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
    • completelyfubar
    • By completelyfubar 22nd Aug 17, 11:29 AM
    • 81Posts
    • 47Thanks
    completelyfubar
    RoeLee Retail Centre - Tesco metro - Gourm8 - UKCPM
    • #1
    • 22nd Aug 17, 11:29 AM
    RoeLee Retail Centre - Tesco metro - Gourm8 - UKCPM 22nd Aug 17 at 11:29 AM
    RoeLee Retail Centre - Tesco metro - Gourm8 - UKCPM
    UPDATE 19th Jan 2018
    I successfully defended the claim D1GF3Q4F and it was thrown out

    UKCPM do not have a valid contract of authority to operate on RoeLee Retail Centre car park.
    Anyone that was caught out by the manager of Gourm8 using the i-ticket app Sept 2016> - DO NOT PAY.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


    Good day to all on the forum, hopefully I can gain some valuable information before filing my defence.... A summary of what has gone on before;
    UKCPM PCN received: 21/11/2016 . From what I have read I don't think this was the first PCN issued but never received one before IF it was posted.
    I replied to the above notice with an altered template I got from this site but they just sent back a letter with an escalated fine/costs and references Beavis etc. There have been plenty of notices/debt collector ond Gladstone letters and I have replied twice since by letter and also email to Gladstone (no response to email other than an auto response)
    I have now been issued a claim (14/08/17) and have acknowledged it on the government gateway.
    I was not the driver.

    I have absolutely no idea what the 'fine' was for as the car park is free and all my family and friends had been parking on there for years prior to this. We had no idea they even had a parking management company there although I have now learnt from the council that they only put the signs up around late Sept > early Oct 2016.
    The sign on the wall (pohoto'd near my vehicle) has very small lettering and wasn't even noticed by any of our family and friends until the PCN landed and I informed them.
    It is not within a yellow hatched area that the sign appears above and eludes that it is protecting.
    It is contentious from the photo's if the car is indeed parked or that it is purely stationary/giving way, i.e. no picture showing the front seats etc.and the car is not facing a wall, the photo's are only 29 seconds apart!
    There are no signs at the immediate entrance and we had not noticed any on our previous visits to the small retail car park. There is another sign on the same wall for tesco metro that states 30 minutes parking allowed and nothing more.
    I believe the photo's were taken by a disgruntled cafe owner who doesn't like cars parking in front of his premises. The yellow hatched areas in front of his cafe appeared a few weeks prior and the car is not on them.
    I have tried ringing Tesco but no luck there & I have never been showed a contract or details that I could follow up with the landowner (requested in my letters)

    Any initial thoughts on this one peeps? Any help would be very much appreciated. I have read a considerable amount of the Sticky's and just wanted an initial opinion before setting out my defense.

    Thanks in advance
    Last edited by completelyfubar; 22-01-2018 at 9:27 AM. Reason: typo
Page 5
    • completelyfubar
    • By completelyfubar 11th Jan 18, 11:24 AM
    • 81 Posts
    • 47 Thanks
    completelyfubar
    draft SA
    In the County Court
    between
    UK Car Park Management Ltd
    vs
    Me

    D1GF3Q4F Hearing: 16th Jan 2018 10:30am
    ________________________________________
    Skeleton Argument of ******** (defendant)
    ________________________________________
    Opening statement - Keeper Liability
    I, ********, was not the driver of the vehicle ******** at the time of the alleged incident and therefore defend this claim as the registered keeper under the Protection of Freedom Act 2012 (POFA).
    The claimants Witness Statement (GSL1) (9) states: “The defendant avers that they were not the driver” then references “The criminal case of Elliot v Loake 1983”. This is not a criminal case therefore the claimant can only pursue the Registered Keeper under the strict rules of POFA. I draw to the courts attention the written words of Sir Henry Greenslade, chief adjudicator POPLA annual report 2015:
    “there is no ‘reasonable presumption’ in law that the registered keeper of a vehicle is the driver. Operators should never suggest anything of the sort"

    SUMMARY OF PRIMARY DEFENCE POINTS
    1. No Valid Contract/Agreement – No enforcement Authority
    GSL1 (5) states: “my company is not obliged to provide the defendant with the contract”.
    This is incorrect and contrary to the Practice Direction 16 7.3(1) which states:
    “a copy of the contract or documents constituting the agreement should be attached to or served with the particulars of claim and the original(s) should be available at the hearing” .
    GSL1 (15) also states: “the agreement exhibited to this Witness Statement evidences my Company’s authorisation to operate/manage the relevant land on the behalf of the Landowner”
    The ‘agreement’ evidenced has the ‘leaseholder’ blanked out and only one signature, again, partially blanked out. This is not a legally binding document as Section 44 of the Companies Act 2006 states:
    “(2) A document is validly executed by a company if it is signed on behalf of the company—
    (a)by two authorised signatories, or
    (b)by a director of the company in the presence of a witness who attests the signature.”

    I challenge that the lone signatory (client) on that document is not even the Landowner or Landlord for the carpark area and that UK Car Park Management (UKCPM) do not have any authority at all.
    I also challenge that UKCPM do not conduct any due diligence on clients using their ‘i-ticket’ phone application; to confirm they have the legal right to enforce parking terms.

    2. Non-Compliant Signage – No Contract with Driver.
    GSL1 states (15): “The contract is between my Company and the defendant” and again (31): “The defendant decided to park, having read the sign”.
    These statements are false as I was not the driver. Any contract (if read and accepted) could only be between UKCPM and the driver; further they state (19):
    “My Company relies on the case of ParkingEye v Beavis 2015” and that “a valid contract can be made by an offer in the form of the terms and conditions set out on the sign, and accepted by the driver’s actions as prescribed therein”. Also (20): “The signs on the land are clear and unambiguous”.
    The IPC & BPA Code of Practice (CoP) requires any signs to clearly display the terms and conditions (T&C’s); my defence and photographs clearly show that the sign is high up on the wall and the lettering of the T&C’s is far too small to read even when standing in front of it and impossible to see/read if sat in a vehicle. The signage was (and still is) woefully inadequate & non-compliant with IPC & BPA CoP.
    There is however a ‘prominent’ & ‘clear’ contradicting sign only a short distance away that has been in existence for many years.
    Further, under IPC & BPA CoP and reinforced by Sir Henry Greenslade in the POPLA annual report 2015;
    “13.2 You should allow the driver a reasonable ‘grace period’ in which to decide if they are going to stay or go. If the driver is on your land without permission you should still allow them a grace period to read your signs and leave before you take enforcement action”
    I contend that 29 seconds (time difference between the claimant’s two photographs) is an inadequate grace period.

    3. No Evidence/Proof the Vehicle was Parked.
    GSL1 states: “The defendant alleges he was waiting not parked”. This is a false claim as I, the defendant, was not the driver and have never made this statement. GSL1 (8) follows with the definition:
    “‘To Park’ is to place or leave a vehicle at a certain location for a period of time”.
    I will use this statement in my defence. The two photographs are only 29 seconds apart and show only the rear of the vehicle and obscure the driver’s seat. The driver could easily have been in the vehicle waiting for a parking space to be vacated or giving way to cars or pedestrians. This is a very busy yet small carpark and is regularly at full capacity due to Tesco and other retail shoppers.

    I confirm that the above facts and statements are true to the best of my knowledge and recollection.
    Signed:
    Date:
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    I'm torn with how to reduce this in size without loosing the impact of the 3 main defence points. I have opened with the Keeper liability but maybe don't need to? I have see some SA's that must be 4 pages or more and basically tear down the claimants WS, this is only 2 pages and I have plenty more to say 'verbally' that rebuts their WS.
    Last edited by completelyfubar; 22-01-2018 at 9:26 AM.
    • Lamilad
    • By Lamilad 11th Jan 18, 12:51 PM
    • 1,353 Posts
    • 2,712 Thanks
    Lamilad
    I'm torn with how to reduce this in size without loosing the impact of the 3 main defence points. I have opened with the Keeper liability but maybe don't need to? I have see some SA's that must be 4 pages or more and basically tear down the claimants WS, this is only 2 pages and I have plenty more to say 'verbally' that rebuts their WS. Have a look please chaps and give me your valued opinions
    Why are you obsessing about keeping your SA so short? I agree it should be sharp and concise. An SA cab be upto 25 pages long so don't stress over the number of pages. It's more important that it's pertinent and on point - avoid 'waffle' and long explanations.

    Every SA I have submitted has been over 5 pages, one was 16 pages. It just depends how much of the case you want to deal with orally in court. Your SA should certainly focus on your strongest arguments and attack the parts most damaging to their case.
    • completelyfubar
    • By completelyfubar 11th Jan 18, 1:01 PM
    • 81 Posts
    • 47 Thanks
    completelyfubar
    Hi Lamilad, it was just a comment from an esteemed member that made me concerned and the sticky links do support an SA that gets to the main points of defence.
    I do want to attack the main arguments and hope my SA has done that as it stands.
    I could also rebut more of their witness statement but I think their claim will fall apart on item 2 never mind the rest.
    Any comment on the content so far would be very much appreciated?
    • claxtome
    • By claxtome 11th Jan 18, 1:17 PM
    • 575 Posts
    • 678 Thanks
    claxtome
    I would second what Lamilad has said about length of SA.
    (He is more experienced than me as has won a few times at court).

    I have produced only one so far for the case I took to court which was about 4 pages long.
    (I had help to write it from one of the 2 legally trained people on here - Loadsofchildren123)

    I have had a quick look at your SA and looks ok in my limited experience.
    I would continue to extend if you have more to say.

    The one I produced is here if it is any help (totally different scenario to yours)->
    http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.php?t=5640401&page=9#165

    HTH
    • nosferatu1001
    • By nosferatu1001 11th Jan 18, 3:19 PM
    • 2,748 Posts
    • 3,412 Thanks
    nosferatu1001
    Two pages is good, and fine. It was more of a target to get you to write concisely - its harder to write short and snappy than long and waffley!
    • completelyfubar
    • By completelyfubar 11th Jan 18, 3:22 PM
    • 81 Posts
    • 47 Thanks
    completelyfubar
    Cheers nosferatu1001
    Content seem OK?
    • IamEmanresu
    • By IamEmanresu 19th Jan 18, 6:26 AM
    • 2,410 Posts
    • 4,286 Thanks
    IamEmanresu
    @completelyfubar

    Are you on today? If so good luck.
    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.
    • completelyfubar
    • By completelyfubar 19th Jan 18, 8:20 AM
    • 81 Posts
    • 47 Thanks
    completelyfubar
    Win win win
    Gents, I was in on Tuesday but had to catch a flight later that day (work commitments)
    Just got back in the UK so will summarise my experience as soon as I can.
    But, just to update the thread.... I tore their claim apart and it was thrown out.
    They paid my fee's for the day, over a hundred quid.
    Happy this one is over but I now have another to follow... fun & games
    • IamEmanresu
    • By IamEmanresu 19th Jan 18, 8:24 AM
    • 2,410 Posts
    • 4,286 Thanks
    IamEmanresu
    but I now have another to follow
    You should try to get them to withdraw on the basis that the case has been decided by a competent court on the same facts (res judicata).

    Continuing when they have had a judgment against them is an abuse of process and unreasonable behaviour. You may want to get a transcript of your case to present to the court in your WS if they press ahead.
    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.
    • completelyfubar
    • By completelyfubar 19th Jan 18, 8:27 AM
    • 81 Posts
    • 47 Thanks
    completelyfubar
    Thanks IamEmanresu, I was thinking the same thing but not sure who to approach.
    If I approach GS I expect they will just ignore me but UKCPM may sit up and listen?
    • nosferatu1001
    • By nosferatu1001 19th Jan 18, 8:58 AM
    • 2,748 Posts
    • 3,412 Thanks
    nosferatu1001
    Approach both

    Assuming the other is allocated to the same court see if the court will take notice - point out the POC are materially the same, bar dates.
    • bargepole
    • By bargepole 19th Jan 18, 9:09 AM
    • 2,278 Posts
    • 6,629 Thanks
    bargepole
    Dear Gladstones,

    As you will be aware, claim no. DXXXXXXX was heard on Tuesday 16 January at XXXXX County Court, and dismissed for the reason that the District Judge found that your client, UKCPM, did not have the necessary authority from the landowner to operate on the relevant site.

    There is a further claim, no. DXXXXXXX, proceeding through the Court system, involving essentially the same facts and cause of action as the previous one. Since the first claim has now been determined res judicata, it would be an abuse of process to continue with the second claim, for which the leading authorities are Henderson v Henderson [1843] 3 Hare 100 and Johnson v Gore Wood & Co (No.1) [2002] 2 A.C. 1, HL.

    I therefore suggest that you advise your client, in the strongest possible terms, to discontinue this second matter. Should they decide to proceed to trial, with the now inevitable outcome of the claim being dismissed, I will seek my costs, plus further costs for unreasonable behaviour pursuant to CPR 27.14(2)(g).

    Yours etc.
    Speeding cases fought: 24 (3 of mine, 21 for others). Cases won: 20. Points on licence: 0. Private Parking Court Cases: Won 33. Lost 10.
    • completelyfubar
    • By completelyfubar 19th Jan 18, 9:39 AM
    • 81 Posts
    • 47 Thanks
    completelyfubar
    Massive thanks to all you guys

    Can't thank you guys enough for the support through this process, outstanding!
    The support you provide gave me so much confidence during the hearing... I emptied both barrel's when cross examined by their 'representative', he never stood a chance!
    The Judge was smiling

    bargepole, again, thanks for the wording, I'll get that printed off and sent to GS asap.
    I'll email it as well....

    I've also altered the heading of the 1st post so it is searchable for other 'victims' of the Gourm8 manager & UKCPM.
    Last edited by completelyfubar; 19-01-2018 at 10:27 AM. Reason: typo
    • completelyfubar
    • By completelyfubar 24th Jan 18, 1:46 PM
    • 81 Posts
    • 47 Thanks
    completelyfubar
    Letter & emails sent off... lets see if Gladstone's withdraw the second claim...

    I have now been given (from another victim) the original 'agreement' with the name and business clearly showing (not blanked out). This confirms that it was the manager of Gourm8 restaurant that was the 'i-ticket client'. He is not the owner or landlord of the unit, let alone the car park, so he effectively lied on his application.
    • nosferatu1001
    • By nosferatu1001 24th Jan 18, 1:54 PM
    • 2,748 Posts
    • 3,412 Thanks
    nosferatu1001
    Sue the idiot.
    Fraud through false representaiton would be one area for a civil claim.
    • completelyfubar
    • By completelyfubar 24th Jan 18, 2:03 PM
    • 81 Posts
    • 47 Thanks
    completelyfubar
    You may have a very good point there... we have 30+ people in a facebook group that are defending essentially the same claim from the same car park at approximately the same time!
    The local council have said that they received approximately 400 complaints so just think of how big a claim we could drop on Mr Hussain!
    • nosferatu1001
    • By nosferatu1001 24th Jan 18, 2:44 PM
    • 2,748 Posts
    • 3,412 Thanks
    nosferatu1001
    Add in - breach of the DPA and harassment, you sue the PPC then have the person who set it up as the second defendant.
    • completelyfubar
    • By completelyfubar 24th Jan 18, 2:47 PM
    • 81 Posts
    • 47 Thanks
    completelyfubar
    .. and so UKCPM bail on the 'client' for false representation and he cops for the lot?
    • c-torr
    • By c-torr 24th Jan 18, 2:59 PM
    • 2 Posts
    • 0 Thanks
    c-torr
    Same claim - court date mid - feb
    Hi, thanks for updating your thread title found it whilst preparing for my defense. How did you come about learning the ownership of the land and the retail unit etc? i know i can find it from the land registry but i don't really want to pay to access the information if possible. Also you mentioned there was a fb group for this is it visible as i could not find anything when i searched....
    • completelyfubar
    • By completelyfubar 24th Jan 18, 3:06 PM
    • 81 Posts
    • 47 Thanks
    completelyfubar
    I'll PM you the FB link
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

4,138Posts Today

8,135Users online

Martin's Twitter