CASE WON Student Accommodation with free parking 13 May 2022 at 5:04PM edited 27 January at 3:33PM in Parking tickets, fines & parking 80 replies 3.9K views

Mouse007

Johnersh said:

Incidentally, that sign is pants. 

Thank you, in Son's WS we have:

The Sign

24.    The Claimant claims the signage situated across the car park forms a unilaterial offer to park. I refute that, the signs say “Private Land Permit Holders Only”. This is forbidding and does not offer any right to park. It specifically states Permit Holders Only and offers no alternative option.

25.    There is no offer to park just a warning that Parking Enforcement (is) in Operation. It is not however clear what the Parking Enforcement entails and what it means.

26.    The consequence of not displaying a permit is lost in the smallest sized font on the sign, namely a parking charge of £100. This does not meet the standards set in the Beavis case which stipulated such terms or conditions on the signs should be clear and prominent. Unreadable, non-prominent terms or consumer notices are not binding on consumers (CRA 2015).

27.    The Terms and Conditions state “Display a valid permit within the windscreen / dashboard or have a valid whitelist session in place”. This term can only apply to permit holders, it says they must display their permit or have a whitelist session in place. It does not offer parking to non permit holders. It does not say you may park here for £100.

28.    The sign does not say how or from where you can obtain a permit or whitelist session. It does not say how much a permit costs or indeed if there is any charge for a permit.

29.    The sign does not say who Premier Parking Solutions Limited are managing the car park for.

Hopefully enough.

Le_Kirk

Mouse007 said:

26.    The consequence of not displaying a permit is lost in the smallest sized font on the sign, namely a parking charge of £100. This does not meet the standards set in the Beavis case which stipulated such terms or conditions on the signs should be clear and prominent. Unreadable, non-prominent terms or consumer notices are not binding on consumers (CRA 2015).

Ask Auntie Google about Lord Denning's Red Hand Rule

Mouse007

A week to go, and no peeps from BW Legal. Did they pay the hearing fee just before Christmas? No idea but sincerely hope so. My son also hopes it goes ahead. He sees it as a valuable life learning experience - perhaps safe in the knowledge that someone (guess who) will pay if he loses.

Hearing set to be by MS Teams (whatever that is - don’t panic I will work it out) 10 am 24th January.

This morning I confirmed by phone the Court have received my son’s and my contact details, he being defendant I being his lay rep.

I’m now drafting a Skeleton Argument and struggling to get it past 2 pages. They had no authority to manage parking, their signs created no contract. Even if they did and they did my son already had the right to park.

BW Legal are muppets.

Coupon-mad

MS Teams = IMHO it's best to instal the app on your laptop in advance.  You can then check your camera and audio is working, in advance.

On the day, click on the link the court will provide. Sit and wait to be joined into the meeting by the 'host' and don't give up.  Might not start on time.

Fruitcake

I agree about testing Teams well before you need to use it. Zoom is much easier to use and more reliable. Teams is much less user friendly and has "features" that sometimes need a work around to get it operational.

Set it up on two separate devices, set up a meeting and have a practice.

If I try to access it via the app installed on my laptop it just freezes. The only way I can get it to work is to use a search engine and access Teams via the website.

Galloglass

Apologies for the "drive-by" but the Student Accomodation title caught my eye. Is the rental agreement actually called an AST?

SA tends to be a license to occupy rather than an AST which has lesser rights than an AST. This phrase "The Tenant will have access to the common areas with a non exclusive license in common with the other tenants of the Landlord" could mean everyone can use the kitchen or communal lounge. 

Licences in SA are used rather than AST's so there is a break in the contract so students can't squat. It can be extraordinarily expensive to get people out at the end of an AST. With a license you know they'll be gone at the end of the academic year.

Just have a quick check on the title of the agreement.

It's a nonsense claim, as pointed out, as it was an impossibility to comply with the terms on the signs if passes were not available and no further information given.

Mouse007

Coupon-mad said:

MS Teams = IMHO it's best to instal the app on your laptop in advance.  You can then check your camera and audio is working, in advance.

Fruitcake said:

Set it up on two separate devices, set up a meeting and have a practice.

Yup, did that earlier - son already instructed to do same for a trial trial

A couple of years ago I presented a Treasurer's report to a national charity's AGM using zoom, so comforrtable with the concept and sharing documents to screen. Perhaps I could do a similar powerpoint presentation for the Skelly.

Galloglass said:

Is the rental agreement actually called an AST?

100% yes

Galloglass said:

This phrase "The Tenant will have access to the common areas with a non exclusive license in common with the other tenants of the Landlord" could mean everyone can use the kitchen or communal lounge.

Which is why the parking was on a first come, first served. The flats were however self contained each with their own bedroom, bathroom, kitchen and sitting area - cost a fortune!

Galloglass said:

It's a nonsense claim, as pointed out, as it was an impossibility to comply with the terms on the signs if passes were not available and no further information given.

Yup, and how many students get caught by this every year and foolishly pay up? The car park is tiny and hidden between rows of terraced houses accessed by a small service road. Why on earth did anyone think parking management would be needed here?

That's a rhetorical question btw, I know the answer.

Mouse007

Skeleton Argument here

I think we are now all ready for next Tuesday 10am - Teams test to be done over the weekend

Coupon-mad

Looks good.

Mouse007

I’ve got my opening question for the claimant

What is your legitimate interest in the secondary obligation? And in answering that can you please advise what the secondary obligation in your contract is.