Claim Form for Parking Ticket - Had Parked in my own allocated parking

gs_park

D_P_Dance said:

Why did you display a permit?  Does not your lease/AST take primacy?  Have you read tese?

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

https://forums.landlordzone.co.uk/forum/residential-letting-questions/1053920-private-parking-companies

@D_P_Dance

Thanks for your message.

My landlord told me to do so as he said he had seen these people issue fines in the past.

I had read the first article and have now read the second one.

Could I use this information later as to how I should not even be required to display the permit? Does it help the case?

Thanks for your time.

D_P_Dance

permi unkOf course there is no need to show a permit unless it is specifically mentioned in the AST.  Is it?

gs_park

@D_P_Dance I just checked. The AST was a very generic one and does not talk about the underground parking as such.

Fruitcake

What a lease/AST does not say is just as important as what it does say. If there is no mention of a requirement to display a permit, then there is no requirement for you to display a permit.

You might wish to display a permit as a courtesy, but it is not a requirement of your lease/AST/property rental agreement. Failing to display one is not a breach of your lease etcetera that has primacy of contract over anything an unregulated private parking company that was not a party to your lease/AST.

Sometimes it is better to defend a claim for an own space case as an admitted driver since it means all your evidence is first hand from a witness, the only witness who will attend court.
It might be better therefore to change "keeper" in para 2 to keeper and driver.

At some point you should state that you want the parking attendant present so you can ask her/him about the permit that was clearly on display as a courtesy, and ask why the PCN was issued. You should also ask to see the attendant's notes taken at the time of the alleged event.

1505grandad

As above you should incorporate in the Defence that you only displayed the permit as a matter of courtesy.

gs_park

@D_P_Dance, @Fruitcake, @1505grandad, @Coupon-mad

Thank you all for your comments. I will update my defence as suggested.

gs_park

Fruitcake said:

At some point you should state that you want the parking attendant present so you can ask her/him about the permit that was clearly on display as a curtesy, and ask why the PCN was issued. You should also ask to see the attendant's notes taken at the time of the alleged event.

@Fruitcake Your suggestion above regarding the presence of parking attendant, should I add this as a part of defence now or later in Witness statement?

Thanks.

Fruitcake

Your WS is in support of your defence. You can't include something in your WS not already covered at the defence stage, (except commenting on anything in the claimants WS). 

The claimant's images show the permit clearly displayed in the car, so you aver the charge is spurious and therefore there was no breach of parking Ts and Cs. You want the opportunity to question the attendant, and see her/his notes to determine why the charge was issued.

gs_park

@Fruitcake Thanks. I will include it in my defence now and use it again in my WS.

gs_park

Hi @Coupon-mad, @Fruitcake, @1505grandad, @D_P_Dance

This is my final version of Defence as per your suggestions. I think I have worded the points correctly. Also @Fruitcake, they had the parking sign in the underground parking (screenshot attached). Can I still say that permit wasn't really required to be displayed and ATS had primacy of contract?

1. Defendant denies that the Claimant is entitled to relief in the sum claimed, or at all.  It is denied that a contract was entered into - by conduct or otherwise - whereby it was ‘agreed’ to pay a ‘parking charge’ and it is denied that this Claimant (understood to have a bare licence as managers) has standing to sue, nor to form contracts in their own name at the location.

2. It is admitted that Defendant was the registered keeper and driver of the vehicle (reg AB11CDE) but liability is denied.

3.1 The car was parked in Defendant's allocated car parking bay and the parking permit was always visible and the evidence photo shows the permit so there was no breach. The entry to the underground parking is by means of a key fob, of a type only issued to residents.

3.2 Defendant's car was de facto permitted due to being a tenant of XX with an allocated parking space (Bay X) and as such, the Claimant offered nothing of value (the Defendant already had the right to exclusive use of that bay).  In fact, this over-zealous firm has been targeting residents with predatory 'fines' and interfered with the resident's rights that flowed from the landlord.

3.3 Defendant avers that the parking charge is spurious. Defendant displayed the permit as a matter of courtesy as his AST had primacy of contract over an unregulated private parking company that was not party to Defendant's AST.

4. Defendant requests that the parking attendant be summoned for questioning regarding issuance of the ticket even though the permit was clearly on display as a matter of courtesy. Any notes from the parking attendant should also be made available for review to ascertain why the charge was made even though no breach of parking T&Cs had occurred.

Thanks again for your advice.