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
    • chrisypaty
    • By chrisypaty 27th Jul 17, 8:50 PM
    • 18Posts
    • 6Thanks
    chrisypaty
    Notice of Intended Court Proceedings
    • #1
    • 27th Jul 17, 8:50 PM
    Notice of Intended Court Proceedings 27th Jul 17 at 8:50 PM
    Hello,

    Recently the owners of my apartment block have employed myparkingcharge.co.uk to 'manage our underground parking. I received a parking permit which I placed in the holder in my car. The parking space is also written in the tenancy agreement.

    Back in April I went away on holiday for 2 weeks and before my holiday I cleaned the car and put the parking permit in my glove box whilst hoovering the car and forgot to put it back. On my return from my holiday I had 15 PCNs under my wipers.

    I appealed the charges on the website for £60 each and the appeals were rejected by myparkingcharge, with a reduced fee offered. I have ignored these reduced charges for all the PCNs and did not appeal to the IPC as mentioned in the NEWBIES thread.

    I have now received notice of intended court proceeding unless I pay £100 each by a certain date. I have read the NEWBIES thread but I am still a bit confused as to what to do now.

    Also I am changing address soon so would like to know what I have to do.

    Thanks.
    Last edited by chrisypaty; 27-07-2017 at 8:51 PM. Reason: incorrect spelling
Page 2
    • Umkomaas
    • By Umkomaas 3rd Nov 17, 10:24 PM
    • 17,588 Posts
    • 27,803 Thanks
    Umkomaas
    Once I do that can I still claim against the fine which is £1400 at the moment?
    Is that the amount of the default judgment (CCJ) and which is registered against your credit file?
    We cannot provide you with a silver bullet to get you out of this. You have to be in for the long run, and need to involve yourself in research and work for you to get rid of this. It is not simple. We will help, but can't do it for you.

    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.
    • chrisypaty
    • By chrisypaty 3rd Nov 17, 10:36 PM
    • 18 Posts
    • 6 Thanks
    chrisypaty
    Is that the amount of the default judgment (CCJ) and which is registered against your credit file?
    Yes its 1400
    • Johnersh
    • By Johnersh 3rd Nov 17, 10:59 PM
    • 1,031 Posts
    • 1,989 Thanks
    Johnersh
    Ok, so let me get this straight.

    1. You moved out.
    2. Your management company knew you moved out before the default judgment and were liaising with the parking company
    3. The claimant wrote to you AFTER obtaining default judgment, so were quite capable of locating you BEFORE issue.

    Did the claimant ever ask you to confirm an address for service?
    • IamEmanresu
    • By IamEmanresu 4th Nov 17, 6:57 AM
    • 2,309 Posts
    • 4,111 Thanks
    IamEmanresu
    Once I do that can I still claim against the fine which is £1400 at the moment?
    With a CCJ you explain why it happened (old address) and why you need a chance to defend (You were being ticketed in a space for which you had exclusive use/unfettered rights). Judges don't normally want to rehear the case there and then as the other party is not normally there.

    You should ask the judge to a) require the claimant to serve you a copy of the particulars they sent to the court so you can defend and b) order the refund of your £255 costs so far.

    You then get a date for a rehearing unless the other party drops their claim which means they don't get £1400 and you don't get £255 - unless the judge has ordered it at the set-aside stage.
    Idiots please note: If you intend NOT to read the information on the Notice of Allocation and hand a simple win to the knuckle dragging ex-clampers, then don't waste people's time with questions on a claim you'll not defend.
    • nosferatu1001
    • By nosferatu1001 4th Nov 17, 7:27 AM
    • 2,485 Posts
    • 3,038 Thanks
    nosferatu1001
    You have to show you were there to be found at your new address. Sounds like you were.
    I!!!8217;d be holding the managing agent liable as well.
    • chrisypaty
    • By chrisypaty 4th Nov 17, 8:34 AM
    • 18 Posts
    • 6 Thanks
    chrisypaty
    2. Your management company knew you moved out before the default judgment and were liaising with the parking company
    3. The claimant wrote to you AFTER obtaining default judgment, so were quite capable of locating you BEFORE issue.
    Notice handed in 1st August and moved out 31st August

    Did the claimant ever ask you to confirm an address for service?
    The only time I was asked for an address was in the initial online parking appeal form.

    You have to show you were there to be found at your new address. Sounds like you were.
    I’d be holding the managing agent liable as well.
    I gave the letting agent my forwarding address for my deposit which is my parents address. I have been living with my brother temporarily as I am moving in with a mate in December so I never sent off the change of address form for my car because I thought I was moving to my new place in October but the move was delayed.

    I'm not allowed to post links but I've read the thread 'Not advising Change of Registered Keeper to PCM' from the 29th of March

    Is this the sort of documentation in need to provide in support of my n244 application?

    Do I have a deadline date to send this form to the court by?

    Thanks
    • Johnersh
    • By Johnersh 4th Nov 17, 9:19 AM
    • 1,031 Posts
    • 1,989 Thanks
    Johnersh
    Type CPR part 13 into Google. Those are the court rules. This application needs to be made promptly.

    The application is not a mini-trial. It is a matter of procedure. The court will consider:

    1. Should the judgment be set aside
    2. If yes, is the case defensible (for which the prospects are considered on the basis of being more than false, fanciful or imaginary - i.e. quite a low bar)

    Normally if the claim form has not been correctly served, the court MUST set aside the claim. The risk here is that you had gone slightly off radar. The court rules do permit service at a last known address, but this does not absolve then of the need to undertake basic checks.

    What is the period between the last letter and the claimant starting court proceedings? The longer that period the greater the onus on them to check the address.
    • The Deep
    • By The Deep 4th Nov 17, 9:21 AM
    • 9,209 Posts
    • 8,979 Thanks
    The Deep
    I just gave the management company my forwarding address which they'd been sending mail to.

    This is a new one on me. As a landlord of 40 years standing, I have never come across an MA who will do this. Without mail redirect, you may have difficulty getting your set aside costs refunded.
    Last edited by The Deep; 04-11-2017 at 9:27 AM.
    You never know how far you can go until you go too far.
    • chrisypaty
    • By chrisypaty 4th Nov 17, 9:46 AM
    • 18 Posts
    • 6 Thanks
    chrisypaty
    What is the period between the last letter and the claimant starting court proceedings? The longer that period the greater the onus on them to check the address.
    Last letter was notice of intended court proceedings 24/07/17 - County court letter 21/09/17 so a gap of 59 days.

    This is a new one on me. As a landlord of 40 years standing, I have never come across an MA who will do this. Without mail redirect, you may have difficulty getting your set aside costs refunded.
    Just to clarify I gave me address for forwarding of deposit. It could have been the landlord sending the mail forward.
    • Loadsofchildren123
    • By Loadsofchildren123 4th Nov 17, 11:54 AM
    • 2,058 Posts
    • 3,447 Thanks
    Loadsofchildren123
    I've just checked the rules and think they applied early for the default judgment.
    Have you seen the Claim Form? Assuming it says further PoC were to follow (why else would you have received separate further PoCs?), then you were only due to serve your AOS 14 days after those were SERVED (rule 10.3(1)(b) and Rule 9)

    The POC were served on 2 October (rule 6.26).

    Therefore your AOS was due to be filed under rule 10.3(1)(b) on 16 October.
    Yet they got default judgment on 13 October.

    This was quite clearly premature.

    However, this is all wrong if the original Claim Form didn't say "further PoC to follow within 14 days".

    Then you can't rely on this procedural error (because you should have filed your AOS within 14 days of service of the Claim Form - service of that being date on Claim Form plus 5 days) but only on the change of address.
    Last edited by Loadsofchildren123; 04-11-2017 at 3:58 PM.
    • The Deep
    • By The Deep 4th Nov 17, 12:05 PM
    • 9,209 Posts
    • 8,979 Thanks
    The Deep
    Just to clarify I gave me address for forwarding of deposit. It could have been the landlord sending the mail forward.

    This is not the same as mail forwarding, the deposit is not usually held by the MA but by the landlord or a holding company. Therefore whilst knowing that A PPC was after you, you did not inform them of your new address.

    As a landlord, I do not automatically forward my tenants' mail to them. only if it looks important.

    Did you inform DVLA in a timely manner of your change of address?
    Last edited by The Deep; 04-11-2017 at 12:28 PM.
    You never know how far you can go until you go too far.
    • chrisypaty
    • By chrisypaty 4th Nov 17, 12:33 PM
    • 18 Posts
    • 6 Thanks
    chrisypaty
    However, this is all wrong if the original Claim Form didn't say "further PoC to follow within 14 days"
    Letter from VCS Ltd on 21/09/17 with claim particulars. It makes no mention of further PoC to follow in 14 days.

    As a landlord, I do not automatically forward my tenants' mail to them. only if it looks important. d Did you inform DVLA in a timely manner of your chang of address?
    I'm not sure has forwarded the mail. No I did not mail the DVLA as I this is only a temporary address and I was expecting to move. Something I should have done in hindsight but didn't unfortunately.

    Do I still have a case for a set aside?

    Thanks
    • KeithP
    • By KeithP 4th Nov 17, 12:58 PM
    • 7,209 Posts
    • 6,713 Thanks
    KeithP
    No I did not mail the DVLA as I this is only a temporary address and I was expecting to move. Something I should have done in hindsight but didn't unfortunately.
    Originally posted by chrisypaty
    Would've made no difference.

    The PPC was never going to ask the DVLA for an updated address, so it is unimportant (in this context) that the DVLA weren't updated.
    .
    • chrisypaty
    • By chrisypaty 4th Nov 17, 5:05 PM
    • 18 Posts
    • 6 Thanks
    chrisypaty
    I used the various sources on the forums to put together a set aside claim. By no means an expert in law related issues so if anyone could let me know if i'm on the right track that would be much appreciated.

    I haven't included an email I exchanged with the property management company. In short, they offered to reduce the charges to £300 but I refused. Could I include that?

    Also the PCN one of the parking charge notices was received on 23rd of June some 60 days after the contravention for which VCS 'as a gesture of goodwill ' offered a reduced settlement of £20. Does this not contravene the 14 day rule?

    Thanks

    I am XXXX and I am the Defendant in this matter. This my supporting Statement in support of my application dated XXX to:

    1. Set aside the Default Judgement dated XXX as it was not properly served at my current address and order for the Claimant to pay the Defendant £255 as reimbursement for the set aside fee;

    2. Order for the original claim to be heard at a re-hearing.

    1. Default Judgement

    1.1. I understand that the Claimant obtained a Default Judgement against me as the Defendant on XXX. I am aware that the Claimant is Vehicle Control Services (UK) Ltd (VCS), and that the claim is in respect of 13 unpaid Parking Charge Notices dated from 18th of April to 1st of May at XXX. I further contest this charge for the reasons outlined in Part 2 of this defence.

    1.2. The claim form was not served at my current address and I thus was not aware of the Default Judgement until the of 3rd November 2017 where it had been posted to a forwarding address I provided the letting agent. I understand that this Claim was served at, XXX. However, I moved to a new address at, XXX on 1st September 2017.

    1.3. I believe the Claimant has behaved unreasonably in pursuing a claim against me without ensuring they held the Defendant!!!8217;s correct contact details at the time of the claim. They have used information that was at the time one month out of date.

    1.4. According to publicly available information my circumstances are far from being unique. The industry!!!8217;s persistent failure to use correct and current addresses results is an unnecessary burden for individuals and the justice system across the country. This is a topical issue: I note that the Justice Minister The Rt Hon Sir Oliver Heald QC MP announced on the 23rd December 2016 a consultation and information campaign to help protect consumers from debt claims. The consultation will look at ways to; !!!8220;better protect consumers who are sent mail to inaccurate addresses and verify addresses again before a claim is sent.!!!8221; The Minister added that !!!8220;In the digital age, we must ensure companies pursuing unpaid debts make every reasonable effort to contact individuals, rather than simply relying on a letter to an old address.!!!8221;

    1.5. On the basis provided above I would suggest that the Claimant did not fulfil their duty to use the Defendant!!!8217;s current address when bringing the claim.

    1.6. Considering the above I was unable to defend this claim. I thus believe that the Default Judgement against me was issued incorrectly and thus should be set aside and I ask the Court to kindly consider the reimbursement of the fee of £255 from the claimant should this request be successful.

    2. Order for the original claim to be heard at a re-hearing

    2.1. I was, at the relevant date, the registered keeper of the vehicle in question registration number XXXXXX. Below is a summary of my version of the events.

    2.2. On the XXX I went away on holiday until my return on XXX. Upon my return there were a number of parking charge notices (PCNs) on my car windscreen for £60 if I didn't appeal. I have a permit for bay XX but before my holiday I was cleaning my car and removed the permit and put it in the glove box of the car and didn't place it back in the holder.

    2.3. I subsequently appealed each PCN on the VCS website and received a Notice to Keeper from the Claimant for each parking charge notice stating that my appeals had been turned down and now £100 was due to them for each of the parking charge notices (Total - £1300). I did not send an appeal further appeal to the Independent Appeals Service (IAS), the allegedly independent body appointed by the Claimant!!!8217;s trade body, the Independent Parking Committee - now International Parking Community (IPC).


    2.4. I further believe that the original Claim by the Claimant has no merit and should thus be dismissed. I understand that the Claimant is a Parking Company which seeks to claim for !!!8220;Parking Charge Notices!!!8221; which the Claimant believes are due as a result of an alleged breach of contract for parking by a motorist.

    2.5. If the Claimant can evidence that the alleged incident relates to a vehicle for which the Defendant is the Registered Keeper, any Notice to Keeper served by the Claimant must comply with Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012. Otherwise, the Claimant is required to prove the driver of the vehicle they claim was involved in the alleged incident. I submit that the Claimant cannot provide such evidence and further submit that the Claimant does not include !!!8216;Protection of Freedoms Act 2012!!!8217; wording on the Parking Charge Notices they issue and therefore cannot hold the Defendant automatically liable for the alleged incident merely for being the Registered Keeper of a vehicle.

    2.6. A requirement of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 is that this any Notice to Keeper served by the Claimant must be served within 14 days of the date of the alleged incident. For the contravention dated 27th of April 2017 the parking charge notice was received on 23rd of June 2017 for which VCS 'as a gesture of goodwill ' offered a reduced settlement of £20. The parking charge notice issued by the Claimant will not have complied with the requirements of the Act and thus cannot claim this charge against me as the Registered Keeper in any case.

    2.7. I further submit that the Claimant!!!8217;s claim is without merit due to substantial issues in law. This is for the following main reasons:

    2.7.1. The rental agreement I signed on XX with XXX property services allowed use of the parking space in bay XX without the need to display a parking permit. There is no provision in the lease for XX property servies to require me to pay a charge of £60 for such failure(or for the defendant VCS to do so on their behalf), and to inexplicably add the sum of £40 to that charge and in any event the letting agent failed to provide me with a new contractual agreement with which I agreed. I have attached the rental agreement.

    2.7.2. Lack of Standing by Claimant: The Claimant is unlikely to be the landowner of the car park in question, and will have no proprietary interest in it. This means that the Claimant, as a matter of law, will have no locus standi to litigate in their own name. Any consideration will have been provided by the landholder, and only they would have been able sue for any damages or trespass.

    2.7.3. No Loss Suffered by Claimant: Their claim is presumably based on damages for alleged breach of contract. It is a fundamental principle of English Law that a party who suffers damages through breach of contract can only seek through court action to be put back in the same position as they would have been if the breach had not occurred. In order to do so, they must demonstrate their actual, or genuine, pre-estimate of loss. I submit that no loss has been suffered by the Claimant as a result of any alleged breaches of contract on the part of any motorist of the vehicle of which I am the Registered Keeper. I further submit that any loss to the landholder (which would be the only party able to claim such losses) would be at most a few pounds.

    2.7.4. Claimed charge is an Unenforceable Penalty: I further submit that the Parking Charge that the Claimant claimed, given it is not based on any loss suffered due to the alleged breach, is nothing but an unenforceable penalty.

    2.7.5. No contract with the claimant: Any contract must have offer, acceptance and consideration both ways. There would not have been consideration from the Claimant to the motorist; the fee for parking benefits the landowners, not the Claimant. Therefore, there is no consideration from the motorist to Civil Enforcement Ltd.

    2.8. On this basis I believe that the Claimant has not provided any reasonable cause of action and thus the claim should be dismissed in its entirety.

    2.9. In order to make informed decisions and statements in my defence as keeper of the a vehicle, I will require copies of all paperwork and pictures of all signs from the Claimant.

    2.10. The Court is invited to dismiss this Claim, and to allow such Defendant!!!8217;s costs as are permissible under Civil Procedure Rule 27.14.

    2.11. It is not possible that a valid parking charge exists for the following reasons:

    2.11.1. Even if there were a binding contract the charge would be a penalty and unfair consumer term as it is not a genuine pre-estimate of loss and is not saved by the case law in ParkingEye v Beavis.

    2.11.2. There was therefore no valid reason to apply for my keeper data from the DVLA.

    2.11.3. Additionally the operator contract with the DVLA only allows them to obtain data for parking contraventions and not for briefly stopping.

    2.11.4. My name and address information (together with other information) is classified as personal data within the meaning of s1(1) of the Data Protections Act (DPA). The Claimant has misused this data by attempting to claim a charge when there is no possibility that a lawful reason exists. Additionally, this data may only obtained and used from the DVLA for parking, and not for stopping.

    2.11.5.. This is therefore a breach of data principle 1 (data must be used lawfully) and 2 (data must only be used for the purpose provided).

    2.11.6 The case of Vidal-Hall v Google Inc [2014] EWHC 13 (QB) provides authority that misuse of personal data is a tort and that damages may be non-pecuniary. The case of Halliday v Creation Consumer Finance Ltd [2013] All ER (D) 199 provides authority that a reasonable sum for compensation would be £750.

    2.11.7. The case of VCS v Phillip, claim number C9DP2D6C Liverpool 07/12/2016, while not binding, concerns a motorist sent a parking charge for briefly stopping at Liverpool Business Park. The signage there has the equivalent forbidding wording to the signage in this case. The judge ruled that no contract could exist and therefore data had been wrongly obtained from the DVLA. This is therefore a persuasive case that a DPA breach occurs when a parking charge is not legitimately pursued, and that a sum of at least £250 is compensation for pursuing a purported parking charge when there is no reasonable prospect of success.

    2.12. In summary, and to stress the point that there is growing anger at the dubious practices of private car parking companies of which I believe I the Defendant has fallen foul of, I would also like to draw the attention of the court to a debate in Parliament on 21st March 2017 that focussed on the relationship between the DVLA and private car parking companies, and the latter!!!8217;s access and (mis)use of data. In the debate the Rt Hon Steve Double MP commented that !!!8220;We need to look at the relationship the firms have with the DVLA. In my view, they are abusing their privileged relationship and their access to drivers!!!8217; information.!!!8221;

    The Rt Hon Kevin Foster MP surmised that !!!8220;We got rid of the cowboy clampers in the last Parliament. The suspicion is that the cowboy clampers have now become the cowboy finers and cowboy invoicers. Although they may wish to leave their spur marks on car parks across the country, I hope the Minister will be clear what action will be taken to ensure that they have to ride off into the sunset for good.!!!8221;
    • KeithP
    • By KeithP 4th Nov 17, 5:21 PM
    • 7,209 Posts
    • 6,713 Thanks
    KeithP
    Leave out this sentence:
    "I did not send an appeal further appeal to the Independent Appeals Service (IAS), the allegedly independent body appointed by the Claimant’s trade body, the Independent Parking Committee - now International Parking Community (IPC)".
    It adds nothing to your case.

    Not sure how these sentences are relevent:
    "2.11.3. Additionally the operator contract with the DVLA only allows them to obtain data for parking contraventions and not for briefly stopping".
    "Additionally, this data may only obtained and used from the DVLA for parking, and not for stopping".
    .
    • chrisypaty
    • By chrisypaty 4th Nov 17, 5:28 PM
    • 18 Posts
    • 6 Thanks
    chrisypaty
    I've taken both out.

    Does it otherwise sound reasonable?

    What about the reduced fee the property management company offered me? and the >14 days PCN sent to me?

    Thanks.
    • chrisypaty
    • By chrisypaty 5th Feb 18, 10:02 PM
    • 18 Posts
    • 6 Thanks
    chrisypaty
    Hello again.

    Draft Order and the Witness statement were sent to the court where the CCJ was issued along with an application notice NS244 and the fee. Court has responded and transferred to my local county court. Hearing has been set for early March

    VCS have provided me with a lengthy response saying they would dispute the set-aside and costs be awarded to the claimant

    Their main arguments are that:
    1. I was to affix the permit at all times.
    2. My rental agreement does not relate to entitlement to the car park rather how the property should be utilised. It solely relates to the property.
    3. Contract between claimant and occupier of car park.
    4. Contract between claimant and myself.
    5. Loss has been suffered by claimant.
    6. Penalty is enforceable - lots about parkingeye vrs beavis
    7. Personal data not misused.

    They say I was not prompt enough as it was 5 weeks between judgement and my application.

    DCBL have been instructed to enforce judgement,

    13 PCNs were issued but they only claimed for 11 in letter before action.

    Anything I need to do here?

    Thanks in advance.
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 5th Feb 18, 10:21 PM
    • 57,473 Posts
    • 71,063 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    Loss has been suffered by claimant.
    Really, what do they say about that?
    PRIVATE PCN? DON'T PAY BUT DO NOT IGNORE IT TWO Clicks needed for advice:
    Top of the page: Home>>Forums>Household & Travel>Motoring>Parking Tickets, Fines & Parking - read the 'NEWBIES' FAQS thread!
    Advice to ignore is WRONG, unless in Scotland/NI.

    • chrisypaty
    • By chrisypaty 7th Feb 18, 8:40 PM
    • 18 Posts
    • 6 Thanks
    chrisypaty
    Claimant relies on parking eye vrs beavis (2015) UKSC 67 and submits that the predominant purpose of the parking charge was to deter motorists from misusing the car park and that the occupiers objective include the following:

    (a) The need to provide parking spaces for tenants;
    (b) The related need to prevent the misuse of the parking for purposes unconnected with the tenants' business; and
    (c) The other purpose was to provide an income stream to enable the claimant to meet the costs of operating the scheme and make a profit from its services, without which those services would not be available.

    The claimant submits that if the £xxxx was payable it gains by the unauthorised uses, since its revenues are wholly derived from the charges for the breach of the terms.

    How exactly can they claim I was misusing the parking bay I had been allocated as part of my tenancy agreement?
    • waamo
    • By waamo 7th Feb 18, 8:53 PM
    • 3,233 Posts
    • 4,286 Thanks
    waamo
    I wonder which one of this motley outfit had used the brain cell the day they came up with that. If they employed a half wit it would increase the average intelligence of the company.
    This space for hire.
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

1,680Posts Today

7,869Users online

Martin's Twitter
  • It's the start of mini MSE's half term. In order to be the best daddy possible, Im stopping work and going off line? https://t.co/kwjvtd75YU

  • RT @shellsince1982: @MartinSLewis thanx to your email I have just saved myself £222 by taking a SIM only deal for £7.50 a month and keeping?

  • Today's Friday twitter poll: An important question, building on yesterday's important discussions: Which is the best bit of the pizza...

  • Follow Martin