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
    • FutureTrunks
    • By FutureTrunks 2nd Oct 18, 5:55 PM
    • 55Posts
    • 20Thanks
    FutureTrunks
    County Court Claim by SCS and UKPC
    • #1
    • 2nd Oct 18, 5:55 PM
    County Court Claim by SCS and UKPC 2nd Oct 18 at 5:55 PM
    Hi guys, it's been a while since I've been on here and the last time I was on here, it was in regards to a set of parking tickets I had received during my time at university when my car was parked outside my halls of residence. I apologise for the long post, but I want to try and explain the situation as best as I can.

    During the year I was there, I had received a total of 9 tickets (stupid, I know). However, for each ticket that I received, I followed the advice given on the newbies thread and appealed to POPLA. In total I had sent 6 appeals to POPLA; I had won 5 of these with the appeal pack I had provided, however I lost one because the adjudicator had asked me for more evidence within 7 days, however I was unable to provide an update to my appeal at that time as I was out of the city and did not have access to my emails, and as I did not respond to whatever they had asked for, the PPC had won this appeal.

    You may have noticed that I had only sent 5 appeals to POPLA, and may be asking what about the other 4? Well, over time I received four more “tickets” and eventually received the NTKs for each of these. However, I believe (I may be correct or incorrect about this) that two of these tickets may have been removed by the operator.

    This seems like a bit of a far-fetched statement but the reason I say this is because I clearly remember one occasion where I caught the operator taking a picture of my car with the ticket on the windscreen. When I caught him in the act, he removed the ticket from my windscreen, said he’ll “let me off” this one time, told me to move me car, and walked off. Now that didn’t ring any bells then, but it does now. I was a bit naive to believe he'd not issue the ticket but lo-and-behold, I got an NTK a month later. Could someone advise me on this too?

    Anyways, each of the tickets that were successfully appealed were due to:
    1) Insufficient signage
    2) No evidence of Landowner Authority
    3) No grace period given

    Another member of this forum had a similar problem and I had used their appeal as a draft and just filled in pictures that were relevant to my situation. I tried posting a link to my Dropbox with my appeal but since I'm still a new user I can't post links, any advice on how I can provide the appeal to you guys?

    Now I had received several more NTKs in regards to the 4 remaining tickets over the past 2 years, with the collection agency switching hands multiple times, from DRP Ltd, to Zenith Collections, and now finally to SCS Law.

    Today I have received a Claim Form from SCS Law for the 4 tickets, totalling for over 700! Now I really want to fight this as I believe that, had I had the chance to appeal these at the POPLA stage, I would have won, and the fact that I beat 5 other tickets at POPLA would maybe give me a bit of an edge for this case?

    I’m now going to acknowledge the claim & MCOL process, I really appreciate all and any help I can get during this time. Thank you all to everyone who’s helped me out in the past, hopefully I can beat these pricks at this stage as well.
    Last edited by FutureTrunks; 15-04-2019 at 7:25 PM. Reason: Numbers
Page 4
    • FutureTrunks
    • By FutureTrunks 15th Apr 19, 7:52 PM
    • 55 Posts
    • 20 Thanks
    FutureTrunks
    Good shout, it should hopefully be removed from access now
    • FutureTrunks
    • By FutureTrunks 15th Apr 19, 8:48 PM
    • 55 Posts
    • 20 Thanks
    FutureTrunks
    Is everything okay with the witness statement everyone?
    • FutureTrunks
    • By FutureTrunks 16th Apr 19, 7:00 PM
    • 55 Posts
    • 20 Thanks
    FutureTrunks
    I'm gonna arrange my evidence pack tonight and send it off first thing tomorrow, please do let me know if there are any recommendations that you guys have!
    • FutureTrunks
    • By FutureTrunks 17th Apr 19, 9:42 PM
    • 55 Posts
    • 20 Thanks
    FutureTrunks
    Hi guys, I just got UKPCs witness statement and evidence pack today. It's pretty big but I'm gonna go through their points (am I allowed to post it on here?). However one of the things they've stated is some case law, namely UKPC v Mr Somduth Peenith. The case is regarding a forbidding offer and how the case went in favour of UKPC. They also put down costs of nearly 550?! Starting to get a little nervous about the whole ordeal now
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 17th Apr 19, 9:56 PM
    • 70,207 Posts
    • 82,779 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    Peenith (sounds like a guy with a lisp! ) is just another county court decision turning on different facts. Not 'case law' and not a precedent, not like the Beavis case that has real clout.
    I just got UKPCs witness statement and evidence pack today. It's pretty big but I'm gonna go through their points (am I allowed to post it on here?)
    Yes, and if it's not too cheeky to ask (as I assume they included it) show us Peenith!

    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
    • FutureTrunks
    • By FutureTrunks 17th Apr 19, 10:17 PM
    • 55 Posts
    • 20 Thanks
    FutureTrunks
    Peenith (sounds like a guy with a lisp! ) is just another county court decision turning on different facts. Not 'case law' and not a precedent, not like the Beavis case that has real clout.
    Yes, and if it's not too cheeky to ask (as I assume they included it) show us Peenith!

    Originally posted by Coupon-mad

    I didn't even clock on to that until you mentioned it haha. I'm afraid I can't post a scan of the documents right now as I don't have a scanner, but I can send a proper copy tomorrow. For now here are some pics I've taken with my phone: https://imgur.com/a/toT9PfN
    • FutureTrunks
    • By FutureTrunks 17th Apr 19, 10:51 PM
    • 55 Posts
    • 20 Thanks
    FutureTrunks
    So I'm going through the evidence pack and I can see they've supplied the contract between themselves and the university, for "self-ticketing services" and a witness statement signed by someone from the uni stating that UKPC are authorised by the landowner to issue PCNs.

    They've also stated that a copy of some of the signage is displayed at various locations of the site, and have included close up pictures of the signs (it doesn't show their location in proximity to any bays though), and one of the pictures is a sign I don't recognise which is timestamped from 2012. This 2012 sign is also a pay-and-display sign, which has no bearing on this case because all of the signs in my case are forbidding offers.

    They've then gone on to talk about one of the tickets where I was parked in a disabled bay, and my appeal to UKPC and their response asking for a badge.

    The next point talks about how there were no appeals lodged in relation to two of the PCNs (these are the ones I believe may have been taken off the car after pictures were taken, so I couldn't appeal). But how was I supposed to appeal these if I didn't see the GD physical ticket?!

    They then talk about how the signs are prominent and clear (lol). They say that "The Claimant confirms that some PCNs were cancelled after an appeal to POPLA, however the reason for the cancellation was because it transpired that the parking attendant had noted the wrong contravention code and thus the PCNs were cancelled". Now this makes no sense to me because I remember at least 1 of the POPLA appeals went through to the adjudicator's decision, and their decision was that the signage was indeed inadequate. So UKPC are lying through their teeth here? I'm going to try and find a copy of that decision so I can hopefully show the judge this is just a lie.

    I'd also like to note that some of these PCNs which got cancelled, have the same contravention noted down as some of the PCNs which they are taking me to court for. I.e. I had two PCNs cancelled for "Not displaying a valid permit" but 2 of the PCNs they're taking me to court for is for the same contravention. I also had 2 PCNs cancelled for "displayed an expired permit". And they're taking me to court for the same reason. Why were these deemed "invalid" by UKPC, but the ones they're taking to court for are suddenly "valid"

    Now when I mentioned in my defence on the time I caught the guy they've said "they are unable to comment on the Defendant's interaction with the parking attendant. I would note however that the Defendant provides no evidence to substantiate his assertion, neither did the Claimant receive any correspondence or complaint". Is this a valid claim for them to make? Either way I've included a witness statement from a friend who was with me on the day I caught the guy putting the ticket on my car, so maybe this invalidates that claim? This paragraph goes on to talk about how I've mentioned they were caught doctoring photos, and they say "these were isolated incidents and fail to see the relevance of the Defendant's reference to these incidents that occurred over three years previously". This is wrong because these events happened between 2016 and 2017, closer to one year than the three years that they state. They've attached a massive list of pictures and documents which is basically all correspondence of the letters they've sent me, pictures of my car for each "offence".

    Then they say that "I had parked my vehicle to load and unload, but that the evidence shows the vehicle parked with all doors shut and no sign of any active loading and unloading taking place". Now this is complete and utter !!!!!!!!, I lived in a block of flats on the fourth floor, with no view of my vehicle once I'm inside my apartment. Am I supposed to keep my doors unlocked open for theft during this time?! What a complete load of !!!!!!!!.

    Now they talk about the permit I left of my windscreen (which was for the library almost 2-3 years prior to these events). In my defence I stated that "the expired permit was for another location at the site and was simply left on the dashboard". They then say "this is not the case as demonstrated as the evidence which shows a permit affixed to the windshield and not 'simply left on the dashboard'". That's a bit pedantic isn't it, surely that can't be a valid argument. "The Claimant would question why the Defendant would knowingly leave an expired permit prominently affixed to his windshield". Because I'm a lazy student and I don't think having an expired permit for a different location would affect anything? "Given that the Defendant states that he was a student resident of the site, it is reasonable to assume that he was familiar with the parking restrictions at the site and would have known that displaying an expired permit was in contravention of the terms and conditions of parking". I don't get this? Why would a permit which is valid only for a specific location, have any bearing on parking at another location? If I have a permit for a Location A in London which expires, but then park in Location B in Liverpool, why would the expired permit have any relevance?

    Next up is the 60 charge bolted on to each PCN. They say that the additional charge is a contractual term stated on the signage. They say that "The signage clearly states that unpaid parking charges will be passed to our debt recovery agent at which point an additional charge of 60 will apply". They then say I was warned "adequately" based on the warning that was stated on the multiple NTKs.
    Last edited by FutureTrunks; 17-04-2019 at 11:07 PM.
    • The Deep
    • By The Deep 18th Apr 19, 8:42 AM
    • 12,626 Posts
    • 12,839 Thanks
    The Deep
    Go though paragraph by paragraph refuting everything with which you disagree, anything which you do not refute may be taken as the truth.

    They may have shot themselves in the foot with the DCA charges, can they produce v.a.t. invoices. Usually they do not pay a DCA ywho usually oerates on a no win no fee basis . Ask to see their contract with the DCA, put them to strict proof that these amounts have been aid. Do they use the word "will" in the signs, if so it may be an unfair term in a consumer contract. UTCC

    If they are trying to claim for monies which they have incurred then ask the judge to consider CPR27.14(2)(g) costs for unreasonable behaviour and abuse of process.

    This may cost them a lot of money, especially if you are willing to play hard ball.
    Last edited by The Deep; 18-04-2019 at 8:52 AM.
    You never know how far you can go until you go too far.
    • The Deep
    • By The Deep 18th Apr 19, 9:05 AM
    • 12,626 Posts
    • 12,839 Thanks
    The Deep
    I found this on Legal Beagles

    11. Furthermore, the defendant's assertion that signage was incapable of forming a contract is wrong. The finding of District Judge Gillman in the recent case of UK Parking Control Ltd v Mr Somduth Peenith (2016), sitting at the County Court at Edmonton, which has decided on similar facts, stated that such signage is not an absolute prohibition but merely states that if a driver is to park a vehicle at this site, they must be authorised to do so and will be authorised if they comply with the T&C's of parking, it is reasonable and logical to interpret from the signage that parking is offered subject to the clearly displayed terms and conditions. A copy of the judgement is attached at Exhibit AY/5.

    and this on Parking Prankster

    The SCS Law rep referred the Judge to UKPC V Peenith (C9QZ6915) and stated signage erected at the site was proof of a contract. The Judge said of this case 'that's not binding on me'.


    UKPC may struggle if they intend to rely on this.
    Last edited by The Deep; 18-04-2019 at 9:50 AM.
    You never know how far you can go until you go too far.
    • FutureTrunks
    • By FutureTrunks 18th Apr 19, 11:18 AM
    • 55 Posts
    • 20 Thanks
    FutureTrunks
    So I just handed my bundle in to the County Court, unfortunately there wasn't anyone there to accept the bundle so the security guard told me to put it in a Dropbox specifically for documents which would be picked up later.

    I was hesitant to put it in there because I would have rather waited and gave it to someone official but whoever the relevant person would be wouldn't be back for a while so I left it there and sent an email to the court immediately informing them of my action.

    Hope this was the right thing to do
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 18th Apr 19, 12:15 PM
    • 70,207 Posts
    • 82,779 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    Yes, given the next working day is next Tuesday, this was the right thing to do.

    I assume you have also emailed everything - your WS and all evidence attached - to SCS law as well, and please print out the proof of the sent email and put that in your file in case at the hearing they pretend they were never served the WS/evidence.

    Happens a LOT and people need to be ready to expose the lies.
    Last edited by Coupon-mad; 18-04-2019 at 12:26 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
    • FutureTrunks
    • By FutureTrunks 18th Apr 19, 12:37 PM
    • 55 Posts
    • 20 Thanks
    FutureTrunks
    Yes I've sent them theirs too, I added my own email address to the email too to prove it was sent successfully. Now I guess it's on to my skeleton defence?
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 18th Apr 19, 1:40 PM
    • 70,207 Posts
    • 82,779 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    Skeleton argument, yes. If you want to do one to summarise the legal aspects of the defence argument (not compulsory).
    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
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

1,374Posts Today

4,215Users online

Martin's Twitter
  • Have a great Easter, or a chag sameach to those like me attending Passover seder tomorrow. I?m taking all of next? https://t.co/qrAFTIpqWl

  • RT @rowlyc1980: A whopping 18 days off work for only 9 days leave! I?ll have a bit of that please......thanks @MartinSLewis for your crafty?

  • RT @dinokyp: That feeling when you realise that you have 18 days of work and only used 9 days of your annual leave! Thanks @MartinSLewis h?

  • Follow Martin