Court defence DCB Legal for parking charge at my residential car park

Dodgeviper76

Car1980 said:

Dodgeviper76 said:

Car1980 said:

The contract states "Vehicles must park in the correct marked bay and clearly display an authorised permit in the windscreen"

This clearly means flat owner 1 can't park in flat owner 2's space. Or flat owner 1 must display a permit if they park in their own bay.

Whether the lessees have rights over those spaces is a separate issue, but find out what your lease says anyway. Or find it from another owner-occupier. Because despite this, you'll probably want to see if they can be kicked off site.

But an owner's vehicle parked in a visitors space isn't a breach of the contract. It doesn't say "Flat owners must not park in the visitors spaces."

"Correct marked bay" means a numbered bay. 

Even if they were arguing otherwise:

Consumer Rights Act 2015

Contract terms that may have different meanings

(1)If a term in a consumer contract, or a consumer notice, could have different meanings, the meaning that is most favourable to the consumer is to prevail.

Thank you for your reply. I will try find my tenancy agreement to see what it says. Just to add, my sister who lives with me has a permit that says the flat number and she parks in that space, the landlord gave me another permit with an A after the number of the flat and said I can park in visitor bays with that

Not the tenancy, the lease. Sounds like you are renting, so get it off your landlord or another owner-occupier in the development.

Thank you, I will get in touch with landlord and ask for a copy of the parking situation part of the lease.

Dodgeviper76

Coupon-mad said:

Gr1pr said:

So its Bay Sentry via DCB Legal , issue date 7th August,  deadline date is 4pm on 9th September 

The claim will likely be discontinued by the new year, as long as you defend it & follow the process.

  

Hi, thank you for your reply, I’m struggling a little to understand which defence it is. Would it be the new one with 10 paragraphs? And do I just copy that and then put down in paragraph 3 that my permit was displayed? 

Coupon-mad

Yes. Easy, innit?! Show us your draft para 3. However you need MORE about your right to park and less about the permit.

Read other residential defences. There is one linked in post 2 of the NEWBIES thread you can plagiarise a paragraph from.

Dodgeviper76

Coupon-mad said:

Yes. Easy, innit?! Show us your draft para 3. However you need MORE about your right to park and less about the permit.

Read other residential defences. There is one linked in post 2 of the NEWBIES thread you can plagiarise a paragraph from.

The facts known to the Defendant:

Background

2. It is admitted that at all material times the Defendant is the registered keeper and probable driver of vehicle registration mark XXZZZ which is the subject of these proceedings.

3. It is admitted that on [date] the Defendant's vehicle was almost certainly parked at [location] because this was the defendant’s home, where they displayed their permit and were de facto authorised to park a roadworthy vehicle.

Frustration of Contract

4. Maintaining the residents' rights to peaceful enjoyment of the property does not include allowing everyone to be unfairly charged by a lurking ex-wheelclamper for normal life necessities like parking to unload groceries, building materials, etc.  Clearly there is no 'legitimate interest' supporting these enhanced parking charges in these circumstances and also no reason for the Claimant to sit on their hands for 6 years hoping to profit even further from exaggerated interest calculations.

 

Authority to Park and Primacy of Contract

5. It is denied that the Defendant or lawful users of his/her vehicle were in breach of any parking conditions or were not permitted to park in circumstances where an express permission to park had been granted to the Defendant permitting the above mentioned vehicle to be parked by the current occupier and leaseholder of [address], whose leaseholder agreement permits the parking of vehicle(s) on land. The Defendant avers that there was an absolute entitlement to park deriving from the terms of the lease, which cannot be fettered by any alleged parking terms. The lease terms provide the right to park a vehicle in the relevant parking area, without limitation as to type of vehicle, ownership of vehicle, the user of the vehicle. A copy of the leasehold agreement will be provided to the Court, together with witness evidence that prior permission to park had been given.

6. The Defendant avers that the operator’s signs cannot (i) override the existing rights enjoyed by residents and their visitors and (ii) that parking easements cannot retrospectively and unilaterally be restricted where provided for within the lease. The Defendant will rely upon the judgments on appeal of HHJ Harris QC in Jopson v Homeguard Services Ltd (2016) and of Sir Christopher Slade in K-Sultana Saeed v Plustrade Ltd [2001] EWCA Civ 2011. The Court will be referred to further similar fact cases in the event that this matter proceeds to trial.

7. Accordingly it is denied that:

7.1. there was any agreement as between the Defendant or driver of the vehicle and the Claimant

7.2. the Claimant has suffered loss or damage or that there is a lawful basis to pursue a claim for loss.

thank you, ive found one of your threads. Would this be suitable to slot into the 10 paragraph defence template? 

Coupon-mad

Yes add it in... if it doesn't all fit in on MCOL remove the last para of the Template Defence which is optional.

And please join us this month. Make a difference because the MHCLG had got a lot wrong.

FIGHTBACK ALERT:

Please do the government's Public Consultation. We need every poster to complete this vital survey before the deadline.

See this thread:

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6617396/parking-code-of-practice-consultation-now-extended-closes-friday-26th-september/p1

We understand that you may need some pointers. It looks laborious, we get that. It doesn't matter; no knowledge is needed except re your own experiences so you can call out a scam industry and you'll protect millions of motorists and help change the law. 

I've written some guidance to help focus new posters on the issues. I've covered almost every question, providing ideas if you agree with our stance on things like DRFs, which we say must be banned.

Ordinary people like you are falling victim to this scam 15 million times per annum. Motorists need your voice added please.

CLOSES ON FRIDAY 26th SEPTEMBER.

Dodgeviper76

Coupon-mad said:

Yes add it in... if it doesn't all fit in on MCOL remove the last para of the Template Defence which is optional.

And please join us this month. Make a difference because the MHCLG had got a lot wrong.

FIGHTBACK ALERT:

Please do the government's Public Consultation. We need every poster to complete this vital survey before the deadline.

See this thread:

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6617396/parking-code-of-practice-consultation-now-extended-closes-friday-26th-september/p1

We understand that you may need some pointers. It looks laborious, we get that. It doesn't matter; no knowledge is needed except re your own experiences so you can call out a scam industry and you'll protect millions of motorists and help change the law. 

I've written some guidance to help focus new posters on the issues. I've covered almost every question, providing ideas if you agree with our stance on things like DRFs, which we say must be banned.

Ordinary people like you are falling victim to this scam 15 million times per annum. Motorists need your voice added please.

CLOSES ON FRIDAY 26th SEPTEMBER.

Thank you so much for your help, I feel way out my depth with all this. I will put it all together and enter it on mcol tomorrow when I get home from work. Once I’ve done this I will certainly look at helping out with the above. 

Dodgeviper76

I’ve just arrived home from work to see the guy that issues the parking tickets parked in the visitor bays with only half of a permit displayed, asked him why hasn’t he got his on display and all he said was he has, jumped in his van and drove off. Seems the rules don’t apply to them. I did take pictures. 

Coupon-mad

Dodgeviper76 said:

I’ve just arrived home from work to see the guy that issues the parking tickets parked in the visitor bays with only half of a permit displayed, asked him why hasn’t he got his on display and all he said was he has, jumped in his van and drove off. Seems the rules don’t apply to them. I did take pictures. 

Well done. Challenge these people and certainly take pictures. Nasty companies who are not to be paid, all the time that they remain unregulated.