Your browser isn't supported
It looks like you're using an old web browser. To get the most out of the site and to ensure guides display correctly, we suggest upgrading your browser now. Download the latest:

Welcome to the MSE Forums

We're home to a fantastic community of MoneySavers but anyone can post. Please exercise caution & report spam, illegal, offensive or libellous posts/messages: click "report" or email forumteam@.

Search
  • FIRST POST
    • akzy1990
    • By akzy1990 10th Jun 18, 5:38 PM
    • 27Posts
    • 6Thanks
    akzy1990
    Ace Security FIRST APPEAL ARGH!
    • #1
    • 10th Jun 18, 5:38 PM
    Ace Security FIRST APPEAL ARGH! 10th Jun 18 at 5:38 PM
    Hello everyone!!! I have been reading and reading and reading and its amazing to see such success!! My brain is frazzled now and with so much information to be taken in, i have been overwhelmed. I have read all about ACE and Gladstones appeals (i am at that stage too for 3 more from ACE but I have not responded to them at anytime so will post a thread at some point). I have appealed many fines and had good success however these people really really get under my skin, and I want to make it perfect!! I really want to shut them up. This was the letter I sent to appeal, and also what they sent back. As my emotions are getting the better of me, I just want some clarification and cool heads as I don't want to over do it and say the wrong thing. My appeal is as follows.......:

    You issued me with a parking ticket on . but I believe it was unlawfully issued. I will not be paying your demand for payment for the following:


    There was insufficient signage

    The car park in question has no clear signage to explain what the relevant parking restrictions are for RESIDENTS of the parking space. This means no contract can be formed with the landowner and all tickets are issued unlawfully. In addition, the parking space is private and paid for directly to the landlord. Nowhere does it state in the tenancy agreement, which was signed by the residents of the parking space, that you have the right to issue tickets to residents who pay for their parking. We pay for the parking space and these are the requirement in our legally binding document, Tenancy Agreement.

    The charge is disproportionate and not commercially justifiable

    The amount you have charged is not based upon any commercially justifiable loss to your company or the landowner. In my case, the 100 charge you are asking for far exceeds the cost to the landowner as the land owner is already being paid the correct sum for the parking. I therefore feel the charge you have asked for is excessive.

    Mitigating circumstances

    There are mitigating circumstances to explain why the vehicle was parked where it was and the charge should be waived for this reason. Please see attached evidence, which is an e-mail confirming that the car parked has been looked into and is registered property of a resident.


    Finally, I would like to ask you to prove your assertions of issuing tickets. I would like to ask for either a copy of the contract that binds yourselves with the landowner to issue tickets, which is my right in an appeal, or offer a witness statement as an alternative to the contract itself, that is signed by the landowner as per BPA Code of Practice 22.16b.

    If you choose to pursue me, please be aware that I will not enter into any correspondence and this will be the only letter you will receive from me until you answer the specific points raised in my letter.

    ......:

    After reading some info on the threads I know the commercially justifiable point is weak.

    Please find below the between our landlord and myself.

    Dear Landlord

    I hope all is well at the office and in general.

    I am e-mailing you the logbook of the car registered to .... in order to request a parking permit for our parking space. Also I sould like to thank you for contacting Ace Securities to hold off for at least a week. Thank you for taking the time to complete this request.

    ........:

    Dear Registered Owner,

    Just to confirm that Ace Security are aware & have logged your new cars registration for 1 week.

    Regards

    ........:

    After the one week a ticket was issued. Can I still do it??? Can I still appeal with the hope of winning???

    Hope someone can help, thanks everyone
    Last edited by akzy1990; 19-09-2018 at 10:01 PM. Reason: .
Page 1
    • Umkomaas
    • By Umkomaas 10th Jun 18, 5:49 PM
    • 20,205 Posts
    • 31,875 Thanks
    Umkomaas
    • #2
    • 10th Jun 18, 5:49 PM
    • #2
    • 10th Jun 18, 5:49 PM
    There's no appeal you can put to an IPC operator that will secure a cancellation of your ticket(s) - just doesn't happen. No point either in appealing via the IAS - you have an 80%+ chance of losing there too, giving the PPC the impetus (and an 'independent' adjudication to wave in front of a Judge) to issue court proceedings.

    You just need to see what the PPC's next move is. If it's a LBC or MCOL (see NEWBIES FAQ sticky, post #5 for acronyms) post #2 of the newbie sticky shows you how to deal with court proceedings.

    ACE are somewhat litigious, so you might well be seeing a Claim Form before too long. Very defendable and Glads can and do often make a hash of things.

    http://www.parkingappeals.info/companydata/Ace_Security_Services.html
    Last edited by Umkomaas; 10-06-2018 at 5:59 PM.
    Please note, we are not a legal, residential or credit advice forum, rather one that helps motorists fight private parking charges, primarily at the 'front-end' of the process.
    Give a man a fish, and you feed him for a day; show him how to catch fish, and you feed him for a lifetime.
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 10th Jun 18, 5:50 PM
    • 63,827 Posts
    • 76,482 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    • #3
    • 10th Jun 18, 5:50 PM
    • #3
    • 10th Jun 18, 5:50 PM
    After reading some info on the threads I know the commercially justifiable point is weak.
    In the contrary, a PPC would have to have commercial justification and a 'legitimate interest' in chargung a sum that is far higher than that in damages that might otherwise apply.

    What is weak (with no legs at all) is:

    The charge is disproportionate and not commercially justifiable
    The amount you have charged is not based upon any commercially justifiable loss to your company or the landowner. In my case, the 100 charge you are asking for far exceeds the cost to the landowner as the land owner is already being paid the correct sum for the parking. I therefore feel the charge you have asked for is excessive.

    Mitigating circumstances
    Aaaargggh!! Mitigating circumstances has no place and nor does 'loss'!

    Instead of coming to this forum, you used the TRULY AWFUL MSE template 'appeal' in the article about parking tickets on the main site. Horrible appeal, useless. They still have GPEOL in it, as if it's a thing.

    Never mind, even with our template appeal you would still be in the same position now and sitting on your hands ignoring them.

    And no-one tells you to appeal further with an IPC firm like this. No POPLA, no second appeal. That is made VERY clear in the NEWBIES thread post #3, that IAS is considered a kangaroo court. No-one succeeds:

    https://theipc.info/aos-members/a

    IPC firm, please don't ask what the ''next step'' is, or I will scream!!

    We succeed at court stage, almost every time (no risk of a CCJ, no big deal if lost).

    Read any other IPC thread, come back if that (court claim or LBC stage) happens, 'nuff said, nothing about debt collector letters please...no other questions at this stage, the answer is no to all. We will help you at court stage like with any IPC firm thread, all the same.

    NO RISK. NO CCJ as long as you do not ignore court papers, and keep the PPC updated if you move house, so you can't miss court papers within 6 years.
    Last edited by Coupon-mad; 10-06-2018 at 5:54 PM.
    PRIVATE 'PCN'? DON'T PAY BUT DON'T IGNORE IT UNLESS IN SCOTLAND OR NI
    TWO Clicks needed Look up, top of the page:
    Main site>>Forums>Household & Travel>Motoring>Parking Tickets Fines & Parking - read the NEWBIES THREAD
    • akzy1990
    • By akzy1990 10th Jun 18, 6:42 PM
    • 27 Posts
    • 6 Thanks
    akzy1990
    • #4
    • 10th Jun 18, 6:42 PM
    Their first response
    • #4
    • 10th Jun 18, 6:42 PM
    I have read all that information and that has helped!! Next will be a thread on the gladstone's stuff as they I have requested a PAP form from them which I need to send back before the 25/06/2018. The PPC replied this.......:

    Dear .....

    Unless there are extenuating circumstances, due to the Data projection Act, we can only discuss a Charge Notice with the driver responsible for parking the vehicles at the location prior to this Charge Notice being issued. Please can you confirm if you were the driver at the time.

    This information must be received by us before the Charge notice reaches 28 days old; otherwise your letter will be disregarded for failing to comply with our terms and conditions for appeal.

    Please note if you do not have a valid permit you cannot park your vehicle on the land. you are fully aware of the requirements for a permit as you have enclosed evidence of you applying for one. Please also be aware that we are not members of the BPA and therefore will not comply with their regulations and will not supply you with any copy of our contract at this time. We would also refer to the Supreme Court case of Beavis Vs parking Eye in regards to your claims of disproportionate costs, it is not applicable. Finally all photographs taken of your vehicle are available at ... where you will see a warning sign directly in front of your vehicle. If you believe you have any right to park at Kite & Osprey House you must supply that evidence also, failure to supply any evidence to support your claims will result in it being assumed the evidence does not exist.


    .........: therefore I will be sending a formal appeal letter. I will do some research on the thread for a better template than the one than was used previously but there are any links please let me know. Also this sign that they speak about says, residents parking only and thats it, I am a resident. doesn't ask for a permit, neither does their signage at the entrance.
    • Redx
    • By Redx 10th Jun 18, 6:54 PM
    • 19,874 Posts
    • 25,173 Thanks
    Redx
    • #5
    • 10th Jun 18, 6:54 PM
    • #5
    • 10th Jun 18, 6:54 PM
    no links, the correct one and only template is in post #1 of the NEWBIES FAQ sticky thread near the top of this forum , third thread down


    dont start another new thread, just tack any queries onto this thread


    unless there is a just and valid reason to disclose a drivers details , do not do so


    there are no qick and easy answers to this topic, so stop looking for one


    ideally you get the MA or landowner to get any tickets by ACE cancelled , otherwise you are in it for 6 years
    Newbies !!
    Private Parking ticket? check the 2 sticky threads by coupon-mad and crabman in the Parking Tickets, Fines & Parking Board forum for the latest advice or maybe try pepipoo or C.A.G. or legal beagles forums if you need legal advice as well because this parking forum is not about debt collectors or legal matters per se
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 10th Jun 18, 8:16 PM
    • 63,827 Posts
    • 76,482 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    • #6
    • 10th Jun 18, 8:16 PM
    • #6
    • 10th Jun 18, 8:16 PM
    Dear .....

    Unless there are extenuating circumstances, due to the Data projection Act, we can only discuss a Charge Notice with the driver responsible for parking the vehicles at the location prior to this Charge Notice being issued. Please can you confirm if you were the driver at the time.
    An absolute dirty lie.

    Did they ever get your data from the DVLA as registered keeper? Then you can send them a SAR as the rk and they MUST respond, not lie about the DPA.
    PRIVATE 'PCN'? DON'T PAY BUT DON'T IGNORE IT UNLESS IN SCOTLAND OR NI
    TWO Clicks needed Look up, top of the page:
    Main site>>Forums>Household & Travel>Motoring>Parking Tickets Fines & Parking - read the NEWBIES THREAD
    • akzy1990
    • By akzy1990 20th Jun 18, 3:21 PM
    • 27 Posts
    • 6 Thanks
    akzy1990
    • #7
    • 20th Jun 18, 3:21 PM
    LBC Letter
    • #7
    • 20th Jun 18, 3:21 PM
    1) Letter sent to Ace Security

    2) In regards to 2 other fines, Gladstone have sent a LBC letter (ACE SECURITY)

    3) I requested a PAP and filled it in saying I dispute the debt. I have filled in the financial statement as I have nil income. They have asked reasons for disputing the debt, do I get together my defence statement and send it too them now? I have started writing my defence statement up thanks to some of the other threads. what should I do in regards to the PAP form as I don't want to handicap myself before I send it off. Many Thanks.
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 20th Jun 18, 3:43 PM
    • 63,827 Posts
    • 76,482 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    • #8
    • 20th Jun 18, 3:43 PM
    • #8
    • 20th Jun 18, 3:43 PM
    I have filled in the financial statement as I have nil income.
    I hope you mean you haven't filled that in?

    You only fill that crap form in, if you ADMIT owing money. You will be denying the entire claim, not admitting it, and they have no reason to see your income/expenditure.
    PRIVATE 'PCN'? DON'T PAY BUT DON'T IGNORE IT UNLESS IN SCOTLAND OR NI
    TWO Clicks needed Look up, top of the page:
    Main site>>Forums>Household & Travel>Motoring>Parking Tickets Fines & Parking - read the NEWBIES THREAD
    • akzy1990
    • By akzy1990 21st Jun 18, 9:14 PM
    • 27 Posts
    • 6 Thanks
    akzy1990
    • #9
    • 21st Jun 18, 9:14 PM
    I have NOT filled it in loool
    • #9
    • 21st Jun 18, 9:14 PM
    Its still at home and I haven't sent it off or anything. I got to acknowledge it somehow right? Just a letter saying I deny any liability and wrap it up as that?
    • KeithP
    • By KeithP 21st Jun 18, 10:11 PM
    • 10,567 Posts
    • 10,967 Thanks
    KeithP
    I got to acknowledge it somehow right? Just a letter saying I deny any liability and wrap it up as that?
    Originally posted by akzy1990
    Here's an idea... why don't you follow the guidance offered in post #2 of the NEWBIES FAQ sticky thread?

    In there you will find sample robust LBC responses that just need slight tweaking to fit your circumstances.
    .
    • akzy1990
    • By akzy1990 25th Jun 18, 10:39 PM
    • 27 Posts
    • 6 Thanks
    akzy1990
    Thank youuuu
    So much information!!! Amazing information and some relate directly with my case!!! Thank you for the direction. Below is the letter I will be sending in response to the LBC.

    Dear Sirs/Madam,!!!8232;!!!8232;

    I am in receipt of your Letter Before Claim of (DATE).!Your letter contains insufficient detail of the claim and fails to provide copies of evidence your client places reliance upon.!!!8232;!!!8232;

    Your client must know that on 01 October 2017 a new protocol is applicable to debt claims. Since proceedings have not yet been issued, the new protocol clearly applies and must be complied with.!

    !!!8232;!!!8232;Your letter lacks specificity and breaches both the requirements of the previously applicable Practice Direction - Pre-Action Conduct (paragraphs 6(a) and 6(c)) and the new Pre-Action Protocol for Debt Claims (paragraphs 3.1(a)-(d), 5.1 and 5.2. Please treat this letter as a formal request for all of the documents / information that the protocol now requires your client to provide. Your client must not issue proceedings without complying with that protocol. I reserve the right to draw any failure of the Claimant to comply with the protocol to the attention of the court and to ask the court to stay the claim and order your client to comply with its pre-action obligations, and when costs come to be considered.

    !!!8232;!!!8232;As solicitors you must surely be familiar with the requirements of both the Practice Direction applicable pre-1 October and the Protocol which applies thereafter (and your client, as a serial litigator of small claims, should likewise be aware of them). As you (and your client) must know, the Practice Direction and Protocol bind all potential litigants, whatever the size or type of the claim. Its express purpose is to assist parties in understanding the claim and their respective positions in relation to it, to enable parties to take stock of their positions and to negotiate a settlement, or at least narrow the issues, without incurring the costs of court proceedings or using up valuable court time. It is astounding that a firm of Solicitors are sending a consumer a vague and unevidenced 'Letter before Claim' in complete ignorance of the pre-existing Practice Direction and the new Protocol.!!!8232;!!!8232;

    Nobody, including your client, is immune from the requirements and obligations of the Practice Direction and now the Protocol.!

    !!!8232;!!!8232;I require your client to comply with its obligations by sending me the following information/documents:!!!8232;!!!8232;

    1. an explanation of the cause of action!!!!8232;2. whether they are pursuing me as driver or keeper!!!8232;3. whether they are relying on the provisions of Schedule 4 of POFA 2012!!!8232;4. what the details of the claim are; how long was the vehicle parked, how the monies being claimed arose and have been calculated!!!8232;5. Is the claim for a contractual breach? If so, what is the date of the agreement? The names of the parties to it and provide to me a copy of that contract.!!!!8232;6. a plan showing where any signs were displayed!!!8232;7. details of the signs displayed (size of sign, size of font, height at which displayed)!!!8232;8. Provide details of the original charge, and detail any interest and administrative or other charges added!!!8232;9. Provide a copy of the Information Sheet and the Reply Form

    !!!8232;!!!8232;If your client does not provide me with this information then I put you on notice that I will be relying on the cases of Webb Resolutions Ltd v Waller Needham & Green [2012] EWHC 3529 (Ch), Daejan Investments Limited v The Park West Club Limited (Part 20) !!!8211; Buxton Associates [2003] EWHC 2872, Charles Church Developments Ltd v Stent Foundations Limited & Peter Dann Limited [2007] EWHC 855 in asking the court to impose sanctions on your client and to order a stay of the proceedings, pursuant to paragraphs 13 ,15(b) and (c) and 16 of the Practice Direction, as referred to in paragraph 7.2 of the Protocol.!

    !!!8232;!!!8232;Until your client has complied with its obligations and provided this information, I am unable to respond properly to the alleged claim and to consider my position in relation to it, and it is entirely premature (and a waste of costs and court time) for your client to issue proceedings. Should your client do so, then I will seek an immediate stay pursuant to paragraph 15(b) of the Practice Direction and an order that this information is provided.!!!8232;!!!8232;

    Yours faithfully!!!8232;


    Im sure it doesn't need a response (hoping) but I figured I will post it to show every step of the way. Many Thanks for continued support and direction. 3 of these to tackle!
    • The Deep
    • By The Deep 26th Jun 18, 8:23 AM
    • 10,532 Posts
    • 10,374 Thanks
    The Deep
    This is an entirely unregulated industry which is scamming the public with inflated claims for minor breaches of contracts for alleged parking offences, aided and abetted by a handful of low-rent solicitors.

    Parking Eye, CPM, Smart, and another company have already been named and shamed, as has Gladstones Solicitors, and BW Legal, (these two law firms take hundreds of these cases to court each year). They lose most of them, and have been reported to the regulatory authority by an M.P. for unprofessional conduct

    Hospital car parks and residential complex tickets have been especially mentioned.

    The problem has become so rampant that MPs have agreed to enact a Bill to regulate these scammers. Watch the video of the Second Reading in the HofC recently.

    http://parliamentlive.tv/event/index/2f0384f2-eba5-4fff-ab07-cf24b6a22918?in=12:49:41

    and complain in the most robust terms to your MP. With a fair wind they will be out of business by Christmas.
    You never know how far you can go until you go too far.
    • IamEmanresu
    • By IamEmanresu 26th Jun 18, 8:40 AM
    • 3,769 Posts
    • 6,179 Thanks
    IamEmanresu
    What are the facts in this case

    1. It appears you are a tenant of a Housing Association
    2. It appears you have 3 parking charges from Ace
    3. It seems you applied to Ace for a permit and were given a week's grace before they started ticketing you.

    So to the questions

    a. Do Ace issue permits and how long did they take to issue one
    b. Were you entitled to a permit and do you have one now
    c. How many tickets did you get and for what reason(s)
    If you want to win - avoid losing first. Here are a few examples
    1. Failing to Acknowledge or Defend https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.php?t=5760415
    2. Template defences that say nothing https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.php?t=5818671&page=5#86
    3. Forgetting about the Witness Statement
    • akzy1990
    • By akzy1990 26th Jun 18, 9:55 PM
    • 27 Posts
    • 6 Thanks
    akzy1990
    Thanks!!
    a. Do Ace issue permits and how long did they take to issue one
    - Ace do not issue permits and it is the landlord. We pay for our parking space and have done so since moving into the property on our tenancy agreement. Ace came out of nowhere, put up signs, and then permits were needed.

    b. Were you entitled to a permit and do you have one now
    -We are entitled to a permit and have had one for a previous car for a different registered keeper. This car was in an accident and since then a permit was not re-issued. I have contacted the housing association since January to tell them to replace it and they have not done so. My most recent contact with them was a month ago and they have done nothing but state a grace period was offered (from the housing association) after establishing I was a rightful tenant. They said they have no time frame for permits over the phone which I was bemused by. I have lodged a complaint and will be writing a letter to the local MP who I have met before.

    c. How many tickets did you get and for what reason(s)
    - 3 tickets and they were for not displaying a valid permit.
    • IamEmanresu
    • By IamEmanresu 27th Jun 18, 6:51 AM
    • 3,769 Posts
    • 6,179 Thanks
    IamEmanresu
    Bit concerned on this one.

    1. It appears to be Housing Authority land unless you were parked on your own space.
    2. If it was HA land, then you follow their rules - the ones on the signs
    3. You say that the HA checked to see if you were a " rightful tenant" which suggests that you are a sub-tenant of a HA tenant and as such your rights to a parking space/permit are either limited or non-existant
    4. The lack of a permit since January is a bit odd in that you either haven't chased it, or under the new rules you are not entitled to a permit.

    Bottom line is to chase up with the HA why you haven't received a permit and a full explanation of it.

    You should be able to use a Subject Access Request or Freedom of Information to get some missing information but a direct approach to the HA would be best. Try the Neighborhood office/officer.

    I may have misunderstood something but the HA has the answer.

    Lastly there is a case called Pace (Ace) v Noor that you might want to look up and read.
    Last edited by IamEmanresu; 27-06-2018 at 6:53 AM.
    If you want to win - avoid losing first. Here are a few examples
    1. Failing to Acknowledge or Defend https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.php?t=5760415
    2. Template defences that say nothing https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.php?t=5818671&page=5#86
    3. Forgetting about the Witness Statement
    • Umkomaas
    • By Umkomaas 27th Jun 18, 7:22 AM
    • 20,205 Posts
    • 31,875 Thanks
    Umkomaas
    Lastly there is a case called Pace (Ace) v Noor that you might want to look up and read
    CS041 on this list:

    http://www.parking-prankster.com/more-case-law.html
    Please note, we are not a legal, residential or credit advice forum, rather one that helps motorists fight private parking charges, primarily at the 'front-end' of the process.
    Give a man a fish, and you feed him for a day; show him how to catch fish, and you feed him for a lifetime.
    • akzy1990
    • By akzy1990 27th Jun 18, 8:56 PM
    • 27 Posts
    • 6 Thanks
    akzy1990
    Thanks for the response!
    Its our space which we pay for every week. Outside of the bays no-one is allowed to park. We are entitled to the permit but I am chasing it up with a complaint.
    • IamEmanresu
    • By IamEmanresu 27th Jun 18, 9:16 PM
    • 3,769 Posts
    • 6,179 Thanks
    IamEmanresu
    Its our space which we pay for every week.
    Who do you pay? Your landlord or the HA?

    We are entitled to the permit
    You had a permit on the old rules. Has anything changed for others as well as yourself?
    If you want to win - avoid losing first. Here are a few examples
    1. Failing to Acknowledge or Defend https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.php?t=5760415
    2. Template defences that say nothing https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.php?t=5818671&page=5#86
    3. Forgetting about the Witness Statement
    • akzy1990
    • By akzy1990 28th Jun 18, 10:43 PM
    • 27 Posts
    • 6 Thanks
    akzy1990
    Thank you
    We pay the housing association, we have a tenancy agreement which hasn't changed since we started living here. it hasn't changed for our neighbours as i have checked with them. I was reading through the Nor case which is super helpful!!!
    • akzy1990
    • By akzy1990 25th Jul 18, 8:40 PM
    • 27 Posts
    • 6 Thanks
    akzy1990
    Drafted my defence
    i have received a letter asking from the court asking me if i contest the claims, below is my defence which i think is well suited to my circumstances but any advice would be greatly appreciated!!

    Preliminary

    !!!8232;1. The Particulars of Claim lack specificity and are embarrassing. The Defendant is prejudiced and is unable to prepare a full and complete Defence. The Defendant reserves the right to seek from the Court permission to serve an Amended Defence should the Claimant add to or expand his Particulars at a later stage of these proceedings and/or to limit the Claimant only to the unevidenced allegations in the Particulars.!!!8232;!!!8232;2. The Particulars of Claim fail to refer to the material terms of any contract and neither comply with the CPR 16 in respect of statements of case, nor the relevant practice direction in respect of claims formed by contract or conduct.!!!8232;!!!8232;Background

    !!!8232;3. It is admitted that at all material times the Defendant is the registered keeper of vehicle registration mark ******** which is the subject of these proceedings.

    !!!8232;4. It is admitted that on ****** and ********* the Defendant's vehicle was parked at ****** !!!!8232;!!!8232;

    5. It is denied that the Defendant was the driver of the vehicle. The Claimant is put to strict proof.!!!!8232;

    5.1. The Claimant has provided no evidence (in pre-action correspondence or otherwise) that the Defendant was the driver. The Defendant avers that the Claimant is therefore limited to pursuing the Defendant in these proceedings under the provisions set out by statute in the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 ("POFA"

    )!!!8232;5.2. Before seeking to rely on the keeper liability provisions of Schedule 4 POFA the Claimant must demonstrate that:!!!8232;

    5.2.1. There was a relevant obligation; either by way of a breach of contract, trespass or other tort; and!!!8232;

    5.2.2. that it has followed the required deadlines and wording as described in the Act to transfer liability from the driver to the registered keeper.!!!8232;It is not admitted that the Claimant has complied with the relevant statutory requirements.!!!!!8232;!!!8232;

    5.3. To the extent that the Claimant may seek to allege that any such presumption exists, the Defendant expressly denies that there is any presumption in law (whether in statute or otherwise) that the keeper is the driver. Further, the Defendant denies that the vehicle keeper is obliged to name the driver to a private parking firm. Had this been the intention of parliament, they would have made such requirements part of POFA, which makes no such provision. In the alternative, an amendment could have been made to s.172 of the Road Traffic Act 1988. The 1988 Act continues to oblige the identification of drivers only in strictly limited circumstances, where a criminal offence has been committed. Those provisions do not apply to this matter.!!!8232;
    Authority to Park and Primacy of Contract

    !!!8232;6. 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 **********, whose tenancy 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 allocated bay, without limitation as to type of vehicle, ownership of vehicle, the user of the vehicle or the requirement to display a parking permit. A copy of the lease will be provided to the Court, together with witness evidence that prior permission to park had been given.!!!8232;!!!8232;

    7. The Defendant avers that the operator 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. Accordingly it is denied that:

    !!!8232;7.1. there was any agreement as between the Defendant or driver of the vehicle and the Claimant

    !!!8232;7.2. there was any obligation (at all) to display a permit; and!

    !!!8232;7.3. the Claimant has suffered loss or damage or that there is a lawful basis to pursue a claim for loss.!!!8232;!!!8232;Alternative Defence - Failure to set out clearly parking terms
    !!!8232;
    8. In the alternative, the Defendant relies upon!ParkingEye Ltd v Barry Beavis!(2015) UKSC 67 insofar as the Court were willing to consider the imposition of a penalty in the context of a site of commercial value and where the signage regarding the penalties imposed for any breach of parking terms were clear - both upon entry to the site and throughout.!!!8232;

    8.1. The Defendant avers that the parking signage in this matter was, without prejudice to his/her primary defence above, inadequate.!!!!8232;

    8.1.1. At the time of the material events the signage was deficient in number, distribution, wording and lighting to reasonably convey a contractual obligation;!!!!8232;

    8.1.2. The signage did not comply with the requirements of the Code of Practice of the Independent Parking Committee ("IPC") Accredited Operators Scheme, an organisation to which the Claimant was a signatory; and

    !!!8232;8.1.3. The signage contained particularly onerous terms not sufficiently drawn to the attention of the visitor as set out in the leading judgment of Denning MR in!J Spurling v Bradshaw![1956] EWCA Civ 3

    !!!8232;8.2. The Defendant avers that the residential site that is the subject of these proceedings is not a site where there is a commercial value to be protected. The Claimant has not suffered loss or pecuniary disadvantage. The penalty charge is, accordingly, unconscionable in this context, with!ParkingEye!distinguished.
    !!!8232;
    9. It is denied that the Claimant has standing to bring any claim in the absence of a contract that expressly permits the Claimant to do so, in addition to merely undertaking parking management. The Claimant has provided no proof of any such entitlement.!!!8232;!!!8232;

    10. It is denied that the Claimant has any entitlement to the sums sought.!!!8232;!!!8232;

    11. It is admitted that interest may be applicable, subject to the discretion of the Court on any sum (if awarded), but it is denied that interest is applicable on the total sums claimed by the Claimant.

    12. It is implicit in 5.1 insofar as the claimant is limited to POFA, that they can only recover what POFA allows. At 10 and 11 the sums then claimed are denied (usually 160 by then) and interest on that.!Under the county court rules, the interest may well accrue on 100 if awarded, but not a greater sum than they are permitted to recover.
    !!!8232;
    Last edited by akzy1990; 25-07-2018 at 8:41 PM. Reason: additional wrong info
Welcome to our new Forum!

Our aim is to save you money quickly and easily. We hope you like it!

Forum Team Contact us

Live Stats

1,762Posts Today

8,776Users online

Martin's Twitter