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
    • owais12
    • By owais12 23rd Mar 18, 3:32 PM
    • 20Posts
    • 4Thanks
    owais12
    Taken to court by UK Parking Control Ltd
    • #1
    • 23rd Mar 18, 3:32 PM
    Taken to court by UK Parking Control Ltd 23rd Mar 18 at 3:32 PM
    Hi,

    I've been taken to court for the sum of 770 by UK Parking Control Ltd (Through SCS Law) for 4 parking fines, all from May 2016.

    The driver parked outside a car park on some private land by a university library and not directly in the car park.

    I'm very confused and lost on how to approach the whole situation and would much appreciate any help I can get.

    Is the first thing I should do the 'Acknowledgment of Service' so I get extra time to reply?


    Kind regards,
    Owais


    -----

    My issue date was 12/3/2018 and my date of service is 21/3/2018
    Last edited by owais12; 23-03-2018 at 4:19 PM.
Page 2
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 13th Apr 18, 9:17 PM
    • 62,736 Posts
    • 75,673 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    21/03 date is on the MCOL platform so I would hope that is what counts
    .
    Only because you put it in, but that date hugely exceeds the max 5 days for service. I WOULD NOT HOPE OR 'TRY'.

    YOUR DEADLINE IS MONDAY MORNING.
    • owais12
    • By owais12 2nd May 18, 1:02 PM
    • 20 Posts
    • 4 Thanks
    owais12
    Hi,

    I've received a direct questionnaire - what should I do next for this?
    • nosferatu1001
    • By nosferatu1001 2nd May 18, 1:38 PM
    • 3,722 Posts
    • 4,532 Thanks
    nosferatu1001
    You know the newbies thread that EVERYONE is directed to?

    guess what, ALL instructions are there!

    Read POST TWO, BOOKMARK it and KEEP referring to it at every step.
    • owais12
    • By owais12 25th Sep 18, 9:17 PM
    • 20 Posts
    • 4 Thanks
    owais12
    Ok, my court date is now on the 4th October.
    They sent a statement of costs and a witness statement (which looks very much like a defence statement). Do I make these up too? and who do I send them to?
    Is there anything else I should do?

    I asked the court and they really didn't give me proper answers.
    • owais12
    • By owais12 25th Sep 18, 9:19 PM
    • 20 Posts
    • 4 Thanks
    owais12
    This was my defence:

    Defence
    ------------------------------------------------------------------
    1. 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.

    2. It is admitted that at all material times the Defendant is the
    registered keeper of vehicle registration mark VO60SYT which is
    the subject of these proceedings. The vehicle is insured with
    Direct Line with multiple named drivers permitted to use it.

    3. It is disputed that on dates 18/05/2016, 24/05/2016, 25/05/2016
    and 27/05/2016, the Defendant's vehicle was parked at “Curzon
    Street Car Park Curzon Street Birmingham” as stated in the
    particulars of claim. UKPC’s own photographic evidence shows the
    vehicle parked outside of the car park’s fences and parameters.
    Rather, the vehicle was parked on a private side-road leading to
    Curzon Gateway student accommodation. It is unknown to the
    Defendant as to whether the address photographed can be considered
    within the boundaries of the address stated on these documents.

    4. The Defendant is unable to identify the driver for the
    18/05/2016, 24/05/2016, 25/05/2016 and 27/05/2016. The Claimant is
    put to strict proof.
    4.1. 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)
    4.2. Before seeking to rely on the keeper liability provisions of
    Schedule 4 POFA the Claimant must demonstrate that:
    4.2.1. there was a relevant obligation either by way of a breach
    of contract, trespass or other tort; and
    4.2.2. that it has followed the required deadlines and wording as
    described in the Act to transfer liability from the driver to the
    registered keeper.
    It is not admitted that the Claimant has complied with the
    relevant statutory requirements.
    4.3. To the extent that the Claimant may seek to allege that any
    such presumption exist, 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.

    5. The Defendant relies upon ParkingEye Ltd v Barry Beavis (2015)
    UKSC 67, in so far 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 throughout the site.
    5.1. The Defendant avers that the parking signage in this matter
    was inadequate to reasonably convey a contractual obligation.
    5.1.1. Signs in the area are broken and covered by wiring and
    broken lighting fixtures. Clear photographic evidence will be
    provided to the court. Furthermore, the 'parking charge' and terms
    on the sign are not legible, this is further evident from the
    Claimant’s own photographic evidence that they have provided. If
    the charge/sign/details can't be read in daylight or darkness in
    UKPC's own photographs, it cannot be actcepted that the driver be
    considered by the act of parking, to have agreed to a contract.
    The Claimant’s own employee was unable to get a good view of the
    signs. I will evidence the grainy, illegible tiny print photos
    that were provided by UKPC, unlike Beavis’, whose were clear and
    prominent.
    5.1.2. The largest wording present on the signage states NO
    UNAUTHORISED PARKING. This signage is forbidding, and does not
    constitute an offer of a contract. The defendant will rely on the
    judgements of DDJ Ellington in UKPC v Masterson B4GF26K6[2016].
    5.1.2.1. If the driver/s on each occasion were considered to be
    trespassers if not allowed to park there, then only the landowner
    can pursue a case under the tort of trespass, not this Claimant,
    and as the Supreme Court in the Beavis case confirmed, such a
    matter would be limited to the landowner themselves claiming for a
    nominal sum.
    5.1.3. The Claimant has not produced any evidence to show they
    have complied with the BPA Approved Operator Scheme Code of
    Practice (18.2) by providing clear and prominent entrance signs.
    The BPA state that ‘Entrance signs play an important part in
    establishing a parking contract and deterring trespassers.
    Therefore, as well as the signs have tell drivers about the terms
    and conditions for parking, you must also have a standard form of
    entrance sign at the entrance to the parking area.
    5.2. The Defendant avers that the residential site (Curzon
    Gateway) 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.

    6. 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.

    7. It is believed that this Claimant has not adhered to the BPA
    Code of Practice and is put to strict proof of full compliance.
    This Claimant has been exposed in the national press - and was
    recently investigated by the BPA - for falsifying photo evidence,
    which was admitted by the Claimant. It is submitted that this is
    not a parking company which complies with the strict rules of
    their Trade Body, which were held as a vital regulatory feature in
    ParkingEye v Beavis.

    8. It is denied that the Claimant has any entitlement to the sums
    sought.

    9. 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.
    • KeithP
    • By KeithP 25th Sep 18, 9:21 PM
    • 9,891 Posts
    • 10,206 Thanks
    KeithP
    Didn't your Notice of Allocation tell you when you had to provide your Witness Statement and evidence by?

    Usually that date is two weeks before the hearing.

    Check your paperwork.


    Why don't you have another read of post #23 as well.
    Last edited by KeithP; 25-09-2018 at 9:27 PM.
    .
    • owais12
    • By owais12 25th Sep 18, 9:35 PM
    • 20 Posts
    • 4 Thanks
    owais12






    Last edited by owais12; 25-09-2018 at 9:42 PM.
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 25th Sep 18, 9:38 PM
    • 62,736 Posts
    • 75,673 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    Do I make these up too? and who do I send them to?
    Oh dear, of course you do, and like a few others you are now LATE, so read the advice given to this person:

    https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.php?p=74824348#post74824348

    When I say ''of course you do'' that's because we have to expect posters have read the NEWBIES thread, and won't just disappear or 3 or 4 months and not bother to read their Notice of Allocation properly, or even come back to check the NEWBIES thread, which says:

    IMPORTANT - KNOW WHAT YOU MUST DO AND BY WHEN!

    Here is a walk-through the process from defence onwards (i.e. AFTER acknowledgement of service) by Loadsofchildren123:

    http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.php?p=72244727#post72244727

    Here's a summary from bargepole of what happens when, what you MUST do in time, re the paperwork & deadlines:

    http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.php?t=5546325


    Do not think putting in the defence is your only job.
    Once allocated to your local court, you will be given a clear date by which YOU MUST file the evidence ('exhibits') and any Witness Statement (i.e. yours, as bargepole says in the above link!). At witness statement stage (usually NOT LATER THAN 14 DAYS BEFORE YOUR HEARING!) don't forget to file the evidence you will rely upon, which usually should at least include:

    (a) a copy of the Beavis case sign as a comparison to show how awful the small print sign was in yours case
    (b) photos proving the scarce and illegible small print signs in your case, a view showing the lack of entrance signs, etc.
    (c) a video of how it looks from a car is good evidence! You can get a passenger to hold a camera or phone and record the lack of signs seen to the point of parking.
    (d) a copy of Schedule 4 of the POFA - there is a link to it in post #1 above. The Judge will NOT have this to hand & is unlikely to be familiar with it. This is only applicable if you are defending as keeper.
    (e) a copy of Henry Greenslade's wording from the POPLA Annual Report 2015 'Understanding Keeper Liability' if defending as keeper.
    (f) a copy of your lease or tenancy agreement if this is an 'own space' or 'block of flats' dispute where YOU have primacy of contract.
    (g) the case transcripts that support your argument (get them from the Parking Prankster's case law page), e.g. if arguing prohibitive 'forbidding parking' signs which offer no contract a driver can accept, you need PCM v Bull; if arguing that this is a residential space where the tenant/leaseholder has already been granted (impliedly or explicitly) the right to park or unload you need Jopson v Home Guard (a persuasive Appeal case heard by a Senior Circuit Judge) and PACE v Mr N, etc.
    (h) the IPC or BPA Code of practice, where it supports your case (e.g. the grace periods section 13 of the CoP in a BPA few minutes' 'overstay' claim).
    (i) a Pay & Display ticket if you have it in such a case, e.g. if arguing it was displayed. DO NOT ARGUE 'no loss'!
    Last edited by Coupon-mad; 25-09-2018 at 9:41 PM.
    • KeithP
    • By KeithP 25th Sep 18, 9:45 PM
    • 9,891 Posts
    • 10,206 Thanks
    KeithP
    Why have you shown us the Claimant's Witness Statement?

    You need to file and serve your Witness statement ASAP.
    .
    • owais12
    • By owais12 25th Sep 18, 9:50 PM
    • 20 Posts
    • 4 Thanks
    owais12
    Why have you shown us the Claimant's Witness Statement?

    You need to file and serve your Witness statement ASAP.
    Originally posted by KeithP
    Should I delete it?
    • KeithP
    • By KeithP 25th Sep 18, 9:51 PM
    • 9,891 Posts
    • 10,206 Thanks
    KeithP
    Should I delete it?
    Originally posted by owais12
    Not necessarily.

    I just wondered why you had posted it.

    I sort of hoped you had a reason.
    .
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 25th Sep 18, 9:57 PM
    • 62,736 Posts
    • 75,673 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    It's good to see it but your priority is to read the NEWBIES thread section on WS and evidence and put your own together NOW, to be delivered by hand to the local court, ideally by tomorrow... (and emailed to the claimant's Solicitors).

    I did also show you another link, to Johersh's advice about late WS! Read it.

    No, it's not too late. Read what I posted for you...
    • IamEmanresu
    • By IamEmanresu 26th Sep 18, 5:06 AM
    • 3,664 Posts
    • 5,995 Thanks
    IamEmanresu
    Where is their contract? Have they included one?

    You can see at #2 that they is no direct link to the landowners.
    Last edited by IamEmanresu; 26-09-2018 at 5:13 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
    • nosferatu1001
    • By nosferatu1001 26th Sep 18, 10:33 AM
    • 3,722 Posts
    • 4,532 Thanks
    nosferatu1001
    Seriously, I told you to READ the newbeis thread, yet you still didnt know you needed your own WS?
    If you ask for advice take it!
    • Ezisola
    • By Ezisola 26th Sep 18, 10:43 AM
    • 35 Posts
    • 12 Thanks
    Ezisola
    Just to point out that your full car registration is in one of those photos, You should edit or delete it.
    • owais12
    • By owais12 4th Oct 18, 5:23 PM
    • 20 Posts
    • 4 Thanks
    owais12
    Went to court today - the judge never let the case start as my witness statement was late. He forced me to apply for an application for relief from sanction. I'm not sure what this is but I'll research today and it needs to be in for next Thursday. If it's accepted, then my evidence will be accepted, otherwise I need to fight the case without my witness statement.

    In other news, my friend had a very similar case to me as he parked in the same locations. He was told to pay 3 fines but let off one because it was given outside of operating hours - this was my main argument if I got to speak.
    They provided a contract stating their operating hours are 7am-7pm and every single one of my fines is after 7pm. I have attached this to this post. I think this is a silver bullet as they have operating hours of 7-7 and are not legally contracted to issue or enforce tickets after this time.
    Furthermore, they have signage outside stating "no unauthorised parking during operating hours". This implies you can park outside of operating hours.

    5 min before walking into court, they conveniently mentioned that they have proof from UKPC that they're allowed to manage the site after 7pm ... but still have no contract, just some email they've made up today. This goes against BPA code of practice 7.3:
    7 Written authorisation of the landowner
    7.3 a the definition of the land on which you may operate, so that the boundaries of the land can be clearly defined by any conditions or restrictions on parking control and enforcement operations, including any restrictions on hours of operation

    They can't have a contract that stated 7-7, be going against the BPA code and have a sign outside that says no unauthorised parking during operating hours and still get away with it right? One stupid email from 2018 after the fines in 2016 and the contract creation in 2012 can't be valid right?

    Also, this contract is part of their evidence, so I don't even need my own really...
    I rang their solicitor up and they intend to get this evidence (the email) put into the case but I asked the judge on purpose in front of the UKPC legal representative if they're allowed to enter new evidence and he said no. How do they plan to do this?




    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 4th Oct 18, 8:40 PM
    • 62,736 Posts
    • 75,673 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    Sounds like you could win even without making an application for relief from sanctions.

    I wonder what our legally-qualified posters Johnersh, LoadsofChildren123, IamEmanresu or bargepole would advise, given the lottery of having it granted:

    http://www.stjohnschambers.co.uk/dashboard/wp-content/uploads/Relief-from-Sanction.pdf

    They provided a contract stating their operating hours are 7am-7pm and every single one of my fines is after 7pm. I have attached this to this post. I think this is a silver bullet as they have operating hours of 7-7 and are not legally contracted to issue or enforce tickets after this time.
    Furthermore, they have signage outside stating "no unauthorised parking during operating hours". This implies you can park outside of operating hours.
    Great, you win, surely, and they cannot add that email to evidence or they'd need relief from sanctions!

    Not only that, read the email...it says vaguely ''the contract evolved'' but it does NOT say when! Could have been yesterday...

    I am astonished that the stupid Judge said that your friend had to pay 3 PCNs that are clearly all about TRESPASS, according to the sign.

    Unless they own or lease the land, giving them standing, parking firms cannot seek damages for trespass. It is trite law and was reiterated in the Beavis case!
    Last edited by Coupon-mad; 05-10-2018 at 10:31 AM.
    • IamEmanresu
    • By IamEmanresu 5th Oct 18, 6:29 AM
    • 3,664 Posts
    • 5,995 Thanks
    IamEmanresu
    Have to say this one looks lost for the simple reason the OP hasn't done the work and is relying on a template they either don't understand or more likely cannot be bothered to understand.

    On the positive side, it will lead to a better if somewhat expensive lesson in doing research. Ironic since this was close to a Uni library.

    The issue with this contract and most UKPC contracts is the chain of authority. Parking Partners and UKPC are not landowners. Parking Partners may be occupiers but you would have had to have checked that as instructed back in April - but it wasn't done. "Likely" as you mentioned before doesn't cut it.

    Suspect the judge has chosen the option to reject your WS (he could have accepted it) as he can't be arsed with the nonsense within and has applied Denton. There is a fee to be paid depending on whether it will be a paper application or a verbal one. If you are on benefits, the fee will be lower.

    On balance you should NOT apply for relief and let matters take their course. BW have to do something now if they they want a clean win but let's see if they do. When you have a new date come back and we'll look at the facts again.
    Last edited by IamEmanresu; 05-10-2018 at 7:57 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
    • owais12
    • By owais12 5th Oct 18, 9:50 PM
    • 20 Posts
    • 4 Thanks
    owais12
    Have to say this one looks lost for the simple reason the OP hasn't done the work and is relying on a template they either don't understand or more likely cannot be bothered to understand.

    On the positive side, it will lead to a better if somewhat expensive lesson in doing research. Ironic since this was close to a Uni library.

    The issue with this contract and most UKPC contracts is the chain of authority. Parking Partners and UKPC are not landowners. Parking Partners may be occupiers but you would have had to have checked that as instructed back in April - but it wasn't done. "Likely" as you mentioned before doesn't cut it.

    Suspect the judge has chosen the option to reject your WS (he could have accepted it) as he can't be arsed with the nonsense within and has applied Denton. There is a fee to be paid depending on whether it will be a paper application or a verbal one. If you are on benefits, the fee will be lower.

    On balance you should NOT apply for relief and let matters take their course. BW have to do something now if they they want a clean win but let's see if they do. When you have a new date come back and we'll look at the facts again.
    Originally posted by IamEmanresu
    I was working 17-18 hour days up until late September so didn't really focus on my parking fines - not an excuse but I was was just prioritising that.

    Which template are you referring to? I focused my WS on a few things:
    - Tresspass case that Judge Ellington did
    - Poor entrance signage
    - Conflicting signage outside and inside (says no unauthorised parking during operating hours outside and no unauthorised parking at any time inside)
    - Operating hours (based off their evidence)
    - Broken signage

    All of this was in my WS but it wasn't accepted.

    Tbh, I think I can win based purely off operating hours and a family lawyer also told me to cite my friend's case as precedent (should I?).


    I have a few questions:
    - Why do you feel the case is lost? if this is the case, would it not be better for me to settle now?
    - So you think my application for relief from sanction will not be accepted?
    - If I just ignore the Judges demand of submitting this by 4pm next week... what will happen?
    - I asked the Judge if they could enter new evidence (the email) and he said no. Afterwards the lawyer told me they could find a way to do this without relief from sanctions ....how?
    - Can I use the contract in their WS as my defence in court as not having a WS would mean I can't rely on anything else?

    So essentially, my whole argument would be to tell the judge to look at their contract which clearly states they are not contracted to issue or enforce tickets tickets given after 7pm.
    • owais12
    • By owais12 6th Oct 18, 12:57 AM
    • 20 Posts
    • 4 Thanks
    owais12
    Sounds like you could win even without making an application for relief from sanctions.

    I wonder what our legally-qualified posters Johnersh, LoadsofChildren123, IamEmanresu or bargepole would advise, given the lottery of having it granted:

    http://www.stjohnschambers.co.uk/dashboard/wp-content/uploads/Relief-from-Sanction.pdf


    Great, you win, surely, and they cannot add that email to evidence or they'd need relief from sanctions!

    Not only that, read the email...it says vaguely ''the contract evolved'' but it does NOT say when! Could have been yesterday...

    I am astonished that the stupid Judge said that your friend had to pay 3 PCNs that are clearly all about TRESPASS, according to the sign.

    Unless they own or lease the land, giving them standing, parking firms cannot seek damages for trespass. It is trite law and was reiterated in the Beavis case!
    Originally posted by Coupon-mad
    Thanks - I think the operating hours thing is a very strong point.
    If you are only contracted between yourself and the landlord to operate between the hours of 7-7, then you have no legal right to ticket people after that time. It's essentially the same as me putting random tickets on people's cars and expecting them to pay.

    My issue is missed these deadlines and now I for the life of me can't figure out how to approach the case moving forwards - and google doesn't seem to informative on this application for relief from sanctions stuff and the court staff and free charities for legal procedure are useless.
    Last edited by owais12; 06-10-2018 at 1:01 AM.
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

3,373Posts Today

6,924Users online

Martin's Twitter