Letter from Gladstone Solicitors RE: Parking Fines from UKCPM - Resident Car Park [Educational Only]

ms966

DISCLAIMER: this post and thread is for educational purposes only and based on hypothetical scenarios. All users inc. original poster are role playing.

Hello all,

Upon reading the newbies thread, reaching out for some help to prepare for potentially upcoming court proceedings…mainly around the defence. 

Some context: 

In 2021, I received two parking tickets for allegedly not displaying a “resident permit”. I rent (shorthold tenancy agreement) an apartment in a residential complex which comes with allocated parking spot. The “resident only” car park gate can only be opened with a fob which is what I use. There are standard signs around the car park from UKCPM, there are no ANPR in place and apparently it’s manually operated e (I.e. someone visits the car park and takes pictures).

Letters I received to date: 

1. UKCPM with two Parking Charge Notices (PCN) via post 
2. Debt Recovery Plus 
3. Gladstone Solicitors (debt claimed £100 for each ticket & £70 additional for each, total £340) 
4. Nothing yet but assuming…county court proceedings (need help here to prepare)

Steps I’ve taken to date:

1. Initially emailed building estate management andUKCPM with rent agreement, then also appealed the tickets through the relevant parking board - all dismissed 
2. Ignored Debt Recovery Plus letters (as many threads suggested)
3. Processed SAR request via email directly to UKCPM
4. Replied to Gladstone solicitors via email, informing them that I am seeking debt advice but dispute the claims and of my SAR request to their client 

Need help with (potential court proceedings): 

1. To review my rent agreement (there is no mention of parking, or any permit requirement) 
2. Defence statement and process (plan on using the template I saw on another post)
3. Things to expect in court as never been in one
4. Anything else you deem I may have missed or not shared here please ask 🙏🏼

Trainerman

If it comes with an 'allocated parking spot' then there must be mention of that somewhere. What does it actually say ?

Not_A_Hope

Your tenancy agreement in court will trump any terms and conditions the PPC are allegedly you broke. If it doesn’t state you have to display a permit then they will struggle to win this if they are daft enough to take it to court. Have a look at the recent thread by @Mouse007 who defended a residential case for his son. 

You should continue to challenge your estate management company to get this cancelled.

Mouse007

@ms996 if you reply to the above I will be encouraged to help (too many ask and disappear without trace)

Coupon-mad

Anyone at LBC stage with 'potentially upcoming court proceedings' should be delaying the claim for a month by saying they are "seeking debt advice and as defined in the Pre-Action protocol, the potential Claim must be placed 'on hold' for a month at least. Further, the fake £70 admin/DRA fee (greedily slapped on top in multiples, per PCN) must be removed because the DLUHC is surely about to ban that attempt to "extort money from motorists" (again, as they did in 2022)."

Tell them this and that their ex-clamper clients can damn well get lost.  Rude as you like, within reason!

I say this now because the the third week in July is when we hope the DLUHC will have published their draft Impact Assessment and Public Consultation. 

Anticipated 'before Summer recess' in Parliament.

I'm hoping for useful words and clear analysis about the fake £70 'fee' slapped on top of private PCNs, which will (fingers crossed) help to blow a lot of ongoing exaggerated court and pre-court cases out of the water and hopefully expose a systematic attempt to "extort money from motorists" (Minister's words).

At the very least it will inform your defence!  So kick the can down the road a bit.

ms966

Trainerman said:

If it comes with an 'allocated parking spot' then there must be mention of that somewhere. What does it actually say ?

I could not locate anything on the tenancy agreement. But I have the advert (from Rightmove) and confirmation via email from both my landlord and the building estate management that XX parking bay is allocated to XX apartment. 

Attaching my tenancy agreement (REDACTED) here, let me know if I missed something. 

ms966

Not_A_Hope said:

Your tenancy agreement in court will trump any terms and conditions the PPC are allegedly you broke. If it doesn’t state you have to display a permit then they will struggle to win this if they are daft enough to take it to court. Have a look at the recent thread by @Mouse007 who defended a residential case for his son. 

You should continue to challenge your estate management company to get this cancelled.

I hope so too as there is no mention of it in my tenancy agreement as attached above. 

I tried multiple times with the estate management and my landlord but no luck there unfortunately. 

ms966

Mouse007 said:

@ms996 if you reply to the above I will be encouraged to help (too many ask and disappear without trace)

Thank you, much appreciated!

ms966

Coupon-mad said:

Anyone at LBC stage with 'potentially upcoming court proceedings' should be delaying the claim for a month by saying they are "seeking debt advice and as defined in the Pre-Action protocol, the potential Claim must be placed 'on hold' for a month at least. Further, the fake £70 admin/DRA fee (greedily slapped on top in multiples, per PCN) must be removed because the DLUHC is surely about to ban that attempt to "extort money from motorists" (again, as they did in 2022)."

Tell them this and that their ex-clamper clients can damn well get lost.  Rude as you like, within reason!

I say this now because the the third week in July is when we hope the DLUHC will have published their draft Impact Assessment and Public Consultation. 

Anticipated 'before Summer recess' in Parliament.

I'm hoping for useful words and clear analysis about the fake £70 'fee' slapped on top of private PCNs, which will (fingers crossed) help to blow a lot of ongoing exaggerated court and pre-court cases out of the water and hopefully expose a systematic attempt to "extort money from motorists" (Minister's words).

At the very least it will inform your defence!  So kick the can down the road a bit.

On my email, I attached the “reply form” Gladstone Solicitors requested in which I made that request for 30 days for debt advice in line with PAP guidelines (read somewhere on another thread). They apparently automatically allow 30 days upon sending a replying before their initial 30 day deadline (which I did). 

Wasn’t aware of the pending DLUHC stuff, that’s good news, hope it comes to fruition…it would surely frustrate these scammers. 

Umkomaas

Wasn’t aware of the pending DLUHC stuff, that’s good news, hope it comes to fruition…it would surely frustrate these scammers. 

Please contribute to it. Your posts above show you have a great way with words and I'm sure you can make a very thoughtful and telling contribution to this absolutely final opportunity to bring the private parking sector under sensible control. If we fail in doing so, the sector will have a licence to print money, with British motorists being ravaged even more than they are currently (over 11 million private parking tickets issued in the past 12 months - now a £1billion easy-pickings sector!).  Last chance saloon time.

Mouse007

ms966 said:

Mouse007 said:

@ms996 if you reply to the above I will be encouraged to help (too many ask and disappear without trace)

Thank you, much appreciated!

You're a night owl!

8.1 of your AST Agreement - the right to quiet enjoyment without interruption

Absolutely no mention of parking or permit

The "Dwelling known as" is not further defined but you have the advert and correspondance confirming the dwelling includes a parking space. A space that can only be accessed with a fob to open the gate.

Have a look at the sign - take a good picture. What do they actually say? I bet it is something like Permit Holders Only. That is forbidding, it it not making an offer to park. The signs can not therefore create a contract in contrast to the Parking Eye v Beavis case. When the County Court claim comes in I further bet they will claim on the basis of contractual obligation. Your response, what contract?

Meanwhile you already have a contract, an AST Agreement, and from the contract negotiations the right to park, evidenced by both possession of the key fob to a gated compound and the narrative in the property particulars.

No signs, even if they were correctly worded, can displace your pre existing rights. While you might have displayed a permit out of courtesy you were under no obligation to actually do so.

Defence: Lack of contract, forbidding signs.

My son's Defence and later Witness Statement are in my thread mentioned above.

Edit to add:

The interuption to your quiet enjoyment is a breach of your AST Agreement. You should complain again to the Landlord and their agents pointing out that this breach of contract, known as a derogation of grant (google that) is actionable in law.