PePiPoo Helping the motorist get justice

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

Multiple PCNs for parking in flat car park
HenryHippo
post Sun, 2 Jul 2017 - 19:58
Post #1


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 235
Joined: 17 Mar 2017
Member No.: 90,917



At the end of 2016 the block of flats I live in introduced parking permits and PCNs.

I didn't actually get a permit through the post, but most people did in the block. Consequently the car I own which was parked in the car park had 7 PCNs within a 4 week period and the total invoice is £1,160

I ignored the letters that came in the post, but now they have sent me the attached letters for a not insubstantial amount

Does the fact that I didn't get a permit through the post before they enforced the tickets count as a defence? Eventually they sent me one by recorded delivery at which point I had had several tickets.

Quite miffed to be PCNd in my own home.








This post has been edited by HenryHippo: Sun, 2 Jul 2017 - 19:59
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
19 Pages V   1 2 3 > »   
Start new topic
Replies (1 - 19)
Advertisement
post Sun, 2 Jul 2017 - 19:58
Post #


Advertise here!









Go to the top of the page
 
Quote Post
SchoolRunMum
post Sun, 2 Jul 2017 - 21:29
Post #2


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 18,406
Joined: 20 Sep 2009
Member No.: 32,130



PLEASE be more than 'quite miffed'. This is an utterly deplorable scam against residents. We see this all the time. Did any of the residents even pick up a Googling finger before this was imposed on you all, and actually see who the Managing Agents have let loose among your cars?

http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showtopic=63597

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/parki...-photos-6420974

And did you all realise you do not need this rubbish, do not have to display any permits at all and quite likely have rights to park already? They can't change that, the MA can't take it away or insist on permits or introduce new terms that are not in your lease/tenancy agreements.

Read this:

http://parking-prankster.blogspot.co.uk/20...al-parking.html

And read the links in Lynnzer's signature on his posts on this very forum, showing you how to fight back. Stop being 'quite miffed'! You don't seem to realise that you and your legit visitors, friends & relatives will ALL continue to get fake PCNs from this ex-clamper bunch of shysters, for all the time they are allowed to infest your land. Get angry.

This approach worked on MSE:

http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.php?t=5588292

You need to act quickly and assertively or you WILL get a court claim later this month - best to get them cancelled before that, although it is defendable.


QUOTE
I didn't actually get a permit through the post, but most people did in the block. Consequently the car I own which was parked in the car park had 7 PCNs within a 4 week period and the total invoice is £1,160.

Does the fact that I didn't get a permit through the post before they enforced the tickets count as a defence? Eventually they sent me one by recorded delivery at which point I had had several tickets.


Of course.

Something like this would form that part of a detailed defence talking about derogation from grant and referencing YOUR rights, your primacy of contract:

QUOTE
As the resident had not been formally issued with a car parking permit in a timely fashion, the consequence of this is that any contract requiring display of a permit is null and void due to impossibility.


You should not be bowing to this predatory regime at all, read up on it:

http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showtopic=100916

http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showtopic=105050 (read all pages as it continues over a year, still ongoing)

http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showtopic=110213

http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showtopic=113572




Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
ostell
post Sun, 2 Jul 2017 - 21:31
Post #3


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 8,923
Joined: 8 Mar 2013
Member No.: 60,457



Read this web page and then get out your lease and see what it says about parking and whether you have to display a permit or pay a charge. Your lease takes precedence.

A photo of the signs would help.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
nosferatu1001
post Mon, 3 Jul 2017 - 09:23
Post #4


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 18,710
Joined: 27 Nov 2007
Member No.: 15,642



Show us your lease and what it says about right to apark / use communal spaces / etc.
lease or TA or whatever, dont care about the name. Just show us it

You MUST respond to that Letter Before Action and you only have a couple days to do so. So post those up anbd get drafting a FIRM response teloling them you did not agree to the permit system, you alrady have the right to park, and therefore no consideration can flow from their client to you.
Furhter interference with your rights under your lease / AST / etc including raising a claim wil lbe met with a counter claim for interference and a breach of the DPA, as they had no cause to access your details.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
HenryHippo
post Mon, 3 Jul 2017 - 16:12
Post #5


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 235
Joined: 17 Mar 2017
Member No.: 90,917



Thanks everyone and SchoolRunMum as always

Been through my lease for anything to do with parking. The below does mention an "Allocated Parking Space" but this has never been the case. We were issued with permits and able to park where we pleased.



"Allocated Parking Space: The parking space shown on the Plan 1 being part of the Parking Spaces and numbered with the same plot number as the Demised Premises or such other parking space as the lessor may allocate from time to time if it becomes reasonably necessary to do so"

Rights Included in the demise

6) The right to exclusive use of the Allocated Parking Space for the purpose of parking a private motor vehicle not exceeding three tonnes in laden weight"



2) Not to use the Allocated Parking Space for any purpose other than the purpose of parking a private motor vechile not exceeeding three tonnes in gross laden weight of motor cycle thereon and not to park or allowe to be parked any motor vehicle weheeled vehicle or other form of trasnport on any other part of the Estate save as may be permitted under the terms of the rights granted elsewhere in this Lease





This post has been edited by HenryHippo: Mon, 3 Jul 2017 - 16:21
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
HenryHippo
post Mon, 3 Jul 2017 - 18:07
Post #6


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 235
Joined: 17 Mar 2017
Member No.: 90,917



Be great if I could get feedback tonight, hoping to do a response tonight and post / email in the morning
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Lynnzer
post Mon, 3 Jul 2017 - 18:14
Post #7


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 8,194
Joined: 9 Feb 2006
Member No.: 4,813



QUOTE (HenryHippo @ Mon, 3 Jul 2017 - 19:07) *
Be great if I could get feedback tonight, hoping to do a response tonight and post / email in the morning

My first template letter to both the Managing Agent and UKPC Ltd copied to SCS Law.
Nothing more than that at present then when they don't respond suitably you can hit them for more than they're claiming from you as either a counter-claim or separate claims.

Amend my letter to suit the circumstances and post here for appraisal first
I see a very big KERCHING coming your way. £££££££££££££££


--------------------
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
cabbyman
post Mon, 3 Jul 2017 - 18:33
Post #8


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 6,069
Joined: 15 Dec 2007
From: South of John O'Groats, north of Cape Town.
Member No.: 16,066



The extracts you have posted above give you exclusive rights to your parking space as part of your lease. They are trespassing on both your land and your vehicle. As your lease doesn't require it, there is no way you need to display a permit until your current lease is determined and a new one executed.

As Lynnzer says: Kerching time is approaching!


--------------------
Cabbyman 10 PPCs 0
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
HenryHippo
post Mon, 3 Jul 2017 - 19:47
Post #9


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 235
Joined: 17 Mar 2017
Member No.: 90,917



QUOTE (Lynnzer @ Mon, 3 Jul 2017 - 19:14) *
QUOTE (HenryHippo @ Mon, 3 Jul 2017 - 19:07) *
Be great if I could get feedback tonight, hoping to do a response tonight and post / email in the morning

My first template letter to both the Managing Agent and UKPC Ltd copied to SCS Law.
Nothing more than that at present then when they don't respond suitably you can hit them for more than they're claiming from you as either a counter-claim or separate claims.

Amend my letter to suit the circumstances and post here for appraisal first
I see a very big KERCHING coming your way. £££££££££££££££



QUOTE (cabbyman @ Mon, 3 Jul 2017 - 19:33) *
The extracts you have posted above give you exclusive rights to your parking space as part of your lease. They are trespassing on both your land and your vehicle. As your lease doesn't require it, there is no way you need to display a permit until your current lease is determined and a new one executed.

As Lynnzer says: Kerching time is approaching!


Bloody Nora, pay day for me

Although as with my other thread, any monies will go to charity
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
HenryHippo
post Mon, 3 Jul 2017 - 20:02
Post #10


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 235
Joined: 17 Mar 2017
Member No.: 90,917



Went for £1,500 trespass claim and £500 for unlawful use of my data. Any critic welcome

Dear Sirs,
I refer to PCN ******* Insert all of the numbers Letter before action, re PCN ******

The above Notice to Keeper has been served on me as the registered keeper of vehicle Reg. ****** Your PCN draws to my attention that you are using my allocated car parking areas for your own business purposes. My lease allows unfettered occupational rights to the parking areas, which means you are operating a predatory business on land which you have no overriding rights in.
Your involvement on this land will have supposedly been to prevent parking by uninvited persons, for the benefit of the actual leaseholders and their invited guests. Instead you carry out a predatory operation on those very people whose interests you are purportedly there to uphold.
In any case, my lease in respect of the common areas of the grounds and my designated parking area places no restrictions on the parking facilities such as those you have tried to imply, let alone a penalty regime for an alleged contractual offer to use my own allocated parking area I already have such rights or to place restrictions on visiting guests. You cannot offer me something I already have, and I am not obliged to accept an offer in such circumstances.
My lease remains the same as when it was originally agreed as part of my residential rights. There are no restrictions on parking within it and I believe you are acting unlawfully by attempting to take legal action when I have an absolute right of peaceful enjoyment on the land including allowing my guests free use of it.
If you feel that you have been misled by the Managing Agents insofar as they have contracted with you to operate here, then that is something you must take up with them directly. It is of little interest to me as I have unequivocal unfettered right of peaceful enjoyment on the land.
I draw you attention to the case of Jopson v Homeguard , case 2906J in Oxford County Court where the appeal heard by his honour Judge Harris QC. This was an appeal against a previous hearing which was awarded in favour of Homeguard, in similar circumstances as those addressed in my dispute with you. The Judge allowed the appeal in favour of Mrs Jopson. I also draw your attention to PACE v Mr (N Redacted), case C6GF14F0 in Croydon county court where the case was heard by District Judge Coonan. In summing up he stated " I have before me a tenancy agreement which gives Mr [N. redacted] the right to park on the estate and it does not say “on condition that you display a permit”. It does not say that, so he has that right. What Pace Recovery is seeking to do is, unilaterally outside the contract, restrict that right to only when a permit is displayed. Pace Recovery cannot do that."
As you have seen fit to attempt to charge me the sum of £1,160 as a legitimate amount for the use of my own leaseholder rights to the areas of the property, I hereby claim an amount of £1,500 for damages for the tort of trespass and tortious interference of my leaseholder rights, occasioned by the attempt to restrict my rightful use of the designated area.
Additional matters
You have obtained my details from the DVLA when you have no right to do so.
I am of the opinion that you don't care if you have rights and perhaps rely on your victims believing that some contract with the Managing Agent of the premises or even the landowner, allows you to apply parking terms on the car parking spaces at the premises. This is a mistaken assumption, as you will know anyway.
I am a resident at the premises to which the parking is attached as a lease and which allows unfettered rights to the use of the communal areas and parking facilities.
You have a duty of care to comply with the necessary Code of Practice of your Accredited Trade Association, the International Parking Community. The requirements laid out in the Code of practice make it clear that you must only operate on land where you have the landholder’s permission. You have failed in that duty.
Your involvement in your supposed parking management arrangements place on you an obligation to ensure that proper consideration is given to all the facts. Lax contractual assessment is not an excuse for a derogation of your duty. A breach of the Data Protect Act is a matter of fact. You have either breached it or you haven't. Whatever excuse you present for the breach does not excuse it in any way as you are under the requirement to show due diligence and a duty of care to ensure that personal details are obtained lawfully and then used lawfully from then on.
You will know that as this is a residential location the residents will have some sort of property rights, either by way of a lease or as a freehold resident with attached easements. It is incumbent upon you to consider the resident's rights in respect of the use of parking spaces. If you contracted with the managing agents to “control” the parking facilities they have misdirected you, although it is common knowledge that they often get a kick-back in commission for allowing predatory parking companies to take control of land. They have no other real interest otherwise.
If it was the landowner who contracted with you then the same applies. A landowner cannot restrict a privilege within an agreed covenant and it is your responsibility to ask the right questions and ensure that the operation of parking control is lawful.
I draw your attention to the case of Saeed v Plustrade Ltd [2001] EWCA Civ 2011 (20th December, 2001) heard at the Royal Courts of Justice by LORD JUSTICE AULD, LORD JUSTICE ROBERT WALKER and SIR CHRISTOPHER SLADE where they found that a landlord cannot take away something given within a lease, specifically a derogation of parking rights already afforded within a lease.
However you look at this, as I have an absolute right to use of the parking facilities without any intervention from you or anyone else, a breach of the Data Protection Act HAS occurred as you had no reasonable cause to apply for and use my personal details from the DVLA. I am therefore submitting a complaint to both the DVLA and the Information Commissioner’s Office about your misuse of personal data.
I draw your attention to the case of Lireza Ittihadieh v 5-11 Ceyne Gardens RTM Company Ltd & others at http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2017/121.html which makes it clear that once data has been accessed for personal use then you become the Data Controller, something which the DVLA KADOE Contract also makes clear.
I now make a claim against you for punitive damages to the extent of £1,500 for the wrongful application for, and subsequent misuse of my information from the DVLA. This is a serious matter and one which is both stressful and degrading. It impinges on my rights as a freehold resident, has caused some considerable anxiety and distress and to top it all off, you are now warning me of a claim being likely in a country court for the sum of money you deem you are entitled to. This is an atrocious situation without any merit at all, and I believe may also be a fraudulent action under the auspices of the Fraud Act 2006 for Fraud by false representation which is a criminal offence that carries a sentence of up to 12 months imprisonment on summary conviction.
BE AWARE that this matter is now in your knowledge. An excuse of not knowing a criminal act had occurred due to the ill-constructed contract you have to “manage” the parking, now has no merit. I will ensure that anyone else within the residential complex whom is being targeted by you from now on will be made full aware of your illegal activity and I will also be considering legal action against you for fraud myself anyway. I will first see how you handle this claim before I make a complaint to the police.
I now claim the amount of £1,500 for your trespass against my covenanted rights.
An additional amount of £500 for the damages is also claimed for wrongful application of, and misuse of the data from the DVLA. This is already adjudicated on as being reasonable as evidenced by the case of Halliday v Creation Consumer Finance Ltd [2013] All ER (D) 199
The total amount claimed is therefore £2,000
To prevent this matter being taken to court I require payment within 14 working days from 2 days of the date of this letter. Failure of this will result in a court claim being instigated and consequential separate costs being added for the added expense. I have made it known already that I will also considering a police complaint for the fraud dependant on the response to this claim.
Yours sincerely
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Jlc
post Mon, 3 Jul 2017 - 20:05
Post #11


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 29,468
Joined: 25 Aug 2011
From: With Mickey
Member No.: 49,223



The Police won't be interested in a 'civil' matter. Drop the references.


--------------------
RK=Registered Keeper, OP=Original Poster (You!), CoFP=Conditional Offer of Fixed Penalty, NtK=Notice to Keeper, NtD=Notice to Driver
PoFA=Protection of Freedoms Act, SAC=Safety Awareness Course, NIP=Notice of Intended Prosecution, ADR=Alternative Dispute Resolution
PPC=Private Parking Company, LBCCC=Letter Before County Court Claim, PII=Personally Identifiable Information

Private Parking - remember, they just want your money and will say almost anything to get it.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
HenryHippo
post Mon, 3 Jul 2017 - 21:05
Post #12


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 235
Joined: 17 Mar 2017
Member No.: 90,917



QUOTE (Jlc @ Mon, 3 Jul 2017 - 21:05) *
The Police won't be interested in a 'civil' matter. Drop the references.


I'm quoting Lynnzer's template, which as far as I know is a near identical case to mine
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
HenryHippo
post Tue, 4 Jul 2017 - 08:33
Post #13


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 235
Joined: 17 Mar 2017
Member No.: 90,917



Anyone ?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Lynnzer
post Tue, 4 Jul 2017 - 08:56
Post #14


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 8,194
Joined: 9 Feb 2006
Member No.: 4,813



QUOTE (HenryHippo @ Tue, 4 Jul 2017 - 09:33) *
Anyone ?

The police matter is, as mentioned, unlikely to sway anyone but it adds a threat of another level of action that may just shake them out of their tree.
You can leave it or remove it. It won't make a lot of difference either way but send the letters by first class post with a proof of posting certificate and perhaps back that up by an email. When I say "letters", I mean the one to the managing agents as well for tortious interference. Another template in my link for that.

There's another big win on here reported in Swansea.

This post has been edited by Lynnzer: Tue, 4 Jul 2017 - 08:57


--------------------
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
HenryHippo
post Tue, 4 Jul 2017 - 09:03
Post #15


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 235
Joined: 17 Mar 2017
Member No.: 90,917



QUOTE (Lynnzer @ Tue, 4 Jul 2017 - 09:56) *
QUOTE (HenryHippo @ Tue, 4 Jul 2017 - 09:33) *
Anyone ?

The police matter is, as mentioned, unlikely to sway anyone but it adds a threat of another level of action that may just shake them out of their tree.
You can leave it or remove it. It won't make a lot of difference either way but send the letters by first class post with a proof of posting certificate and perhaps back that up by an email. When I say "letters", I mean the one to the managing agents as well for tortious interference. Another template in my link for that.

There's another big win on here reported in Swansea.


Thanks.

So the goal is to send this letter to the other party's solicitors in the aim of making them drop the case? Although admittedly that isn't what I want if I am likely to get a big payout. So perhaps from that point of view I am better off not responding and letting them take this to court?

Will get this letter out the way first before the managing agent letter
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
HenryHippo
post Tue, 4 Jul 2017 - 09:52
Post #16


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 235
Joined: 17 Mar 2017
Member No.: 90,917



QUOTE (Lynnzer @ Tue, 4 Jul 2017 - 09:56) *
QUOTE (HenryHippo @ Tue, 4 Jul 2017 - 09:33) *
Anyone ?

The police matter is, as mentioned, unlikely to sway anyone but it adds a threat of another level of action that may just shake them out of their tree.
You can leave it or remove it. It won't make a lot of difference either way but send the letters by first class post with a proof of posting certificate and perhaps back that up by an email. When I say "letters", I mean the one to the managing agents as well for tortious interference. Another template in my link for that.

There's another big win on here reported in Swansea.


Oh and do you think my £1,500 + £500 amount is reasonable?

Or should I multiple by 6 given there are 6 PCNs ?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
nosferatu1001
post Tue, 4 Jul 2017 - 11:45
Post #17


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 18,710
Joined: 27 Nov 2007
Member No.: 15,642



You msut respond. Thats why we said you must respond. Failing to respond is unreasonable, and can leave you on the hook fpor their costs regardless of whether you win or not.

" The below does mention an "Allocated Parking Space" but this has never been the case"

What in hell does htis mean? Do you have an allocated space as noted on the lease? Simple yes or no. I dont care about permits, just be clear - DO YOU HAVE AN ALLOCATED SPACE
If no then all the guff above about trespass does not apply.

£1500 for trespass? Really? How will you prove that amount of damage?

I woudl instead give an amount of DPA damage Per PCN, but at a lower amount.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
HenryHippo
post Tue, 4 Jul 2017 - 12:43
Post #18


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 235
Joined: 17 Mar 2017
Member No.: 90,917



QUOTE (nosferatu1001 @ Tue, 4 Jul 2017 - 12:45) *
You msut respond. Thats why we said you must respond. Failing to respond is unreasonable, and can leave you on the hook fpor their costs regardless of whether you win or not.

" The below does mention an "Allocated Parking Space" but this has never been the case"

What in hell does htis mean? Do you have an allocated space as noted on the lease? Simple yes or no. I dont care about permits, just be clear - DO YOU HAVE AN ALLOCATED SPACE
If no then all the guff above about trespass does not apply.

£1500 for trespass? Really? How will you prove that amount of damage?

I woudl instead give an amount of DPA damage Per PCN, but at a lower amount.


RE the £1500 I was going off one of the cases in the links above

I don't have an allocated parking bay, there is however a communal parking area and residents can park in any one of these that is free

Maybe "Allocated Parking Space" refers to the communal parking area? Or residents were allocated a specific spot when the block was built but this was abolished.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
nosferatu1001
post Tue, 4 Jul 2017 - 13:29
Post #19


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 18,710
Joined: 27 Nov 2007
Member No.: 15,642



So what is shown on Plan 1? That would answer your query as to what is covered!

Yes, so I ask again: how wil you demonstrate entitlement to £1500? You cant just say "thats what another case said" in court, now can you? Have you looked at the filing fee for a £2000 claim?

You DO have 6 DPA breaches, so you can go for say £250 for each breach, and thats then £1500....and means a court may decide actually its £150 per DPA breach, thus dropping to £900 HOWEVER a simple £1500 trespass claim - when nominal damages are £1 - mayjust get struck entirely.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
HenryHippo
post Tue, 4 Jul 2017 - 14:01
Post #20


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 235
Joined: 17 Mar 2017
Member No.: 90,917



QUOTE (nosferatu1001 @ Tue, 4 Jul 2017 - 14:29) *
So what is shown on Plan 1? That would answer your query as to what is covered!

Yes, so I ask again: how wil you demonstrate entitlement to £1500? You cant just say "thats what another case said" in court, now can you? Have you looked at the filing fee for a £2000 claim?

You DO have 6 DPA breaches, so you can go for say £250 for each breach, and thats then £1500....and means a court may decide actually its £150 per DPA breach, thus dropping to £900 HOWEVER a simple £1500 trespass claim - when nominal damages are £1 - mayjust get struck entirely.


Plan 1 is just a generic blueprint of the communal car park. Have removed trespass claims from my letter now and going for 5 x £250.

Dear Sirs,
I refer to PCN ******* Insert all of the numbers Letter before action, re PCN ******

The above Notice to Keeper has been served on me as the registered keeper of vehicle Reg. ****** Your PCN draws to my attention that you are using the communal car parking areas for your own business purposes. My lease allows unfettered occupational rights to the parking areas, which means you are operating a predatory business on land which you have no overriding rights in.
Your involvement on this land will have supposedly been to prevent parking by uninvited persons, for the benefit of the actual leaseholders and their invited guests. Instead you carry out a predatory operation on those very people whose interests you are purportedly there to uphold.
In any case, my lease in respect of the common areas of the grounds and the communal parking area places no restrictions on the parking facilities such as those you have tried to imply, let alone a penalty regime for an alleged contractual offer to use the communal parking area I already have such rights or to place restrictions on visiting guests. You cannot offer me something I already have, and I am not obliged to accept an offer in such circumstances.
My lease remains the same as when it was originally agreed as part of my residential rights. There are no restrictions on parking within it and I believe you are acting unlawfully by attempting to take legal action when I have an absolute right of peaceful enjoyment on the land including allowing my guests free use of it.
If you feel that you have been misled by the Managing Agents insofar as they have contracted with you to operate here, then that is something you must take up with them directly. It is of little interest to me as I have unequivocal unfettered right of peaceful enjoyment on the land.
I draw you attention to the case of Jopson v Homeguard , case 2906J in Oxford County Court where the appeal heard by his honour Judge Harris QC. This was an appeal against a previous hearing which was awarded in favour of Homeguard, in similar circumstances as those addressed in my dispute with you. The Judge allowed the appeal in favour of Mrs Jopson. I also draw your attention to PACE v Mr (N Redacted), case C6GF14F0 in Croydon county court where the case was heard by District Judge Coonan. In summing up he stated " I have before me a tenancy agreement which gives Mr [N. redacted] the right to park on the estate and it does not say “on condition that you display a permit”. It does not say that, so he has that right. What Pace Recovery is seeking to do is, unilaterally outside the contract, restrict that right to only when a permit is displayed. Pace Recovery cannot do that."
Additional matters
You have obtained my details from the DVLA when you have no right to do so.
I am of the opinion that you don't care if you have rights and perhaps rely on your victims believing that some contract with the Managing Agent of the premises or even the landowner, allows you to apply parking terms on the car parking spaces at the premises. This is a mistaken assumption, as you will know anyway.
I am a resident at the premises to which the parking is attached as a lease and which allows unfettered rights to the use of the communal areas and parking facilities.
You have a duty of care to comply with the necessary Code of Practice of your Accredited Trade Association, the International Parking Community. The requirements laid out in the Code of practice make it clear that you must only operate on land where you have the landholder’s permission. You have failed in that duty.
Your involvement in your supposed parking management arrangements place on you an obligation to ensure that proper consideration is given to all the facts. Lax contractual assessment is not an excuse for a derogation of your duty. A breach of the Data Protect Act is a matter of fact. You have either breached it or you haven't. Whatever excuse you present for the breach does not excuse it in any way as you are under the requirement to show due diligence and a duty of care to ensure that personal details are obtained lawfully and then used lawfully from then on.
You will know that as this is a residential location the residents will have some sort of property rights, either by way of a lease or as a freehold resident with attached easements. It is incumbent upon you to consider the resident's rights in respect of the use of parking spaces. If you contracted with the managing agents to “control” the parking facilities they have misdirected you, although it is common knowledge that they often get a kick-back in commission for allowing predatory parking companies to take control of land. They have no other real interest otherwise.
If it was the landowner who contracted with you then the same applies. A landowner cannot restrict a privilege within an agreed covenant and it is your responsibility to ask the right questions and ensure that the operation of parking control is lawful.
I draw your attention to the case of Saeed v Plustrade Ltd [2001] EWCA Civ 2011 (20th December, 2001) heard at the Royal Courts of Justice by LORD JUSTICE AULD, LORD JUSTICE ROBERT WALKER and SIR CHRISTOPHER SLADE where they found that a landlord cannot take away something given within a lease, specifically a derogation of parking rights already afforded within a lease.
However you look at this, as I have an absolute right to use of the parking facilities without any intervention from you or anyone else, a breach of the Data Protection Act HAS occurred as you had no reasonable cause to apply for and use my personal details from the DVLA. I am therefore submitting a complaint to both the DVLA and the Information Commissioner’s Office about your misuse of personal data.
I draw your attention to the case of Lireza Ittihadieh v 5-11 Ceyne Gardens RTM Company Ltd & others at http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2017/121.html which makes it clear that once data has been accessed for personal use then you become the Data Controller, something which the DVLA KADOE Contract also makes clear.
I now make a claim against you for punitive damages to the extent of £250 per instance for the wrongful application for, and subsequent misuse of my information from the DVLA. Given that there are six instances in total, this amounts to £1,500. This is a serious matter and one which is both stressful and degrading. It impinges on my rights as a freehold resident, has caused some considerable anxiety and distress and to top it all off, you are now warning me of a claim being likely in a country court for the sum of money you deem you are entitled to. This is an atrocious situation without any merit at all, and I believe may also be a fraudulent action under the auspices of the Fraud Act 2006 for Fraud by false representation which is a criminal offence that carries a sentence of up to 12 months imprisonment on summary conviction.
BE AWARE that this matter is now in your knowledge. An excuse of not knowing a criminal act had occurred due to the ill-constructed contract you have to “manage” the parking, now has no merit. I will ensure that anyone else within the residential complex whom is being targeted by you from now on will be made full aware of your illegal activity and I will also be considering legal action against you for fraud myself anyway. I will first see how you handle this claim before I make a complaint to the police.
An amount of £1500 for the damages is claimed for wrongful application of, and misuse of the data from the DVLA. This is already adjudicated on as being reasonable as evidenced by the case of Halliday v Creation Consumer Finance Ltd [2013] All ER (D) 199
To prevent this matter being taken to court I require payment within 14 working days from 2 days of the date of this letter. Failure of this will result in a court claim being instigated and consequential separate costs being added for the added expense. I have made it known already that I will also considering a police complaint for the fraud dependant on the response to this claim.
Yours sincerely
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

19 Pages V   1 2 3 > » 
Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 



Advertisement

Advertise here!

RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: Saturday, 15th December 2018 - 21:47
Pepipoo uses cookies. You can find details of the cookies we use here along with links to information on how to manage them.
Please click the button to accept our cookies and hide this message. We’ll also assume that you’re happy to accept them if you continue to use the site.