PCM UK - Allocated parking at home

tofrom

Thanks for your reply.

Honestly I'm getting to the stage of accepting paying more money overall for legal fees etc. just to stick it to them. The issue is is that this is a block of flats so I cannot really demand them to remove the signs/stop trespassing as there are about 60 other parking bays. Some of the residents are "happy" with the service too.

I have managed to appeal 2 of the most recent tickets but the other 4 have been passed on to the debt collectors so expecting letters for those to come through any day now.

I'm !!!!!! off about the management company too (another scam industry) because this is purely of their doing. I know for a fact that they can cancel these as someone in the building has had that done couple years ago. These guys are new and took over only a couple months ago but it's none of my business as far as I am concerned. They inherit everything, so it's their issue now too.

h2g2

> I cannot really demand them to remove the signs/stop trespassing

Sure you can. You wouldn't allow other residents to offer up your living room at £100/day to anyone willing to pay that - even if they were happy with it. Why accept it for a parking space?

MrJenkinsEsq

Trespass needs possession. Most flat leases don't demise the bay. They grant an exclusive right to park in it on the landlord's land. That's not possession, so trespass probably isn't available.

Demised land is typically marked red. Other colours typically denote rights. The space is edged green which indicates a right not a demise.

The parking company still isn't allowed to interfere with the right, but they're not trespassing.

tofrom

Thanks for the clarification, you learn something new everyday.

I've just had the following reply from PCM.

Thank you for your email.

We can confirm that Parking Charge Notices (PCN) xxx, xxx, xxx and xxx have now been passed to our Collection Agency.

As your cases are now with Debt Recovery Plus Ltd, any correspondence and/or payments must made directly with them as we are no longer able to deal with this case.

You can do this using one of the following methods:

Via phone – 020 8234 6775
Via website – Customer Enquiry | Debt Recovery Plus
Via post – Debt Recovery Plus Ltd, PO Box 219, Manchester, M34 0DG

We can also confirm we are in receipt of your appeals. Your PCNs xxx and xxx have remained on hold and will continue to do so until a decision is made.

Please note, the Appeals Team will respond within 28 days of receipt.

Unfortunately, as we are unable to discuss a dispute, any further correspondence relating to the Parking Charge Notices sent to this email address will not be responded to.

So do I just wait for the court letters to show up?

James_Poisson

Yes ignore the halfwitted mutterings of Debt Recovery Plus.

Coupon-mad

@tofrom
"do I just wait for the court letters to show up?"

Personally, I'd send a complaint by email to PCM (see their website complaints policy), and head it up:

FORMAL COMPLAINT REJECTING ALL PARKING CHARGES AND THE UNSOLICITED PERMIT SCHEME

cc in the managing agent, telling them all that:

• with all six PCNs, PCM have breached the code of practice clause 14 because I have lease rights to that bay that cannot be overruled by requiring a permit;
• my right to park in that bay means any attempt to interfere or charge for its use is a derogation from grant. In common with all leasehold owners, I do not need a permit;
• there is no relevant contract or relevant obligation to display or renew a permit that a leaseholder doesn't need;
• It was only displayed in the first place for a quiet life as nothing more than a courtesy, but introducing a scheme like this without consulting leaseholders is an attempt to supersede and alter the existing grant in the lease and this breaches s37 of the Landlord and Tenant Act;
• I object to the parking charges and the whole scheme in the strongest terms and unequivocally reject the unsolicited permit idea that was foisted upon me as resident without due process being followed;
• I will not be bound by any terms unlawfully imposed upon me and hereby confirm that my allocated space (granted as my property for my unfettered use) is not to be touched by PCM and is not - and never was - fettered by your little scheme;
• In addition to my allocated space marked in green, I also have rights of way including a right to use the 'car parking spaces within the Building that are intended from time to time to be used by the tenants in the Building' (see a copy of my lease attached);
• As previously decided in the unreported case in Newman v Jones, a right to park appurtenant to the whole of a block of flats exercisable by all of the occupiers of the flats and their visitors can arise under s.62(2) of the Law of Property Act 1925 where there has been a prior settled practice of parking by occupiers, even if not all of them did so.

In this block/estate, neither the residents, nor even a majority of the leaseholders, were consulted when the managing agents contracted with an external company regarding a parking regime, and due to this significant oversight, PCM have been operating against my lease and this is indisputably a derogation from grant.

PCM must cease and desist and I will be calling for other residents to join me in calling for PCM to be removed from the estate. Both companies' actions have imposed and caused a private nuisance, and PCM had no 'reasonable cause' to obtain my data from the DVLA. Yet you did so, six times.

I will counterclaim for damages for data abuse and harassment, if PCM persist and file a small claim for any charges imposed on me at any time during my residency.

The legal position - derogation from grant and breach of L&T Act 1987

Neither a Managing Agent nor the site freeholder have any lawful right to take unilateral steps to change or remove such a fundamental amenity as parking.

Further, you/the freeholder may not impose (or allow an agent to impose) 'parking charges' not covered within the leases, nor effectively supersede or alter the leases at this estate without the proper leaseholder vote and consensus.

Binding authorities which support my position include:

(i) Kettel v Bloomfold [2012] EWHC 1422 (Ch) and

(ii) Saeed v Plustrade Limited [2001] EWCA CIV 201, as well as

(iii) the Winchester County court case of Roger Davey v UKPC [2013] where, in an Order by consent, the parking firm gave undertakings to the Court not to enter the Claimant's land and not to place any parking charge notices on the cars. The Court ordered damages and costs in a total of £1500.00 which included the cost an injunction obtained by Mr Davey, and last but not least

(iv)  Duchess of Bedford House RTM Company Ltd & ors v Campden Hill Gate Limited [2023] EWCA Civ 1470, where the Court of Appeal found in favour of the leaseholders in that the rights available to the head lessee were capable of being passed onto the current leaseholders. They did not have to accede to a permit scheme nor pay the parking charges that had plagued them.

The managing agents are requested to tell PCM to cancel all parking charges and to leave the site because the scheme is unlawful, and PCM already know it breaches their industry Code of Practice.

I will not be registering for any permit again. I do not need one and am not bound by PCM's cardboard signs. They are not permitted to monitor my bay nor mine or my visitors vehicle(s).

I trust I make myself clear but in case I ever need to defend a jumped-up case from PCM or any parking firm operating at my home, I would be grateful if the managing agents will kindly now furnish me with:

1. a copy of the Head Lease, and
2. the name of a Director who can, if necessary, be ordered to appear in court and to supply a witness statement on behalf of the freeholder and/or managing agents who unwisely contracted with PCM.

I expect a substantive reply and apology within 28 days.

yours faithfully,

tofrom

@Coupon-mad, that's amazing, thank you! Much appreciated.