Shakespeare Martineau/PCM LBCC?

Mouse007

Adding to @Fruitcake’s advice above - because it need emphasising:

Look at your lease and see what it says about parking, check for conditions. If there are none that means there are none and no ppc can role up with a bunch of signs to over ride your rights to park. They simply can not impose a permit system on you unless it is already in your lease or there has been a variation thereto approved by at least 75% of the leaseholders, pursuant to s37 of the Landlord & Tenant Act.

Even if your lease does require permits what does it say the consequences will be if you fail to display one? Your lease is your contract, not some words on an irrelevant third party sign.

Who allowed these cowboys onto the site and what authority did they have to do so?

This is known as Pimacy of contract and your lease trumps anything on a sign.

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

Note the cases already decided, download copies from parking prankster (above).

and search the forum for residential own space threads like this one

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6405099/county-court-claim-form-defence-parking-outside-on-property-with-private-parking/p1

Once you understand this tell the ppc you do not consent to them managing your parking space and demand that they stop trespassing on your land.

Fruitcake

That's what I would do. Send the 30 days hold instruction first but not mentioning the issue with the name of the alleged PPC until around day 21 - 25, then challenge the name (or names) on the LOC/LBC.

Parking Control Management Limited were dissolved in 2010 so the defendant can then deny they ever entered inro a contract with a company with that name.
You could point out at the same time that permits could not have been obtained from PCM (UK) Ltd because that company was dissolved in 2017
or,
you could save that in case a new LOC/LBC is issued with the name of a currently trading PPC that is a member of a parking trade association, but still referring to permits from PCM (UK) Ltd.

At this point you could slip in a comment that any permit must be issued in accordance with your lease/AST which must be from the landowner or with whoever you have a residential contract, not from a dissolved company.

Either way, you "should" get a new LOC/LBC once you have pointed out their error, then after another 25 days you can state again that you are seeking debt advice and require the "new" case to be put on hold for 30 days.

... and again, if the incorrect name of the permit issuing company is used on the re-issued LOC/LBC.

It depends whether you want this over with or whether you want to make life hard for SM and show them up for their incompetence in failing to apply due diligence and correctly following the strict requirements of the PAP.

I would most definitely report them to the SRA and include the LOC from the other case with the name of a dissolved company to show they knew or should have known they had the wrong claimant when that case went to court.

I know which I would do.

Once they get the name(s) right I would tell them about their client's ASBO and that you have primacy of contract, pointing them to the other case(s) they have lost when they have tried to scam money out of residents.

How did you get on digging out your lease etcetera and complaining to the landowner, MA/MC, and your MP?

MisTeeeq

 Mouse007 said:

Adding to @Fruitcake’s advice above - because it need emphasising:

Look at your lease and see what it says about parking, check for conditions. If there are none that means there are none and no ppc can role up with a bunch of signs to over ride your rights to park. They simply can not impose a permit system on you unless it is already in your lease or there has been a variation thereto approved by at least 75% of the leaseholders, pursuant to s37 of the Landlord & Tenant Act.

Even if your lease does require permits what does it say the consequences will be if you fail to display one? Your lease is your contract, not some words on an irrelevant third party sign.

Who allowed these cowboys onto the site and what authority did they have to do so?

This is known as Pimacy of contract and your lease trumps anything on a sign.

Read this 

Note the cases already decided, download copies from parking prankster (above).

and search the forum for residential own space threads like this one



Once you understand this tell the ppc you do not consent to them managing your parking space and demand that they stop trespassing on your land.

Hey Mouse,

Honestly they’re awful. When I moved in we had no parking management and it was fine. Then they overbuilt to the amount of spaces and of course people can’t control themselves and parking got out of control. So, many residents complained. In response, this lot rocked up and instead of ticketing those on double yellows, those in incorrect spaces or those in no space at all, they ticket those of us who’ve been parking in the same car in the same space for 5 years because our permit isn’t visible. It’s infuriating.

I’ve complained many many times to the landowner which is Metropolitan Thames Valley Housing, and they always tell me there is nothing they can do, and emphasise that although I own my flat, I do not own the parking space. 

I do plan to write to them telling them I do not want them managing my space, I’d just left it for the time being as I thought as almost a year had passed, they’d forgotten about my tickets 

What I signed originally doesn’t have anything about parking, but it’s probably changed since it was introduced. I’ll try and check! 

Thanks  

MisTeeeq

Fruitcake said:

That's what I would do. Send the 30 days hold instruction first but not mentioning the issue with the name of the alleged PPC until around day 21 - 25, then challenge the name (or names) on the LOC/LBC.

Parking Control Management Limited were dissolved in 2010 so the defendant can then deny they ever entered inro a contract with a company with that name.
You could point out at the same time that permits could not have been obtained from PCM (UK) Ltd because that company was dissolved in 2017
or,
you could save that in case a new LOC/LBC is issued with the name of a currently trading PPC that is a member of a parking trade association, but still referring to permits from PCM (UK) Ltd.

At this point you could slip in a comment that any permit must be issued in accordance with your lease/AST which must be from the landowner or with whoever you have a residential contract, not from a dissolved company.

Either way, you "should" get a new LOC/LBC once you have pointed out their error, then after another 25 days you can state again that you are seeking debt advice and require the "new" case to be put on hold for 30 days.

... and again, if the incorrect name of the permit issuing company is used on the re-issued LOC/LBC.

It depends whether you want this over with or whether you want to make life hard for SM and show them up for their incompetence in failing to apply due diligence and correctly following the strict requirements of the PAP.

I would most definitely report them to the SRA and include the LOC from the other case with the name of a dissolved company to show they knew or should have known they had the wrong claimant when that case went to court.

I know which I would do.

Once they get the name(s) right I would tell them about their client's ASBO and that you have primacy of contract, pointing them to the other case(s) they have lost when they have tried to scam money out of residents.

How did you get on digging out your lease etcetera and complaining to the landowner, MA/MC, and your MP?

Hey Fruitcake,

perfect, I’ll do that - thank you. 

My MP is usually helpful but I keep getting a similar response which is talking about private land. I will contact him again though, and highlight that I’m now looking at potentially being taken to court by these guys for parking in my own space in his constituency. 

Landowner is an absolute joke - I’ve spoken to the manager of the estate at the landowner and he keeps saying there’s nothing he can do. He tells me he’d asked for them to drop it and they said no. Could I make a SAR about this? I’m not sure it would help, but it may make their life difficult. I’m all up for inconveniencing everybody else after they have inconvenienced me lol. 

Umkomaas

What I signed originally doesn’t have anything about parking, but it’s probably changed since it was introduced. I’ll try and check! 

But they can't just change it like that. 

He tells me he’d asked for them to drop it and they said no.

Ask him in an email to confirm that he has asked for this to be dropped, but they have refused the request of the contracting principal. 

Fruitcake

Ask the landowner or MA to put in writing (an email is fine) that he has asked the PPC to cancel the charge(s).
This proves that there is no commercial justification for the claim and is on its knees compared with the Supreme Court case of ParkingEye v Beavis, the highest court in the land.

Does the landowner know about the ASBO?

Who actually employed the PPC? If different to the landowner (Managing Agent/Management Company), do they know about the ASBO.

Are you a tenant or a leaseholder? Tenant's rights are protected by the Landlord and Tenant Act 1987 and cannot be altered without a vote in favour.

Whatever you signed, it cannot be changed without consultation or your knowledge otherwise it becomes an unfair contract term and therefore breaches the Consumer Rights Act 2015.

Galloglass

@MisTeeeq

You said you were an owner. Is this shared ownership?

Also you state you do not own a parking space but have the right to bring a car onto the property which may require (according to the MTVH website) a permit or a fob. Do you use a fob to access the site?

He tells me he’d asked for them to drop it and they said no. Could I make a SAR about this?

Yes you can but you would need to be specific and ask about communication between MTVH and PCM about you (and not someone else.)

Someone has tried a Freedom of Information request to MTVH but it was knocked back as they claim not to be covered by this act but I'm not so sure and, if I have time, will look into this. FOI's would be very useful. 

Edit: Seems MTVH are not for it, which is not a surprise

https://www.insidehousing.co.uk/news/news/housing-associations-sceptical-about-foi-style-transparency-demands-in-white-paper-68634

MisTeeeq

Update:

I’ve emailed my MP. 

I’ve made a SAR to PCM.
I’ve contacted SM to request an extension.
I’ve contacted the landowner again, asking them to clarify that PCM rejected their request to drop the charge. 

@Galloglass it was shared ownership when I moved in, but I since bought the whole lot from them. The property doesn’t require a fob or a gate or anything, anybody could in theory just come and park their vehicle. The only deterrent is parking permits. 

@Fruitcake I’m an owner occupier in a leasehold. The parking company was definitely recruited by Metropolitan Thames Valley, because they explicitly told me on the phone they picked this company because they didn’t charge Metropolitan anything, it’s a £0 contract - their money comes from tickets - surprise surprise!! The landowner doesn’t know about the ASBO yet I don’t imagine, but they will once I reply to their predictable response lol. 

@Umkomaas I’ve contacted the property manager at the housing association (landowner) to ask them to clarify whether PCM had rejected their request to withdraw the PCN. 

Will keep you all posted. 

Thanks again 

Fruitcake

MisTeeeq said:

Update:

The parking company was definitely recruited by Metropolitan Thames Valley, because they explicitly told me on the phone they picked this company because they didn’t charge Metropolitan anything, it’s a £0 contract - their money comes from tickets - surprise surprise!! 

Most PPCs work like that and sucker landowners in on the promise that all their parking worries will go away, and it won't cost them a penny.
What landowners fail to do is any kind of background checks. One look at Trustpilot and the landowner should run a mile.
They also fail to realise that once any perceived parking problem has been resolved, assuming there was one to start with, then the PPC's only source of revenue is genuine residents, visitors, and delivery service providers.

MisTeeeq

Hey,

Just an update for everybody. The landowner is ignoring my emails, I have since chased copying in the CEO. 

But, the landowner has responded to my MP with the below:

“I have been in contact with your Local Housing Manager, to query this and I understand that they have been in contact with PCM. Regrettably there has been no response in relation to withdrawing from further proceedings”

To me, this reads like the landowner has asked PCM to withdraw the charge and they have completely ignored it. 

PCM have yet to respond to my SAR. 

Thanks for the help.

Misteeeq