PCM - Moorside Legal - Residential parking charge

pineapple_butter99

Hello all,

I have read the 'newbies' thread in great detail and have used it up until this stage, however, I need some further assistance please as I'm kinda freaking out. The PCC in question is PCM UK Ltd (who are aggressive money-grabbing *insert colourful word here* !!!)

To summarise, I am the owner of a leasehold flat which comes with its own parking space, that, according to the lease agreement, I am the legal owner of. These are patrolled by PCM. On 7th May 2024, a relative of mine was parked in my bay, I forgot to put a permit on display and we were literally there for 30mins if that. They placed the PCN on windscreen of the car, and unfortunately I jumped the gun and stupidly appealed the following day, rather than wait for NTK, as I am not the registered keeper of the vehicle in question. I did not however state who the driver was at the time. I stated primacy of contract as my main defence as my lease agreement does not dictate that I have to show a permit. This was declined and so I appealed further to IAS and on 8th June 2024, they dismissed my appeal in favour of PCM as I 'should have ensured a valid permit was displayed'. They declared the charge was 'lawfully incurred' and they are not further able to intervene.

On 10th July 2024, I contacted the building developer and landlord of my estate, Bellway and they very unhelpfully stated that 'PCM are a separate company and we do not have any influence on parking tickets that are issued'.

PCM proceeded to send me multiple debt recovery letters from Trace, all of which I ignored on the advice of this forum and I also mentioned in my initial appeal that if they 'choose to decline my appeal and wishes to pursue this matter further, I want to make it clear that I will have no hesitation in taking this matter to court and will not hesitate to seek legal redress for any costs, inconvenience, or stress incurred by me as a result of this unwarranted enforcement action.'

Just when I thought PCM had realised they had no case, on 27th Jan 2025, I received a letter from a company called Moorside Legal advising me that they have been instructed by PCM to collect the outstanding balance of now £170! It is not an LBC but I feel that one is pending any time now and I am feeling super anxious about it, so I am just trying to get ahead of the curve.

I have sent Bellway a more assertive e-mail asking them to help me cancel this ludicrous charge, but I feel they are going to give me the same wet wipe reply.

As per the forum, it states to ignore this letter until an LBC comes through, is that correct? Also, can I check, as I am not the registered keeper of the vehicle and I have not confirmed who the driver was, can I use POFA as a defence? I didn't fully understand the legal talk around this.

Is it worth sending Moorside Legal an e-mail to advise I have previously appealed this and that I am not the driver at the time of contravention?

TIA.

ChirpyChicken

It appears they think you appealed as the driver.
You could name the driver when you get the LBC and use the discharge of keeper liability in the defence.

Coupon-mad

Or...choose to see it off yourself, which will help you to tell PCM that you WILL NOT display a permit and have NEVER authorised them to touch cars on your land.

You never 'opted in' and for the avoidance of doubt, your owned bay is permanently opted out of their little money-grabbing scheme. Any PCNs issued or photos taken of vehicles in your bay will be both data breaches and fall under the tort of trespass. Further, PCM employees and sub-contractors are all banned from setting foot in your owned bay (or parking in it, which will attract a parking charge of £100 per time, as agreed by PCM receiving this email).

I would not name the relative. That's throwing them under the bus!

You are here on MSE and you can win, learn from this experience and use the case to prevent future PCM harassment against you and your visitors, and to lead by example to your fellow leaseholders.

Then work together to get PCM kicked out.  That's the long-term aim.

This is who your managing agents has let loose to harass you all: ex-wheelclampers who were exposed as rogue traders on BBC's Watchdog:

http://parking-prankster.blogspot.com/2015/05/is-it-pcm-uk-who-make-up-stuff-all-time.html?m=1

This is how leaseholders can work together to force PCM out, please read the full thread as a worked example:
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/5997200/pcm-company-introduced/p1


Re the fake 'PCN ' invoice:

You could just wait for the LBC then respond vaguely (see NEWBIES thread for the LBC reply) then await the claim form,

... then in your paragraph 6 onwards (after the standard first 5 paragraphs seen in every recent Moorside Legal case defence and the link to the Chan and Akande appeal cases) state that the Claimant is mistaken and has no cause of action. The Defendant cannot be held liable, being neither the driver, keeper nor owner of this vehicle. The Defendant only disputed the unfair PCN because they are the flat owner and bay owner and allowed their relative to park in the bay.  There was no agreed contract with the Claimant. The Defendant is unconnected to the vehicle and not liable for a parking charge.  The lease does not require a permit to be held or displayed. Given the fact that the Defendant holds legal title in the parking space, they can categorically state that the Claimant does not have the mandatory 'landowner authority' that is a pre-requisite of the DVLA KADOE data release rules. This unsolicited 'scam' regime attempts to operate the Defendant's land as if it was a commercial car parking space hawked out by PCM who are offering it to all-comers at £100 per day; an absurd idea and this farce was never authorised in this particular bay.

KoalaMSEF

"On 10th July 2024, I contacted the building developer and landlord of my estate, Bellway and they very unhelpfully stated that 'PCM are a separate company and we do not have any influence on parking tickets that are issued'."

Pretty typical for MA to come up with that. MA has a contract with private parking companies (PPC thereafter). PPCs are unrelated third party (separate company) to you (leaseholder). They have everything to do with MA/landlord. 

Unless your lease says that you have to display a permit for parking, demanding a permit and charging £100/day for not doing so is a breach of contract (lease variation). 

It is useful to go back to Bellway. You can look at Parkingprankster's posts, especially, the LBC to the landlord. It will give you a good idea how to ping down the MA. 

Before it goes to the court, any charge can still/always be cancelled through MA/landlord. 

h2g2

This is one of those situations where you can certainly take legal action against the landlord or management company.

If they issue a claim, you can counter-claim for trespass (see here: https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/324523-ukpc-issuing-pcns-on-our-private-business-land-without-a-contract-off-to-court-ukpc-liable-for-trespass-success/).

If you feel like going on the offensive, you could even start looking into injunction proceedings against them.

pineapple_butter99

I sent another email to MA earlier this week and they gave the same poxy response:

'For the reasons explained in my email dated 10th July 2023 I am unable to assist you with this matter.'

It's Bellway. I do not know how to get them to take me seriously. Please someone help me draft a letter or something so they can cancel this PCN.

Coupon-mad

They are notorious for not listening regarding parking scams, so forget them.

Like I already said above:

Re the fake 'PCN ' invoice:

You could just wait for the LBC then respond vaguely (see NEWBIES thread for the LBC reply) then await the claim form,

Nellymoser

Make your MP aware.

There is a small group of MPs saying this industry needs statutory regulation. Evidence proves voluntary measures and sector's recently introduced new code are still failing to protect and treat motorists fairly.

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/81193608/#Comment_81193608

Please write to your MP ask them to support their fellow MPs action. It's easy with Poster Smoof's template letter, just copy/alter to suit and sign petition 🙏

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6583618/ive-written-to-my-mp

KoalaMSEF

pineapple_butter99 said:

I sent another email to MA earlier this week and they gave the same poxy response:

'For the reasons explained in my email dated 10th July 2023 I am unable to assist you with this matter.'

It's Bellway. I do not know how to get them to take me seriously. Please someone help me draft a letter or something so they can cancel this PCN.

You probably need to talk 'legal' in your letter than a simple message. 

Here are the templates for the potential counter claim. https://www.scribd.com/document/348759691/LBC-to-Landowner 

1. This is for the landowner, i.e., freeholder. Its name should be on the lease. 

2. If you want to press MA, you can find the template to MC (management company) through the link above. 

3. Read through letter (quite long) first to give you a sense of what your arguments are. 

4. Make sure that you read your lease.

5. Replace the relevant parts of lease in the template with your lease details (section and direct quotation) AND your situation.

There is a lot of work to do things in this way. Alternatively, you can wait the claim form and defend it in the court, and you can find templates and advice in this forum. 

pineapple_butter99

I have received a Letter of Claim from Moorside. I read the Newbies thread, so to confirm - the advice is NOT to send back the reply form? It states I have 30 days to fill and return it otherwise it will result in court proceedings. Is the e-mail alone sufficient? 

This is my draft letter that I plan on sending:

Dear Sirs,

I refer to your letter of claim dated XXXX

I confirm that my address for service for the time being is as follows, and any older address must be erased from your records.

XXXXX

The alleged debt is disputed and any court proceedings will be vigorously defended.

I am sourcing and seeking independent advice and as such, I formally request that this matter be put on hold for an additional 30 days, in accordance with the Pre-Action Protocol for Debt Claims 2017 ('the PAP').

The Defendant would like to outline the reasons for disputing the claim as follows:

1.    The Defendant was not the driver nor the registered keeper of the vehicle

The Defendant cannot be held liable, being neither the driver, keeper, nor owner of this vehicle. The Defendant only disputed the ticket because they are the bay owner and allowed their relative to park in the bay. The Defendant is unconnected to the vehicle and not liable for a parking charge.

2.    The land on which the parking bay is on, is privately owned by the Defendant

The only signed agreement is between the Defendant and the Building’s Management Company. The Defendant has no agreement with the Claimant. I refer to Schedule 9, section 5 of the signed lease agreement, ‘Subject to the Tenant paying the Part C Proportion of the Transferee’s Proportion, has the right to park a single private motor vehicle on the Allocated Parking Space’. The principle of primacy of contract dictates that any agreements between parties, especially contractual agreements, take precedence over subsequent agreements or attempts to enforce terms by third parties, such as private parking companies.

The lease does not require a permit to be held or displayed. Given the fact that the Defendant holds legal title in the parking space, they can categorically state that the Claimant does not have the mandatory 'landowner authority' that is a pre-requisite of the DVLA KADOE data release rules.

On these grounds, the Claimant is mistaken and has no cause of action. As your client cannot pursue me as driver or keeper, it would be an abuse of the court’s process for your client to issue a claim against me.

If you persist in processing my data and in the event of filing a court claim, take note that I will file a Part 20 counterclaim for no less than £500.  This will be claimed as damages for distress and loss of earnings arising as a result of a clear breach of the Protection From Harassment Act 1997.

Anything to add on or amend please?

h2g2

> If you persist in processing my data and in the event of filing a court claim, take note that I will file a Part 20 counterclaim for no less than £500.  This will be claimed as damages for distress and loss of earnings arising as a result of a clear breach of the Protection From Harassment Act 1997.

I'm not sure how far you'd get with this in practice. Damages for distress basically never fly in this country unless it is extreme.

What does the LBC actually say? Does it claim you are the driver or keeper of the vehicle?