UK CPM - new infestation on private estate

_IH8_UKCPM_

Fruitcake said:

Remember, don't call them fines or penalties, and make sure your neighbours understand that they must not use those words otherwise they are adding a legitimacy that they do not have. 
It is also important that words such as unregulated parking companies, and primacy of contract are used.

With regards to tenants, Part 37 of Section IV of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1987 applies. Note that both tenants and landlords must be balloted.

Landlord and Tenant Act 1987 (legislation.gov.uk)

Ah great thanks I was thinking it was just landlords with the rented properties. That helps.

_IH8_UKCPM_

Hi guys, hope you all had good xmas. Just getting round to this again and writing our complaint based on the other template. Changed a lot of the wording to match our case but just wanted someone to check it over make sure I am making sense and not chatting rubbish!

Also wondering if there are any additional legal cases to reference?

Also I spoke to some other FirstPort customers online and many have had them bring in PPC without consultation and had to force them to kick them out. One even confirmed it FirstPort were taking a cut of the penalty fees which is 🤬


LETTER

We the undersigned, object to any proposed 'parking management' in the strongest terms and unequivocally reject the unsolicited enforcement foisted upon residents. We will not be bound by any terms unlawfully imposed upon us.

The background:
In December 2021 FirstPort sent a letter to residents advising that a parking enforcement scheme with permits would be introduced and asked for vehicle registrations. When queried by residents FirstPort advised that the scheme was no longer planned to be introduced and would be picked up by the incoming estate manager. In September 2022 UKCPM distributed letters stating that parking enforcement would begin on the 24th of October 2021. Since enforcement has begun FirstPort have been unable to provide any satisfactory answers or evidence to prove that the scheme was introduced following proper formal consultation with all relevant parties. FirstPort have referred to a meeting that took place on Thursday 5th May 2021 and have implied the parking enforcement was agreed at this meeting. No communication was made to advise parking would be discuss at the meeting and not all relevant parties were present to agree to the introduction of parking enforcement. Additionally, people present at the meeting have confirmed parking enforcement was discussed but no definitive conclusion was drawn, only that the matter was to be discussed further before any action would be taken by FirstPort.

 

It is understood the parking complaints that prompted this scheme relate to an area of the estate where cars were parking in a way that blocked access for large vehicles through a junction of two roads, as well as parking in front of communal entrances. FirstPort have provided no evidence that they explored, considered or attempted to implement any other solutions to these issues or any other parking complaints and instead brought in UKCPM. We have learned from residents on other estates that FirstPort have previously brought in private parking enforcement schemes including UKCPM and in at least one instance had agreements in place to receive a percentage of the penalty fees collected. Your actions have been reported to the media and to our local MP who we understand has written a letter to yourselves asking for an explanation. We note that poor quality of service provided by FirstPort is well documented and has most recently been highlighted in the House of Commons by Mark Francois on December 20th 2022.

The legal position - derogation from grant and breach of L&T Act 1987
Your actions now in imposing an unwanted private nuisance of ex-clamping firm UKCPM are unlawful and constitute a derogation from grant.

As such, we require UKCPM to be removed from our estate and their signs taken down immediately. If you have signed a contract with UKCPM, that is your issue to rescind and as residents, we will not be liable for any wasted costs due to your actions.

Should we be required to seek an injunction to stop UKCPM, we will require the costs of such action from you, the Managing Agent. We sincerely hope the matter can be resolved amicably without legal action or related costs.

You are advised that as a Managing Agent, you (and even the freeholder) cannot take unilateral steps to change or remove such a fundamental amenity as parking. Further, you/the freeholder may not impose (or allow an agent to impose) 'parking charges' not covered within the leases without proper consensus.

The resident position is that we have the benefit of rights and/or an easement allowing cars to be parked on servient land and this benefit cannot be removed, charged for, extinguished, adversely changed with onerous terms, nor resident access to spaces reduced.

Authorities which support our position include:

(i) Kettel v Bloomfold [2012]EWHC 1422 (Ch) and
(ii) Saeed v Plustrade Limited [2001] EWCA CIV 201, as well as
(iii) the Winchester County court case of Roger Davey v UKPC [2013] where, in an Order by consent, the parking firm gave undertakings to the Court not to enter the Claimant's land and not to place any parking charge notices on the cars, and the Court ordered damages for trespass in a total of £150.00 and costs in the sum of £1280.26 which included the cost an injunction obtained by Mr Davey.

We respectfully suggest you need to seek legal advice and you must not allow your (BBC Watchdog exposed as rogue) parking agents - or any parking firm - to impose any terms upon us. As stated in Section 37 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1987, in order to establish a right to impose unilateral terms which vary the terms of the lease, you must have such variation approved by at least 75% of the leaseholders with no more than 10% objecting, or in the case of nine or less leaseholders, all but one must agree.

A variation to the lease was never sought but will not be approved, by residents of:

Before you attempt to respond with wording from lease agreements, we advise you that a fundamental restriction to the parking amenity and inflicting of a notoriously litigious firm upon us with no prior consultation does not, under any interpretation, constitute 'reasonable estate management' for the good of the residents.

We demand that UKCPM are removed, and any issued penalties are immediately cancelled. If we do not receive a reply within 7 days, we will be forced to take legal action and/or apply for an injunction and pass the costs to you and/or the freeholder and/or UKCPM, as necessary, to prevent this private nuisance.

Yours sincerely,

_IH8_UKCPM_

Oh and another party with an interest in two properties on the estate said they are happy to get involved in legal action and another resident's father is a retired solicitor so think we have some legal backing should we need to seek advice or go down that route.

Coupon-mad

Very good.

You need to put the Act in full in your title.

Half_way

You could also add in that you expect them ( the managemeent agency) to reund any "parking charge notices" that other residents may have paid out of fear, or duress as a result of the scheme

Umkomaas

In September 2022 UKCPM distributed letters stating that parking enforcement would begin on the 24th of October 2021.

Have another look at those dates. 

Boat_to_Bolivia

Umkomaas said:

In September 2022 UKCPM distributed letters stating that parking enforcement would begin on the 24th of October 2021.

Have another look at those dates. 

Just a typo surely?

Fruitcake

Letters/emails of complaint must come from each resident, not one letter/email signed by loads of different people.

In other words, I the undersigned, not We the undersigned.

100 individual complaints will have more effect than 1 complaint signed by 100 people. 

The same applies to complaints to your MP.

Mouse007

Fruitcake said:

Letters/emails of complaint must come from each resident, not one letter/email signed by loads of different people.

In other words, I the undersigned, not We the undersigned.

100 individual complaints will have more effect than 1 complaint signed by 100 people. 

The same applies to complaints to your MP.

Bombard them

_IH8_UKCPM_

Half_way said:

You could also add in that you expect them ( the managemeent agency) to reund any "parking charge notices" that other residents may have paid out of fear, or duress as a result of the scheme

I did think to add this but was unsure. Will put it in.

Umkomaas said:

In September 2022 UKCPM distributed letters stating that parking enforcement would begin on the 24th of October 2021.

Have another look at those dates. 

Thanks, have amended them, forgot it was 2022 for a moment when writing!

Fruitcake said:

Letters/emails of complaint must come from each resident, not one letter/email signed by loads of different people.

In other words, I the undersigned, not We the undersigned.

100 individual complaints will have more effect than 1 complaint signed by 100 people. 

The same applies to complaints to your MP.

Others have complained to FirstPort already and I have told those who haven't to email them and complain. Have also advised all to write to MP already rather than just myself and a load have done so. I thought the example letter from the other thread they sent their formal complaint as a group and had all residents involved sign it? That was my plan for this formal complaint which would be alongside all the individual complaints everyone else has raised.