PePiPoo Helping the motorist get justice Support health workers

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

Court action by parking company for parking in own space, Threads merged x3
tyson987
post Tue, 18 Jun 2019 - 19:49
Post #1


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 17
Joined: 18 Jun 2019
Member No.: 104,352



I have received 2 county court claims from BW Legal for PCNs issued by Armtrac on my own parking space. One of which a ticket was placed on the car windscreen, the other for which no ticket was received.

Their claim states that I had not displayed a valid permit. I had never been issued with any permit by the management company but displayed the permit that had been given to me by the previous owner of the property. As my car is a company car, they have already been notified of my details as the driver by myself for one PCN and my employer (via the lease company and DVLA) for the other.

I have done SARS request to Armtrac and received a stack of letters from them in return which are quite different to the ones that I have actually received from them.

I have already sent the acknowledgment and the below response to the initial court claim documentation with copies of all the letters that I have sent to both Armtrac and BW legal stating pretty much the same since thing since the first communication from Armtrac.

I deny all of the allegations in this claim as I do not believe that this parking charge is valid for the following reasons:

1. I am a shareholder of XXX Limited, the owner of the land (see appendix 1)
2. I am the leaseholder of XXX and the associated parking space (appendix 2)
3. The landlords covenants in the leaseholders agreement states “to permit the Tenant peaceably and quietly to hold and enjoy the premises without any interruption or disburbance from the landlord or those claiming under it.” (appendix 3).There also is no mention in the deeds of any type of parking permit to be displayed.

Despite my request to Armtrac Security Services and their representatives (letters appendix 6 and 8) for a copy of their contracts or agreements with the landholders (XXXXXX) to issue tickets or any other agreements that could unilaterally amend my leasehold agreement with the land owner (XXXXXX), none have been provided.

I have also notified Armtrac Security and their legal representatives (appendix 5f &6) of a body of case law which has established that, under primacy of contract, the leasehold agreement with the landlord will override any other agreements or contracts that have been made (details below).
Pace v Mr N [2016] C6GF14F0 [2016] where it was found that the parking company could not override the tenant's right to park by requiring a permit to park.
Link Parking v Ms P C7GF50J7 [2016] it was also found that the parking company could not override the tenant's right to park by requiring a permit to park.

4. The correct parking permit (as issued by the Management company for XXXXXXX Ltd) was clearly displayed in the car window (evidence in appendix 4)
I have requested in writing (appendices 6 and 8) details and evidence as to why they consider the permit to be invalid and what would render it invalid along with evidence that they have issued me with, what they would consider, a valid parking permit. No satisfactory answer has been provided.

I believe that the facts stated in this claim form are true
(Signed)

I have now been sent a Directions questionnaire from the court so it looks like it is going ahead. I am just wondering what I need to do next? Do I have a reasonable case? Will I get the opportunity to submit a more detailed defence? If so what else should I include and when will this need to be done by? Will I get more detail of their claim before I submit it? Any help is much appreciated!

I have also issued a notice before action to Armtrac for what I believe to be a number of data protection breaches including changing my address and sending notice before action and court claim to the wrong address, despite being told on every piece of correspondence of the correct address. As I have received no response from them, I would now like to take further action through the county court. Can I also post this in this thread for advice?

TIA

This post has been edited by tyson987: Tue, 18 Jun 2019 - 20:30
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
2 Pages V  < 1 2  
Start new topic
Replies (20 - 21)
nosferatu1001
post Thu, 28 Nov 2019 - 09:22
Post #21


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 28,687
Joined: 27 Nov 2007
Member No.: 15,642



If you are including a quote, then dont have it as 2) by itself - I would indent it as 1.1, and then start the quote with the reference in the lease it applies to e..g schedule 2 para 6.3. However defences do not have quotes, they are bare arguments.

Also, all that grants is peaceable enjoyment. It does not state exclusive possession, nor does it state the parking space is included, nor who the landlord is.

I presume at 4) you meant permit?
This is a reiteration of your argument at 1, just longer. Why do it twice?

The lien "there has been no ....from the management company" is dangerous as is. State there has been NO FORMAL VARIATION TO THE LEASE agreed to by the defendant, nor has a consultation been undertaken with at least 75% of leaseholders agreeing and no more than 10% disagreeing such that a varation could be forced upon a leaseholder .

5) That permissoin isnt the derogation, of course. The derogation is statring that you must now have a permit in order to park in a space that is demised to you already, under a superior contract, as otherwise you are not permitted to park. Jopson v Homeguard, appeal court ruling - you MUST obtain this and read it andunderstand primacy of contract.

6) Reiterates the same point, third time now?

7) No, be stronger. You aver they do not have permission from the landholder to operate their scheme, as you by virtue of the lease ARE the landholder. and you have made no such agreement This permission is required as part of the ... Code of Practice at ... and compliance with the code of practice was held to be a key determiner that a charge can escape being a penalty in the SC case PE v Beavis

8) parking charge. Make sure it is clear there is nocommerical justification - that is also a key point from Beavis

9) I would put the facts - background - up top. Make it really, really clear. The driver was unloading. Dont mention the drink.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Advertisement
post Thu, 28 Nov 2019 - 09:22
Post #


Advertise here!









Go to the top of the page
 
Quote Post
tyson987
post Thu, 28 Nov 2019 - 19:45
Post #22


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 17
Joined: 18 Jun 2019
Member No.: 104,352



Great thanks nosferatu1001 for your help!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

2 Pages V  < 1 2
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: Thursday, 28th March 2024 - 18:32
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.
IPS Driver Error

IPS Driver Error

There appears to be an error with the database.
You can try to refresh the page by clicking here