PCM UK Fine for parking in my allocated spot - is it enforceable?

RedundantSound

Holy bump....

Two years later I have now recieved a "Letter Before Claim" from a different legal company relating to this ticket and would appreciate a reassuring hand to hold as it is just a little daunting when CCJs are threatened.

I have read the FAQ on this forum and understand that it is telling me that I should send a robust reply to their email address stating that the propensity to pay is zero.

It looks like they have bought the "debt" and are trying to enforce it?

"If you choose not to reply within 30 days our client may intruct us to issue a County Court Claim which adds interest, court fees and legal costs to the balance."

It has given me 30 days to respond however there are no reply forms included. Just telling me how to pay or call them.

I will be complaining to the management company for the estate which has changed since I purchased but I assume are still responsible for the on-going relationship with PCM.

Any advice or reassurance would be greatly appreciate!

Thanks

James_Poisson

They have not "bought the debt" there is no debt it hasn't been to court so it's only an alleged debt.

You cannot just get a CCJ it has to go to court, you would have to lose the case, and then not pay before a CCJ can be awarded, and you won't let that happen.

This is just an expected stage as outlined in the advice on page one of this forum.

It all shows that this is just a money making scheme operated by scammers, there is no parking management, there is no protection of residents' bays the parking company and their agents are just scamming people.

If they were honestly protecting your parking rights, they would accept your appeal job done, but no they try to hide behind the contractual agreement argument to get their money. 

But over and above this, they seem to have accepted they should not be trespassing on your land as they have removed their patrol, just let them carry on but get all your ducks lined up.

Coupon-mad

RedundantSound said:

Holy bump....

Two years later I have now recieved a "Letter Before Claim" from a different legal company relating to this ticket and would appreciate a reassuring hand to hold as it is just a little daunting when CCJs are threatened.

I have read the FAQ on this forum and understand that it is telling me that I should send a robust reply to their email address stating that the propensity to pay is zero.

It looks like they have bought the "debt" and are trying to enforce it?

"If you choose not to reply within 30 days our client may intruct us to issue a County Court Claim which adds interest, court fees and legal costs to the balance."

It has given me 30 days to respond however there are no reply forms included. Just telling me how to pay or call them.

I will be complaining to the management company for the estate which has changed since I purchased but I assume are still responsible for the on-going relationship with PCM.

Any advice or reassurance would be greatly appreciate!

Thanks

It's just a letter. Nobody has bought the debt.

RedundantSound

Coupon-mad said:

RedundantSound said:

Holy bump....

It's just a letter. Nobody has bought the debt.

Thank you, I thought it was just another company chancing their arm but it seems that Moorside Legal (the LBC) are a sister company of Trace Debt Recovery who had sent me the initial payment requests two years ago.

I have been reading other threads and saw in a claimant's witness statement they used the following;

5. My Company also relies on One Parking Solution Ltd v Wilshaw [20211, which confirmed that

proving landowner authority is not required to establish a valid cause Of action. What matters is

that a binding contract is formed between the Claimant and the Defendant through the site

signage, regardless Of the terms between the Claimant and the landowner.

(https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6624541/euro-parking-services-gladstones-solicitors-court-claim-defence-help-required/p2)

My lease states(amongst other things listed on p1);

Sch 7: Agreements and Declarations.

"10. Acting reasonably at all times the Management Company shall have authority to make and at any time vary such Estate Regulations as it may reasonably think fit for the preservation of the amenities of the estate or for the general convenience of the occupiers of the Dwellings PROVIDED such Estate Regulations are notified to the Tenant and other owners and the Landlord in writing."

There are signs which say that I must park in bays and display a permit, however there was never any ballot carried out, just imposed via a letter after moving in.

Does this bury my chances of winning a claim? Am I able to rely on any other defences? I have read through numerous threads with court reports etc etc but I have not been able to find any which match my situation of parking on my own private land.

Thanks!

EDIT 21:00:

Having re-read through the parking prankster page again (it has been over three years...) I am hoping that I am completely covered by the following passage straight away;

However, this does mean that the lease needs scrutinising carefully.

It is not sufficient for the operator to simply point to a clause which allows the lease to be varied. They must prove that the lease was so varied, and furthermore varied by the lessor.  The operator isn’t a party to the lease and cannot vary it.

Furthermore, a clause ostensibly permitting variations does not give carte blanche to introduce any terms at whim.  Such variation clauses are normally couched in terms stating that variations can be made for the good management of the site, or similar.  So, if a variation can be shown to be to the significant detriment of the lessees, it should be challenged.  A variation might also conflict with other terms of the lease e.g. the right to peaceful enjoyment.  If so then, again, it should be challenged.

RedundantSound

James_Poisson said:

They have not "bought the debt" there is no debt it hasn't been to court so it's only an alleged debt.

You cannot just get a CCJ it has to go to court, you would have to lose the case, and then not pay before a CCJ can be awarded, and you won't let that happen.

This is just an expected stage as outlined in the advice on page one of this forum.

It all shows that this is just a money making scheme operated by scammers, there is no parking management, there is no protection of residents' bays the parking company and their agents are just scamming people.

If they were honestly protecting your parking rights, they would accept your appeal job done, but no they try to hide behind the contractual agreement argument to get their money. 

But over and above this, they seem to have accepted they should not be trespassing on your land as they have removed their patrol, just let them carry on but get all your ducks lined up.

Thanks for the reply! Yes, sorry I put "debt" in paranthesis as I knew it wasn't a debt, but more buying an "opportunity" to attempt extortion.

I like your line about protecting parking rights, I have included it in a complaint I am writing to the two management agencies (changed recently) and my MP.

Coupon-mad

Good fightback and good research.

You are correct that a detrimental regime which was unilaterally imposed without consultation or consensus and which potentially risks charges for every tenant and visitor (and trespassers, effectively invited to park!) at £100 per day, is not 'for the general convenience of the occupiers'. It also breaches the Landlord & Tenant Act regarding lease variations and certainly interferes with prior rights and your peaceful enjoyment.