PCN in residential car park (Do I have a leg to stand on!?)

marina_madness

Thanks for all the responses.

I'm not sure when people refer to the 'lease' if they are referring to the lease for my flat, (I own it outright, but it is leasehold rather than freehold), or for the car space. To clarify, I have a numbered car bay which comes as part of the flat. I don't pay for it and any car can park in it; hence why it was fine for my mum to park in it.

I tried to do the right thing by not parking in one of the many empty bays that night, so I am 'guilty' of parking outside of an allocated bay as stated on the sign. 

Coupon-mad

We are talking about the lease to your flat, which will also have reference to common areas, rights of way, etc.

Leasehold (not freehold) is the most common title of flat ownership. I owned a leasehold flat years ago. You will have a lease which specifies or implies your right of access and to peaceful enjoyment.  It helps your position.

KoalaMSEF

marina_madness said:

Thanks for all the responses.

I'm not sure when people refer to the 'lease' if they are referring to the lease for my flat, (I own it outright, but it is leasehold rather than freehold), or for the car space. To clarify, I have a numbered car bay which comes as part of the flat. I don't pay for it and any car can park in it; hence why it was fine for my mum to park in it.

I tried to do the right thing by not parking in one of the many empty bays that night, so I am 'guilty' of parking outside of an allocated bay as stated on the sign. 

Lease is the legal document that set out the covenants that you (as leaseholder), landowner (freeholder), and management agent must observe. 

It has nothing to do with you own your flat outright. It is a legal document that says what you can and cannot do with your flat (English system, different elsewhere). It is important because it says how you can park and where/in which way you can park. 

The complication here is the private parking company your management agent (MA) has 'hired', who is not in the lease but sometimes, tries to impose restriction that overrides, contradicts the clauses in the lease, or simply makes up things. 

For example, we have a numbered bay that is in our lease that comes with our flat (leasehold). We do not pay for it because it is part of our lease. Like what happens in your case, in theory, we can park in that bay without any interference. However, MA 'appointed' a private parking company to manage the ground. The signage says that we have to display a permit EVEN we are parking in our OWN allocated bay. For any reason that we did not display that permit, we were ticketed EVEN when we parked in our OWN allocated bay. 

That's why I asked you what "pre-authorised' actually means, or whether you are required to display a permit. If in your case, no permit is needed, then what kind of "pre-authorisation' it talks about.

That's also why it matters to read your lease because lease is a contract and the signage from the parking company is also a contract. The lease is a higher level of contract than the commercial contract from the parking company. 

The frustration is - for people who try to be sensible, e.g., not parking on the pavement, they got 'penalised'. (see that happens all the time in my block). There should be visitor parking bays in your block (again it can be tricky with this 'pre-authorisation.'

Mullerice

KoalaMSEF said:

You said that spaces aren't linked to specific cars. I assume that your mum's car has been 'pre-authorised' in some way (either through registration or permit display)? If not, they probably will receive a PCN saying that they parked in a bay that is not allocated to them, since you are the owner. 

Residential parking cases involves two angles - lease (MA/freeholder) or signage (parking company)

From the angle of lease, it depends on what your lease says about the parking. Although your lease overrides the commercial 'contract' of the parking company, your lease has to say something other than that you can only park in your allocated bay. 

From the angle of signage, as far as the parking companies' concern, you breached the 'contract' (i.e., T&C on the signage) because you did not park in your own allocated bay. Parking sensibly is irrelevant in light of the 'contract'. 

Your lease should give you some idea about your case. 

The lease governs what the leaseholder can do on the land, and if it doesn’t mention a third party can enforce the lease terms then I don’t see how a PCN is the remedy from breaking the contract with the landlord. 

There’s plenty of examples of people winning in court when not parked in a bay (for example to unload furniture) and the judge ruled that’s fine. 

I’d be exploring the route of third party not being privy to the lease therefore cannot try to extort a penalty from OP who was simply using an easement in the lease (loading / unloading items but no bay to park in temporarily without infringing on someone else’s space 

KoalaMSEF

Mullerice said:

KoalaMSEF said:

You said that spaces aren't linked to specific cars. I assume that your mum's car has been 'pre-authorised' in some way (either through registration or permit display)? If not, they probably will receive a PCN saying that they parked in a bay that is not allocated to them, since you are the owner. 

Residential parking cases involves two angles - lease (MA/freeholder) or signage (parking company)

From the angle of lease, it depends on what your lease says about the parking. Although your lease overrides the commercial 'contract' of the parking company, your lease has to say something other than that you can only park in your allocated bay. 

From the angle of signage, as far as the parking companies' concern, you breached the 'contract' (i.e., T&C on the signage) because you did not park in your own allocated bay. Parking sensibly is irrelevant in light of the 'contract'. 

Your lease should give you some idea about your case. 

The lease governs what the leaseholder can do on the land, and if it doesn’t mention a third party can enforce the lease terms then I don’t see how a PCN is the remedy from breaking the contract with the landlord. 

There’s plenty of examples of people winning in court when not parked in a bay (for example to unload furniture) and the judge ruled that’s fine. 

I’d be exploring the route of third party not being privy to the lease therefore cannot try to extort a penalty from OP who was simply using an easement in the lease (loading / unloading items but no bay to park in temporarily without infringing on someone else’s space 

The lease is an agreement between leaseholder, freehold and MA. There is no place for the third party (PPC). 

Confused about "PCN as a remedy from breaking the contract with the landlord." The leaseholder's argument is - there is no contractual relationship between PPC and the leaseholder because PPC is an irrelevant third party. 

However, the PPC's argument is that their signage is the contract that overrides the lease, which we all know is WRONG. This is what I mean "as far as the parking company's concern." This argument will be in every appeal rejection letter, including IAS, which we have seen plenty in this forum. 

When preparing documents for the court, a full lease and the specific clauses about parking in the lease, whether it is about allocated parking (in case mum also receives a PCN) or easement (loading and unloading), is still needed. 

I keep finding parking prankster's posts insightful, some of the LBCs to landowner/MA that parking prankster referred to are among the best educational material to understand the intricacy of the relationship mess in the residential parking cases. 

1505grandad

"However, the PPC's argument is that their signage is the contract that overrides the lease, which we all know is WRONG."

FYI (@OP) -  even the latest unregulated CoP (soon to be replaced by a proper regulated PPCoP by the Government) recognise/acknowledge  this scam:-

https://www.britishparking.co.uk/write/Documents/AOS/NEW Redesigned Documents/sectorsingleCodeofPractice.pdf

THE SINGLE CODE OF PRACTICE

14

Relationship with landowner 

NOTE 3: Particular care is needed to establish appropriate contractual terms, including the application of parking terms and conditions, in respect of controlled land where leaseholders may have rights that cannot be qualified or overruled e.g. by imposing a requirement on the resident of an apartment block to display a permit to park in contravention of their rights under their lease, or to ensure that free parking periods do not breach planning consents.