DCB legal court hearing - resident fined at home address!

solidsnake_2

Hello,

I've trawled through a fair bit of the huge repository of information around parking appeals. I've found some that relate to my circumstances but at the same time are a bit different. So I'm not sure how best to go about my appeal.

A short summary of my case:

Background

• Tenant at a block of flats with private road access
• On the council register (named) at this address and also tenant paperwork in my name
• Parking managed by UKPC with ANPR but no permits (to my knowledge and my landlords)
• building and all other is managed by a block management company

Fine circumstances

• Fined for parking on the property by UKPC (no designated parking just 'residents parking').
• I raised with block management that I lived there (car registered to a different address, which I has since found is irrelevant as I am the registered keeper). Asked them to cancel off. Palmed off to UKPC who told me appeal window was closed (letters going to address for the car).
• I noted UKPC say that the contract holder (block management can easily remove fines) so I requested this. 
• Block management company (for who I have chased many times) finally came back asking for £45 to settle (which maybe I should have despite not being in the wrong)
• Ticket issued as my car was not registered on UKPC list despite me having emailed block management and UKPC to detail cars that are mine that will be in attendance. 
• I have received a number of fines (some even when I have requested within minutes due to not being able to access the underground car park for which I have no issues parking in as I do not go past the ANPR to access)

Current status

• I have received a court hearing notice from DCB (again, all to cars registered address - as such not giving me much time to respond.
• AoS applied for per guidance here
• Trying to understand options - I have 5 days to submit my hearing docs

1. should I contact the block management and tell them the situation and ask them to cancel (if they can)?
2. I considered 'threatening' a counter claim to see if that would jolt some action. But seems to late for cancelling court?
3. do I have to appoint a solicitor (I have seen here that it's recommended against it - but seeing the statements is quite overwhelming!)?
4. as a tenant am I in a weak position since I am not able to refer to leaseholder info?

The only thing I have in my favour is the ongoing issue for other cars I have used here and been fined despite providing the registration info per their guidance. I also have email correspondence (but not all) to the block management company requesting again and again against the issue and it being ignored. They definitely palmed me off which I think is really poor as I am one of the residents they're supposed to be serving!

Sorry for the specific post but other thread reference points seem to be about property owners.

Hope you can provide some guidance (and maybe assurance!) that I can start to work toward.

KeithP

solidsnake_2 said:

• I have received a court hearing notice from DCB

What exactly does that mean?

Have you perhaps received a County Court Claim Form?
If so, what is the Issue Date on it?

solidsnake_2 said:

• AoS applied for per guidance here

and it looks like you may have filed an Acknowledgment of Service.
If so, on what date did you do that?
Your MCOL Claim History will have the definitive answer to that.

solidsnake_2 said:

• I have 5 days to submit my hearing docs

Again... what does that mean?
What are your 'hearing docs'?
Do you have a date for a hearing?

Half_way

This is not a fine, however the issue needs dealing with.

Big question, what rights do you have to park a vehicle in the car park?

Forget anything that may be printed on any signage, or permits - you must look at the tenancy agreement , or whatever else you may have.

Also try a search for other own space issues- that is if you have a right to use the car park .

The basics are

 Property owner/renter has an allocated parking space - and/or a right to use a communal car park ( ie on a first come first get basis)

This will have precedence over anything a third party may try and impose such as a charge of £100/day for not displaying a permit or other such nonsense.

 They can not take away a pre existing right, nor can they offer you a contract ( £100/whatever a day to park ) for something you already have the right to do

you must dig out the tenancy agreement/freehold and state exactly what it says about the use of the car park - usually its along the lines of no significant work to be carried out, no boats/caravans and vehicle must be roadworthy etc

Coupon-mad

It's not an appeal. It's a defence.

Hopefully your answers to KeithP's questions will confirm you are at (dead easy) court CLAIM stage like this person who was actually thinking she had to pay, until we put her straight:

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/80093355/#Comment_80093355

Or are you further down the line?  WS stage?  Also easy enough.

solidsnake_2

Firstly, thank you so much for the lightning fast replies. I am really grateful.

Apologies for the terminology mistakes.

As KeithP asked - yes, County Court Business Centre Claim Form.
Issue date was the 11th May (I picked this up late as at old address). I completed the AoS online last week and called the court to confirm I have until 13th June to complete the N9B form for my defence ( I meant 5 working days from today).

To provide a bit more context - there is allocated underground parking which is numbered per flat. Again, this is never an issue as it's secure access and I don't go past the ANPR camera. There is also a private road which all residents are allowed to use in the first come first served way. The private road parking is monitored exclusively by the ANPR.

I had two fines received when parking outside my flat for a few hours to unload the car. I didn't pick these up for some time. But in any case the block management know I live there as I had a previous problem with some other car hire cars and my previous owned car (they resolved the latter but not the former since the hire care companies automatically deducted the fine allowing them to wash their hands of it). Anyway, that is by-the-by as the Claim Form pertains to two specific instances and to a different registration (of which, as mentioned, I have contacted the block management company to resolve but they haven't.

I'll dig out the tenancy agreement. And reference it back here. I'll also review the link from Coupon-mad. Hopefully some parallels I can draw from.

I take it it is not work engaging the block management company as we've gone past that point? Feels a bit frustrating that they've been able to just pass on the issue without any recourse for their ability to manage the property.

KeithP

solidsnake_2 said:

As KeithP asked - yes, County Court Business Centre Claim Form.
Issue date was the 11th May (I picked this up late as at old address). I completed the AoS online last week and called the court to confirm I have until 13th June to complete the N9B form for my defence ( I meant 5 working days from today).

With a Claim Issue Date of 11th May, and having filed an Acknowledgment of Service in a timely manner, you do indeed have until 4pm on Tuesday 13th June 2023 to file your Defence but you won't be using a N9B form.

That's over a week away. Plenty of time to produce a Defence, but please don't leave it to the last minute.

To create a Defence, and then file a Defence by email, look at the second post in the NEWBIES thread.

Don't miss the deadline for filing a Defence.

Do not try and file a Defence via the MoneyClaimOnline website. Once an Acknowledgment of Service has been filed, the MCOL website should be treated as 'read only'.


Oh... and as @Half_way has already pointed out, there is no fine.

KeithP

You must now ensure that both the CCBC and the Claimant - and their solicitor, if any - have your up to date address for service.
Do that in writing.

Also check your vehicle's Registration Document(V5c). The keeper's address on that can be updated online.

Coupon-mad

It's too late for landowner complaint now.

Just use the defence by @Johny86 

For para 2 (see the Template Defence thread) admit to driving.

For para 3 and 4, write some stuff about being a resident and how UKPC made residents' lives a misery with predatory ticketing and no grace period.  No actual PCNs were received; only inflated and intimidatory debt demands.  Multiple complaints were made by the Defendant to the Managing Agent and to these Claimants.

4. It is believed that the Defendant's car was not registered on UKPC's whitelist despite the Defendant having emailed the Managing Agents and UKPC to detail the cars relating to the flat, that were permitted to park.  There is no legitimate interest to support penalising a resident and it is denied that there is any cause of action, not that the embarrassing Particulars of Claim actually specify anything.

Use Johny86's as your base - but not his para 4 because he wasn't driving. Unlike your case.

Hence the above suggestions for 3 and 4.

Read the Template Defence thread and all the rest of that continues after Johny's para 11.  Re-numbering it all, like he did.

B789

You keep mentioning the word "fine" many times, even after being told that it is nothing of the sort. Compare the number of times the word "fine" appears on any of the paperwork you have received to date and give us the ratio.

It really is a pity that you previously just gave in and accepted the hire company paying your "fine" speculative invoice from an unregulated parking company. By letting that happen, you were marked as a mug for future targeting, hence you are where you are now.

Follow the advice given above by others. Here is an example of the defence template referred to by Coupon-Mad:

https://www.dropbox.com/s/5r7vbqttho3q948/2023 defence.pdf?dl=0

So, no more use of the word "fine" please. You are part of a scam and are reacting to a speculative invoice for an alleged breach of contract from an unregulated private parking company. 

solidsnake_2

B789 said:

You keep mentioning the word "fine" many times, even after being told that it is nothing of the sort. Compare the number of times the word "fine" appears on any of the paperwork you have received to date and give us the ratio.

It really is a pity that you previously just gave in and accepted the hire company paying your "fine" speculative invoice from an unregulated parking company. By letting that happen, you were marked as a mug for future targeting, hence you are where you are now.

Follow the advice given above by others. Here is an example of the defence template referred to by Coupon-Mad:

So, no more use of the word "fine" please. You are part of a scam and are reacting to a speculative invoice for an alleged breach of contract from an unregulated private parking company. 

Ok, fine...oops! Appreciate the nuance now. I guess the mind just goes where it has been trained to go PCNs, fines etc used to be interchangeable to me. Now I'm learning! So thank you.

With regards to the hire car companies, they auto bill. I didn't have a choice. Only found out when I was reviewing my payments the next time I went to hire a car (I use different services depending on availability).

I'm guessing there is no way to get that back retrospectively. Although that is a different topic. I will keep on track here with the CCBC business as that is my most pressing matter.

Will come back with a write per instruction. Hopefully I will have some kind of grounds to get this kicked out,

solidsnake_2

Hello guys,

This is my second stab at writing this defence. I'm wondering if I am being overly verbose, skirting around detail (i.e. I have multiple fines issued against more than this vehicle including when I could actually get into the car park due to works!)

I also wonder if I am being too polite @Coupon-mad provides some nice scathing critique of the situation which I have effectively lifted. 

I suspect I should consolidate some points and amp up the criticism of UKPC and the managing agents? 

Grateful for your thoughts. Conscious I need to submit this on Tues and for avoidance of doubt I will submit on Mon,

Identifying details redacted:

1.  PLACE is a private access residents for use of all residents of PLACE.
2. The Defendant is a resident at PLACE as at XXth January 2022. Tenancy documents, Council Tax registration documents and other utilities services are also evidenced to illustrate the Defendants right to use the private residents road that the Claimant is seeking to charge for. 
3. The Defendant is known to the freeholder as part of the site as part of the tenancy agreement for which the Claimant is working for by providing the ‘parking control’ service.
4. The tenancy agreement provides the Defendant, as a tenant, access to a designated car parking space in the underground car park.
5. The private residents only road access is supplied on a first come, first served basis and is not managed by a visible paper windscreen permit model. Vehicles are granted access by emailing the freeholder appointed block management company
6. The Claimant is a service provider on behalf of the block management agent ‘NAMEt’. Any action by the Claimant can be overridden by the block management agent per the terms mentioned on the Claimants own website. There is no pre-agreed or enforceable contract between the Defendant and the Claimant.
7. The Defendant’s vehicle is registered to a different address as a permanent (nightly) storage location for reasons of enhanced security, insurance obligations and ULEZ compliance.
8. Signage provided by the Claimant refers to “registered users only. There is currently no direct way to register a vehicle/vehicles other than email to the block management agent. This has created the issue whereby the Defendant has informed the managing agent and despite this has received a PCN charge from the Claimant. The Defendant has requested on multiple occasions with for the voiding of these parking charges. Despite this no forthcoming support from either the Claimant or the block management has been provided to resolve their erroneous ticketing. Contact by the Defendant has been made by email and phone to both the Claimant and the block management company.
9. The Defendant along with other residents have been subject to the Claimants predatory ticketing and no grace period despite this in effect.  This has created a miserable living experience whereby the Defendant cannot freely access their property without fear of unfair ticketing which then through the ineffectual block management are allowed to escalate into unfair PCNs and debt collection agency harassment.
10.  As the vehicle targeted is not registered at the Defendants address, the Claimant and block managing agent has wilfully allowed this to escalate to inflated and intimidatory debt demands.  Multiple requests and complaints have been made by the Defendant to the block management company and to these Claimants to resolve the matter as is their remit.
11. It is believed that the Defendant's car was not registered on the Claimants whitelist despite the Defendant having emailed the block management agent and the Claimant to detail the cars relating to the flat, that were permitted to park.  There is no legitimate interest to support penalising a resident and it is denied that there is any cause of action, not that the embarrassing Particulars of Claim actually specify anything.

Sorry if it's a drag to review - I didn't appreciate how busy this forum is until I saw how many new threads appeared from when I last posted!