than 30 minutes. Judge found in my favour and awarded £200 fixed costs 

Thank you very much again to everyone on here for all of the help. And if anyone in a similar situation to me is reading this, please take this as an encouragement that even if you have no experience, you should fight these cowboys, they are amateurs and they can be beaten!

Boat_to_Bolivia

Brilliant. Well done on keeping up the fight and beating the thieving scammers 

Fruitcake

Well done, and thanks for letting us know.

This is ammo for you to get the PPC thrown off site.

You should always complain to the landowner, not just the managing agent.

You should also complain (again even if you have already) to your MP pointing out that the PPCs actions were wholly unreasonable, and charges against PPCs should be included in the forthcoming version of the DHULC's public consultation.
It should not just be motorists who are charged for breaching Ts and Cs. Parking companies should also pay charges for issuing unfair PCNs and unlawfully obtaining and processing keeper data without the motorist having to resort to the courts.
This is something I believe should be in the parking charter.