CST Law case - Judgement made

Castle

LDast said:

I stand corrected and further research indicates when a limited liability company in England uses a trading name to establish a contractual relationship, it must comply with the Companies Act 2006 and associated regulations to ensure that its registered name and details are properly disclosed. Failure to do so means that you can challenge the enforceability of any contract formed and there is also the breaches of consumer protection laws.

You can also add part 6 of:- 

The Company, Limited Liability Partnership and Business (Names and Trading Disclosures) Regulations 2015

Coupon-mad

lurpdog101 said:

LDast said:

I stand corrected and further research indicates when a limited liability company in England uses a trading name to establish a contractual relationship, it must comply with the Companies Act 2006 and associated regulations to ensure that its registered name and details are properly disclosed. Failure to do so means that you can challenge the enforceability of any contract formed and there is also the breaches of consumer protection laws.

Companies Act 2006

Section 82 of the Companies Act 2006 requires that a company must display its registered name at its registered office and any other location where it conducts business. This includes where contracts are formed, such as through signage.

Section 83 requires companies to disclose their registered name on business letters, order forms, websites, and any other form of business correspondence. While it doesn't explicitly mention signage, the principle of transparency would suggest that a company should clearly identify itself if attempting to form a contract through such means.

Section 84 mandates that companies using a trading name must also disclose their registered name in any business correspondence or documentation to avoid misleading the public.

Business Names (Companies) Regulations 2007

These regulations, made under the Companies Act 2006, specifically govern the use of business names by companies. They require that if a company uses a trading name that is different from its registered name, the registered name must be disclosed along with:

• The company’s registration number.
• The place of registration (e.g., "Registered in England and Wales").
• The company’s registered address.

Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008 (CPRs)

Regulation 5 (Misleading Actions) and Regulation 6 (Misleading Omissions): These parts of the CPRs protect consumers from unfair trading practices. If a company does not clearly identify itself, this could be considered a misleading omission or action. For example, if a driver is misled into thinking they are contracting with one entity when it is actually a different company operating under a trading name, this could breach these regulations.

The Companies (Trading Disclosures) Regulations 2008

These regulations require companies to clearly display their registered name at all locations where business is carried out and to include it on all forms of communication which would include any signs that form a contract. This ensures transparency and enables anyone dealing with the company to know its true legal identity.

Thank you!!! This is perfect. I will use this in my defence to have it dismissed. They have breached consumer protection!!

Calm down about that. Use it by all means, but IMHO the above is the LEAST likely point to win out of your others.

1505grandad

"7. I was not the driver of the alleged instances and have cited this several times and in my Defence to the Court."

Should that therefore be " the driver" in the following?:-

Para 13  -  "At the time of the alleged contract between myself and the Claimant,...."

Is the following correct?:-

"21. However, there is no such legitimate interest where the requisite fee has been paid in full for the time stayed.

lurpdog101

1505grandad said:

"7. I was not the driver of the alleged instances and have cited this several times and in my Defence to the Court."

Should that therefore be " the driver" in the following?:-

Para 13  -  "At the time of the alleged contract between myself and the Claimant,...."

Is the following correct?:-

"21. However, there is no such legitimate interest where the requisite fee has been paid in full for the time stayed.

thank you, obviously I must have copied the last bit in error from an example...thank you for being so vigilant...perfect example of why needed the review! Thank you

LDast

In September 2021, I received 3 PCNS through the post on the same day for the following alleged offenses:

An "offence" is a legal violation ( under statutory law), while a breach of contract is a private civil matter. Receiving a speculative invoice from an unregulated private parking company for an alleged breach of contract by the driver is in no way or ever can be an "offence". Do not call it that as you give unwarranted authority to the PPC that is simply not true.

lurpdog101

Do I need to bundle all the letters and correspondence they sent me into my witness statement submission? There are over 45 letters which means I'd need to scan them all and turn them into PDFs which woukd take me ages! Or could I take a photo of them all laid out and submit that and bring them all in on the day?

Coupon-mad

Depends if you are trying to make a point about harassment (rarely works). Generally no.  Stick to the evidence that supports your defence.

lurpdog101

I have added the following

I enclose time stamped photos of the car park. There are no disabled parking bays, which is acceptable by law, however, as can be seen, the provided spaces are extremely narrow, and when there are multiple cars, making the entering and exiting a vehicle difficult and time consuming with mobility issues. 

12. I cite the BPA Code of Practice Section 13.3 regarding grace periods. 

Where a parking location is one where a limited period of

parking is permitted, or where drivers contract to park for

a defined period and pay for that service in advance (Pay

& Display), this would be considered as a parking event

and a Grace Period of at least 10 minutes must be added

to the end of a parking event before you issue a PCN.

As can be seen on six of the Claimant’s evidence of the PCNs (of which, I state, as owner, I only ever received 3 original PCNs) the timing can be seen as follows:

OPxxx - 14 minutes

Opxxx - 12 minutes

OPxxx - 11 minutes

OP xxx - 14 minutes

OP xx - 13 minutes

OP xxx - 12 minutes

These are all under 15 minutes and although the CoP states a minimum of 10 minutes, again I would recommend these are struck out on the basis that 14 minutes, considering those with mobility issues would be a reasonable grace period. It is not clear on any signs of any grace period, as recommended by the British Parking Association.

12. Section 27.3 of the British Parking Association Code of Practice states the following: 

“Specific parking-terms signage tells drivers what your 

terms and conditions are, including your parking charges.

You must place signs containing the specific parking

terms throughout the site, so that drivers are given the

chance to read them at the time of parking or leaving

their vehicle. Keep a record of where all the signs are.

Signs must be conspicuous and legible, and written in

intelligible language, so that they are easy to see, read

and understand. Signs showing your detailed terms and

conditions must be at least 450mm x 450mm

The signs within the car park, as can be seen in the photographs attached are visibly located around the car park. However, I argue that they are not easily read as stated in the Code of Practice. The only way to read them is to physically stand in front of the signs, and as mentioned, if a person was to have mobility issues and taking extra time to get in and out of a car, in the small spaces provided, then by the time it takes that person to walk to a sign, and then return having disagreed with the terms, can be longer. 

lurpdog101

I have also removed the section about the trading name, as I have reviewed their sign again and in very small print it does say Ocean Parking is a trading name of Anchor Security. Damn

Also the signs do state if charge not paid, then it will be passed to a Debt Recovery Agent where extra charges may occur.

LDast

lurpdog101 said:

I have also removed the section about the trading name, as I have reviewed their sign again and in very small print it does say Ocean Parking is a trading name of Anchor Security. Damn

Also the signs do state if charge not paid, then it will be passed to a Debt Recovery Agent where extra charges may occur.

Does the sign also state their company number and registered in England and Wales?