UKPA - Moorside legal - Money claim online

Coupon-mad

Ignore them and await further court directions.

Hozah isn't the Claimant or on the signs I presume? UKPA isn't the same legal entity as Hozah.

krisboats

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/81908523#Comment_81908523

No it's not mentioned anywhere before this. Looks like hozzah subby it out to UKPA

Jame4ters

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/81908524#Comment_81908524

Technically Hozah Parking isn’t Hozah Parking Ltd and UK Parking Administration isn’t UK Parking Administration Ltd. Whether that invalidates the agreement someone with more knowledge of contract law would have to give you guidance but it does seem a bit slapdash

patient_dream

What a contradiction in that Moorside letter ?

 The £70does not represent the cost of recovery 

and then they say ……

There are however also costs incurred by our client in relation to debt recovery

Totally misleading and will probably have a judge in hoots of laughter ?

The words plain stupid comes to mind. It all adds up to a DEBT RECOVERY CHARGE

Clearly Moorside are misleading themselves and you plus the court

When government approved ATA's and POFA debt collection charges were not part, it is an invented add-on called the OSNER SCAM OF ZZPS. The money scam was approved by the BPA and IPC. Just two private members clubs adding fakes ?

AND … Moorside ignoring the Supreme Court ruling.

Castle

So they haven't provided a copy of the actual agreement dated 07/07/2022.

krisboats

Well, i've had a response. looks like i have a court hearing on friday 5th june.

Dear Sirs
 
Our Client: UK Parking Administration Ltd

Claim Number: M6*******

Hearing details: 05/06/2026 10:00 

We act for the Claimant in the above matter.

By way of filing, please find attached the Claimant's Witness Statement.

Yours faithfully

Hannah Shaw

They also included a pdf with the dates of contraventions, map of the site etc. Said i never appealed the fines originally, which i did and got a template rejection.

Its just one inaccuracy after another from this case.

Coupon-mad

Errrm what about your WS? Surely you had a Hearing Order from your court and had a deadline that passed last week…

krisboats

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/82018120#Comment_82018120

I had to send an ammended defence and thats it. this email regarding the witness statement for the claimant is the only thing i've had submitted and that was via email on 10th april. i hadn't heard anything so decided to search my emails for the case number

ChirpyChicken

Get your ws in asap like tomorrow

Coupon-mad

You've missed a letter from your court. The Claimants have received a Hearing Order, so why didn't you? It was sent by post.

Get the WS & evidence in tomorrow!

So they want £680 for an unpleaded number of PCNs between two consecutive dates.

We guess they've now elaborated on that woefully pleaded POC. That's not OK (no times were pleaded, nor even how many PCNs are pursued!) and you need to say so in your WS as well as telling your story and attaching relevant exhibits (evidence) and case law.

The WS by @JackR1 (April 2026) can be used as your base as it includes HHJ Moloney's specific Cambridge (first) transcript from ParkingEye v Beavis which you need, as well as Wilkinson, Chan and Akande. All relevant for you but (of course) don't copy his story, write your own facts including why you were on site, what happened (and your appeal that they pretend didn't happen) and don't copy his section about Edward & Smith.

And don't forget to add the point that the landowner authority references a completely different operator. As was said above:

UKPA isn't the same legal entity as Hozah.

Also mention that they've asked for 8% interest (on the whole inflated £680) from the day BEFORE the vehicle was even there! Ludicrous greed.

Show us your draft URGENTLY tomorrow. Use JackR1's version as the base because it gives you the WS style and case law.