Defence vs UKPC (Parking in my own space)

beamerguy · 4 February 2019 at 9:38PM

peoplepower555 wrote: »

Thanks for your reply, I'll be using your advice when putting together my defence, which I am adamant will be a strong as possible. I despise these scammers!

In my defence, would you consider it constructive to highlight stories such as the one you mentioned, in order to remind the judge that these people have a track record of disregarding the law in order to make money from innocent people?

Best not to as that got UKPC banned from the DVLA for a period
and most already know about it.

What happened then does not apply to you and judges can get a bit funny. Let UKPC and their dodgy legal upset the judge while you stay squeaky clean ..... gently gently catch a monkey

peoplepower555 · 5 February 2019 at 12:08AM

Thank you for your responses guys. Because I am thinking I might as well try to settle one of the 5 tickets, I have thought of a question about the AoC. I had look at a walkthrough of the AoC process and one of the steps gives you two options:

1. Defend all of this claim
2. Defend part of this claim

If I am looking to settle one of the tickets, do I still click “Defend all” and offer to settle with my defence? Or do I click “Defend part of this claim”?

Perhaps this sounds a silly question but I want to make sure I get everything right the first time!

Secondly…..

Umkomaas, you asked me if they provided in the POC a breakdown of the costs they have incurred in chasing me for these "fines". The answer to that is no - They have been extremely vague and not detailed why they are increasing the costs from the original PCNs which were issued at £60 each.

One part reads:
“AND the claimant claims:
1. £800
2. Costs”

Another part of the document reads:
“In the circumstances, the claimant has suffered loss and/or damage due to the defendants failure to pay the charges”

These are the only two parts of the POC document which mention the extra money which they have added to the original PCN. Clearly they are being vague because they are inflating the costs as much as possible. What exactly should I ask them to detail in their breakdown of costs? Should I do this in my defence?

Just to be clear, I am only planning to challenge the costs of the PCN from 3 years ago. I will (hopefully) not be paying any of the 4 which were incurred for parking in my space last year, due to my leasehold agreement providing access to my space.

Thank you everyone for all your help.

peoplepower555 · 5 February 2019 at 6:59PM

any help with the above guys?

Ralph-y · 5 February 2019 at 7:59PM

why are you trying to settle one ?

Ralph:cool:

peoplepower555 · 6 February 2019 at 5:05PM

Fruitcake says it’s worth saying I’ll be asking for additional charges for unreasonable behaviour in defending receiving 4 tickets for parking in my allocated space. What sort of figure is usual for this sort of claim and how should i justify it?

And I am offering to settle one because I don't know how to fight it, nor do i have the mental energy to do it. beating 4 of the 5 tickets is still a win for me.

Finally, the POC doesn't include a breakdown in the costs per ticket. I want them to justify their £160 figures. Do i ask them to do this in my defence or can i contact them sooner?

I have started drafting the defence so will keep you all posted shortly.

Thanks

KeithP · 6 February 2019 at 5:21PM

Have you done the AoS?

Needs to be done before next Wednesday.

Ten minutes work - no thinking required.

peoplepower555 · 6 February 2019 at 5:43PM

Yes i have thanks Keith. I chose to defend part of the claim because i'd like to settle one of the five PCNs. Hopefully that was the right move.

peoplepower555 · 6 February 2019 at 6:04PM

Coupon-mad wrote: »

Yes, your defence can include words like this:

xxxx.forums.moneysavingexpert/showthread.php?p=75304578#post75304578

Hi Coupon-Mad, i am using your defence which highlights the outrageous inflation of the price of tickets, which you linked me too. Some really useful looking stuff in there. However in point 10.4, you mention the fact that solicitors charge "little or no fee to IPC members". I am dealing with UKPC who are BPA member, but not IPC as far as i can see. Does this point still relate to BPA members and UKPC? The solicitor they are using is SCS Law if that helps. If the point is still valid, could you tell me how to edit the below paragraph to make it appropriate for my case. If the point is invalid, i'll not use it - Just let me know. Thanks

The full quote is here:
"10.4. It was held in the Supreme Court in Beavis (where £85 was claimed, and no more) that a private parking charge already includes a very significant and high percentage in profit and more than covers the costs of running an automated regime of template letters. It is also a fact that debt collection agencies act on a no-win-no-fee basis for parking operators, so no such costs have been incurred in truth. Thus, there can be no 'damages' to pile on top of any parking charge claim, nor 'indemnity costs if applicable', whatever that cut&paste phrase may mean. The Claimant knows this, as do their solicitors who charge little or no fee to IPC members, given the connection between Gladstones and the IPC Trade Body, and the Defendant asks that the Court takes judicial notice of this repeated abuse of consumers rights and remedies, caused by IPC/Gladstones' clients artificially inflating their robo-claims."

Coupon-mad · 6 February 2019 at 6:15PM

You won't be able to settle one, as they won't consider less than the inflated sum of £100 plus £60 etc. Yet the sum can only be £100...(or nothing if you win).

I really would never have recommended this. Never mind.

You are now stuck with writing a defence that first of all at the start, says you admit £100 of the claim only (not £160 as they can't add made-up 'debt collector' costs for no reason!).

Then have the usual stuff from an example residential defence, about primacy of contract etc (see bargepole's residential example about key fobs and adapt it to suit). It's in the NEWBIES thread.

Then have the bit objecting to the costs at the end. Change the point you highlighted by just stopping here:

10.4. It was held in the Supreme Court in Beavis (where £85 was claimed, and no more) that a private parking charge already includes a very significant and high percentage in profit and more than covers the costs of running an automated regime of template letters. It is also a fact that debt collection agencies act on a no-win-no-fee basis for parking operators, so no such costs have been incurred in truth. Thus, there can be no 'damages' to pile on top of any parking charge claim.

You already have 10.2 that cites Ladak v Locums, to explain why a solicitor can't charge £50 a pop for a case that's a robo-claim admin exercise by clerical staff & computers, with no actual work in a legal capacity. So that already covers it.

peoplepower555 · 6 February 2019 at 6:30PM

Ok thanks for the tips above - I will be putting together 1st draft over the weekend. I have roughy until the end of the month to complete the defence.

Paying out £160 wouldn't be a huge problem for me as i just want this dealt with now and i thought that it might give me the best chance of getting the rest of the fees dropped. They want £930 in total which is a scary sum!

I asked above about defending all or part of the claim but didn't get any real guidance and panicked a bit as the clock was ticking on the AoS. Is there any way i can change that now or is that set in stone? I've done a lot of reading on this site about the inflation of PCN fees and primacy of leasehold but no idea how to defend the ticket which was for parking in a residential area a few years ago. Would the approach essentially have been to force them to prove signage was in full view?

Defence vs UKPC (Parking in my own space)

Comments

Categories

Get our FREE Weekly email full of deals & guides - and it’s spam-free