UKPC / DCB Legal - Part 2 - I WON IN COURT

Umkomaas

A high top van was parked next to me before I entered the carpark thus obstructing the sign.

For both parking events?  What are the dates of the parking events?  What is the date of the first notification from the PPC for the first parking event?

they currently do not managed the land (some local shop keeper said they have been booted out because ukpc were issuing tickets incorrectly )

Not relevant to your defence if they were actively managing the car park at the time of the parking events. In any case, as it stands, a local shopkeeper's information is hearsay and has no standing in court. 

IloveElephants

Le_Kirk said:

IloveElephants said:

Just some of my main defence points

They did not install adequate signage and the signage on the wall was hardly visible on a cold frosty night in October 2019.

A high top van was parked next to me before I entered the carpark thus obstructing the sign. (see first image uploaded where the small blue car is parked) 
No signs on entrance
the building is sat empty
they currently do not managed the land (some local shop keeper said they have been booted out because ukpc were issuing tickets incorrectly )
no contract was agreed to 
no damages have occurred

Inability to see signage is relevant.  It being a cold and frosty night is irrelevant; being a dark night in October would be more relevant!  No entrance sign is relevant.  Signs being obscured by high vehicles is relevant; if they allow high sided vehicles to be parked in the car park, they should make sure signs are visible to ALL vehicle drivers at all times.

Hi LeKirk

Thank you for taking the time to write that. 

Yes my main points now will be.

It was a dark night in October with poor lighting in that carpark. It was hardly maintained
No entrance signs upon entry
signs being obscured by high top vans
They did not make signs visible to ALL vehicle drivers at all times. No height restrictions upon entry to the car park either.

My other points are (what do you think, shall I add them to my defence?)
The carpark is currently not managed by UKCP
The building has been empty since 2020
Jack straw would not approve of a scam company like UKCP and dcb legal extorting money from the tax paying public that are trying to do their best to make a honest living amidst a cost of living crisis.  

Jenni_D

The last section is irrelevant to your defence:

The carpark is currently not managed by UKCP - irrelevant; they were active in the car park at the time of the event (although you aver that they had no contractual right to operate in that car park and put them to strict proof of the contrary)
The building has been empty since 2020 - irrelevant; the car park was being managed at the time of the event
Jack straw would not approve of a scam company like UKCP and dcb legal extorting money from the tax paying public that are trying to do their best to make a honest living amidst a cost of living crisis. - irrelevant, this is merely opinion. And is he even still alive? Edit: just checked - he is. (He's certainly not part of the government).

IloveElephants

Umkomaas said:

A high top van was parked next to me before I entered the carpark thus obstructing the sign.

For both parking events?  What are the dates of the parking events?  What is the date of the first notification from the PPC for the first parking event?

they currently do not managed the land (some local shop keeper said they have been booted out because ukpc were issuing tickets incorrectly )

Not relevant to your defence if they were actively managing the car park at the time of the parking events. In any case, as it stands, a local shopkeeper's information is hearsay and has no standing in court. 

Hi Umkomaas, 

Good questions, thank you for your input

the pcn dates are 4th October 2019 and 27th September 2019

Yes on both occasions, I entered the carpark at 11pm on those 2 occasions. I remember parking next to a high top van and a people carrier. They were parked so close to the wall as the carpark is very small. Hence all signage was obstructed.

Not relevant to your defence if they were actively managing the car park at the time of the parking events. In any case, as it stands, a local shopkeeper's information is hearsay and has no standing in court. 

 Ok, makes sense, thanks for correcting me. 

Umkomaas

the pcn dates are 4th October 2019 and 27th September 2019

You didn't answer the second question relating to dates. Here it is again:

What is the date of the first notification from the PPC for the first parking event?

IloveElephants

Umkomaas said:

the pcn dates are 4th October 2019 and 27th September 2019

You didn't answer the second question relating to dates. Here it is again:

What is the date of the first notification from the PPC for the first parking event?

Hi Umkomaas,

from the sar the first notification letter was dated 10th November 2019 - that was for the pcn dated 27th September 2019

Thanks

Umkomaas

IloveElephants said:

Umkomaas said:

the pcn dates are 4th October 2019 and 27th September 2019

You didn't answer the second question relating to dates. Here it is again:

What is the date of the first notification from the PPC for the first parking event?

Hi Umkomaas,

from the sar the first notification letter was dated 10th November 2019 - that was for the pcn dated 27th September 2019

Thanks

Thanks for clarification that the first notification for the first event came after the date of the second event. Had it come before the date of the second event, the PPC would argue you knew ahead of the second event that parking restrictions applied, which could have blown your defence (of the second event) in court. 

IloveElephants

Umkomaas said:

IloveElephants said:

Umkomaas said:

the pcn dates are 4th October 2019 and 27th September 2019

You didn't answer the second question relating to dates. Here it is again:

What is the date of the first notification from the PPC for the first parking event?

Hi Umkomaas,

from the sar the first notification letter was dated 10th November 2019 - that was for the pcn dated 27th September 2019

Thanks

Thanks for clarification that the first notification for the first event came after the date of the second event. Had it come before the date of the second event, the PPC would argue you knew ahead of the second event that parking restrictions applied, which could have blown your defence (of the second event) in court. 

Good point Umkomaas, The first pcn and second pcn are 7 days apart. 

The first letter regarding the second pcn according to the sar "notices" was sent on 

10/11/2019

IloveElephants

Jenni_D said:

The last section is irrelevant to your defence:

The carpark is currently not managed by UKCP - irrelevant; they were active in the car park at the time of the event (although you aver that they had no contractual right to operate in that car park and put them to strict proof of the contrary)
The building has been empty since 2020 - irrelevant; the car park was being managed at the time of the event
Jack straw would not approve of a scam company like UKCP and dcb legal extorting money from the tax paying public that are trying to do their best to make a honest living amidst a cost of living crisis. - irrelevant, this is merely opinion. And is he even still alive? Edit: just checked - he is. (He's certainly not part of the government).

Thanks for your comment Jenni, 

IloveElephants

patient_dream said:

IloveElephants said:

patient_dream said:

IloveElephants said:

patient_dream said:

IloveElephants said:

The pcn was issued on private land or managed by C. 
The vehicle was parked in breached of the terms and C signs. (the contract)
thus incurring the PCNS. 
4. the driver agreed to pay within 8 days but did not. D Is liable as the driver or keeper. Despite requests the PCNS 
is outstanding. The contract entitles C to damages. 
AND THE CLAIMANT CLAIMS
1. £340 Being the total of the PCNS and damages
2. interest at a rate of 8% per year per annum pursuant to 69 of the county court act 1984. 
3. Costs a court fees.

Signed Yasmin Mia 

We don't know why Yasmin Mia is not locked up for contempt of court

£340 is a complete lie and DAMAGES is the biggest load of rubbish ?
Yasmin must tell the truth, not a fabrication of DCBL

Hi Patient dream,
thanks for your reply, outrageous,

£530 IN TOTAL. Amount claimed £430
court fee £50
Legal representative costs £50

And the so called damages are £140 ??  

This must be a spelling mistake by DCBL ...... We already know the correct spelling is "fake debt recovery charge" or "fake scam"

DAMAGES ...... who gets the amount ?  Cannot be DCBL as no damage has been done to them ? ..   Was UKPC the landowner or just a simple manager ?  If they were  kicked out, they certainly were not the landowner

The real landowner should be alerted that a legal is working on their behalf and money is on the way ?

Of course in your case, how would they explain this to a judge because as eggs are eggs UKPC are not entitled to damages and nor are DCBL

The real landowner should be alerted that a legal is working on their behalf and money is on the way ?

If anyone knows who the owner of Jacks straws castle is and was in Sep/Oct 2019 please let me know, I will contact them as well and inform them what is happening.  

You can read this 
https://www.hamhigh.co.uk/news/albany-homes-seeks-buyer-for-jack-straws-castle-ground-floor-3643506

Plus you can do a FOI request to Hamstead council
Easy to do from "What do they know" site
https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/

I have used them, they are good as it's free

Hi,

Camden council are unable to help, they sent me a broken link to the .gov.uk website to search for the land registry

so I used the postcode  NW3 7ES which is on my claim form and it is unable to find anything.