Claim received for unpaid Parking Charge Notice

Afrochap

@Coupon-mad. Much thanks for your critique. 

The bays are not allocated and not even marked, just standard tarmac. 

I have updated my defence and added the s37 1987 L&T Acts and I've tried to rearrange the points to sort of build on each other and added further arguments that I've picked up in the forums   - 

The Defendant was parked at the location as it is his home address.

         i.          The Defendant is a Leaseholder and the Lease signed with the Freeholder affords the Defendant the right to peaceful enjoyment of the premises.

Paragraph 5.1 of the Lease clearly states the following –

The Leaseholder paying the rents reserved by this Lease and performing and observing the covenant in this Lease may peaceably enjoy the Premises during the term without any lawful interruption by the Landlord or any person rightfully claiming under or in trust for it.

A copy of the Leasehold is attached.

        ii.          There is no mention within the Lease that the Leaseholder must display a permit to use the parking amenities on the property, or to pay penalties to third parties, such as the Claimant, for non-display of same.

      iii.          The Claimant, in order to establish a right to impose unilateral terms which vary the terms of the Lease, must have such variation approved by at least 75% of the Leaseholders, pursuant to s37 of the Landlord & Tenant Act 1987, and the Defendant is unaware of any such vote having been passed by the residents.

      iv.          The Defendant's vehicle clearly was 'authorised' as per the Lease and the Defendant relies on primacy of contract and avers that the Claimant's conduct in aggressive ticketing is, in fact, a matter of tortious interference, being a private nuisance to residents.

       v.          Whilst the Defendant possesses a permit for the vehicle VRM ABC123XXX which is usually displayed as a courtesy to other residents, it is neither admitted nor denied that it was not visible on the material date when the Claimant took carefully angled photos over the space of two minutes.

It is denied that there was a contractual obligation to display a permit, whereby a resident with title in the land somehow (absurdly) 'agreed' to be charged potentially £100 per day by an unrelated third party as if their own space was being run like a commercial car park. 

It is denied that the Claimant was offering anything of value that the Defendant did not already enjoy as a benefit of the lease.

Afrochap

Also do I need to attach the Leasehold at this stage? 

Coupon-mad

No, I was about to say that!  

Defence looks fine; it'll be over 30 paragraphs once it is all sequentially numbered (remove all the sub-numbering).  Own your defence, be confident, and number it all normally...  There's no rule that you have to call all your added facts 'paragraph three'!

Which solicitor? Wait, Gladstones!

So object to this extortionate interest too:

10.25% per annum

Afrochap

@Coupon-mad

Thank you once again.

I've puy the email to CCBC together and it's sitting in Draftbox just need to push Send.

I will update once again now, remove the reference to Lessehold attached, number in sequence and send at 9.30am

This experience has taught me a lot about this Vampiric industry. 

Once all done and hopefully it'll be found in my favour, I will be writing a letter to UKPCM warning them that should they touch my car or leave anything on my car again I'll be suing them for trespass.

Coupon-mad

@Afrochap defence is only the first step.
Other paperwork stages and a Witness Statement are to be done yet, your work is not over.

The Template Defence thread sets out the first 12 steps to save you asking about the first letter.

And did you get a CCBC email acknowledgement?

Afrochap

I got the following email from them on Friday 14/01 and also attached is "Defence Questionnaire". I know from the Template Thread that this is to be ignored and that I should instead wait for the Court's direction and Questionnaire

We acknowledge receipt of your email as you have filed A defence we are unable to place the file on hold.

We act for the Claimant and have notified the Court of the Claimant’s intention to proceed with the Claim. Please find enclosed a copy of the Claimant’s completed Directions Questionnaire, which has also been filed with the Court.  

KeithP

Afrochap said:

I know from the Template Thread that this is to be ignored and that I should instead wait for the Court's direction and Questionnaire.

That's good.

Afrochap

@KeithP @Coupon-mad @Le_Kirk @B789

Morning all, 

First off, many thanks again for the continued support,  you guys are nothing but Stars. Mucho gracias.

So, I received the Directions Questionnaire from CCBC yesterday and will be completing and sending it back by this Saturday 17/06 (The letter gave me until 26/06 to respond.
I forgot about the SAR I sent out to CPM on 27/03/2023 and after looking through my inbox, I saw they responded on 27/04/2023. There are 2 tickets in the response and quite a number of pictures and for each ticket, the only correspondence included are only  Formal Demand letters.

a. Also, I have letters from Debt Recovery Plus for one of the tickets and there's nothing in their SAR response mentioning that my information was passed to another company. Is this legal/normal?

b. What should I do with their SAR response? Am I to upload the documents on here for your perusal?

I've received other shenanigans from CPM and Gladstones.

1. I received another letter before claim for another ticket from Gladstones. After perusing the document, I note that the reference on the letter does not correspond to any reference on any of the PCNs (invoices) received from CPM.

c. Is this normal? I'm thinking, how can one be sure of the legality of each of their claims if there's nothing actually linking the claims together with a specific PCN?

2. Since then, CPM has issued me with 2 more PCNs and I've received a Final Chance Before action for one of them. Can't help but feel they are intentionally targeting me at this time. I am planning to respond to them saying I do not recognise their authority as there's nothing on my Leasehold that says I must display a parking ticket to enjoy the use of the parking facilities at my home address.

d. What do you think?

e. One thing I'm worried about though, is that I've ignored all their correspondence. Is this something that may sway a judge in finding against me? 


My questions are in bold. 


Many thanks for your continued support. 

Le_Kirk

You do not post the DQ - N180, if you remember (but if not go back to @KeithP post about the template defence and the 12 step process) where you will see that it should be sent by e-mail to CCBC and to the claimant/claimant solicitor.  There is a new question on the form and the answer is here: -
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6364201/new-questions-on-the-n180-form/p1
and: -
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/79267087/#Comment_79267087
You keep the SAR response for use in your witness statement if it helps your case.
How many PCNs are in play here and how many are concerned with the case for which you have received the DQ - N180?  You are right to carefully check that the reference numbers match as they could have a) made a mistake or b) just be trying it on or c) (hopefully not) you have more PCNs in play than you knew about!

Coupon-mad

Ignore DRP letters but reply to the Gladstones letter talking about the fact their client has already filed its claim and any subsequent claim would offend against the doctrine of cause of action estoppel:

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/80107835#Comment_80107835