PePiPoo Helping the motorist get justice

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

£2000 of tickets - Permit expired without us knowing or being informed, Need help - have appealed but told to contact debt recovery or IAS
alfxlon
post Thu, 11 May 2017 - 15:32
Post #1


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 59
Joined: 11 May 2017
Member No.: 91,917



Hi Everyone,

I’d be really grateful if someone could help with this as it’s getting really stressful – 12 tickets each at £160 and mounting. I’ve trawled through the other threads to find exact answers but I’m still unclear what to.

Basically I park my car in my friend’s apartment car park (with permit displayed). My friend who owns the space is also named insured driver. Neither of us really use the car or see it that often as we both cycle or use public transport.

Anyway, I needed to use the car recently but found a load of tickets on it (from private parking management company). I had no idea what they were for so I phoned up the debt collection company who eventually told me it was because my permit had expired. We had no idea this had happened because our existing permit had no expiry date written on it. Also they never wrote to him telling him they’d expired the permit or issued him with a new one. Because my place (where vehicle is registered) is a building site at the moment I’m living at a forwarding address, all the notices came through late to me so was delayed in appealing.

Anyway for each of these tickets I get a separate correspondence. They’re now coming from a debt collection agency (TRACE) and now letters from solicitors Gladstone’s requesting payment (with increasing costs).

I wrote to the PCN company with the letter of appeal (see below) and they wrote back saying they are unable to process my appeal as my case is with one of their external debt collection agencies and I’d need to contact them. They say I can appeal through IAS (see response letter below).

My question is, what’s the best thing to do now? Should I appeal through IAS? Other options? £2000 plus seems excessive especially as they didn’t inform us or provide new permit!!

Would really appreciate any help

many thanks


<I anonymised the letter – I’m Mr C and registered Keeper. Mr S is owner of the car space and permit and insured driver on vehicle>

Dear Sir / Madam

Vehicle Registration Number: XYZ
Ticket References:
PCM Ref Date of Issue PCN ticket Description Reason later established by calling TRACE Debt recovery
PM1 07/10/2016 Parked without clearly displaying a valid PCM UK Ltd Permit No permit displayed
PM2 05/11/2016 Parked without clearly displaying a valid PCM UK Ltd Permit Displaying expired permit
PM3 07/11/2016 Parked without clearly displaying a valid PCM UK Ltd Permit Displaying expired permit
PM4 12/11/2016 Parked without clearly displaying a valid PCM UK Ltd Permit Displaying expired permit
PM5 15/11/2016 Parked without clearly displaying a valid PCM UK Ltd Permit Displaying expired permit
PM6 19/11/2016 Parked without clearly displaying a valid PCM UK Ltd Permit Displaying expired permit
PM7 22/11/2016 Parked without clearly displaying a valid PCM UK Ltd Permit Displaying expired permit
PM8 03/12/2016 Parked without clearly displaying a valid PCM UK Ltd Permit Displaying expired permit
PM9 13/12/2016 Parked without clearly displaying a valid PCM UK Ltd Permit Displaying expired permit
PM10 11/01/2017 Parked without clearly displaying a valid PCM UK Ltd Permit Displaying expired permit
PM11 17/01/2017 Parked without clearly displaying a valid PCM UK Ltd Permit Displaying expired permit
PM12 29/01/2017 Parked without clearly displaying a valid PCM UK Ltd Permit Displaying expired permit

We are writing to appeal the above parking charges. Owing to the circumstances explained below we believe that the tickets have been unfairly issued because of administration issues of the parking management company (Parking Control Management (UK) Ltd) and other circumstances beyond our control.

We can confirm that ‘Mr S’ is resident owner in the building (address of building where tickets were issued managed by PCM) and owner of the parking space occupied by the vehicle (Registration XYZ). He is fully paid-up in terms of his building service charges which include financial contribution to the management of the car park and entitlement to a valid parking permit. ‘Mr C’ is the registered owner of the vehicle and we are close friends. ‘Mr S’ is a named insured driver on the vehicle (see attached evidence).

We note that all of the parking tickets except the first relate to “displaying an expired permit”. This information was only recently established (18/4/17) by contacting the debt recovery agency, TRACE as this information isn’t stated on any of the parking control notices or correspondences relating to the charges.

We can truthfully inform you that we had no awareness that the permit had expired. This is owing to three administration issues caused by the parking management company as follows:

1. The permit supplied by the parking management company that was displayed in the vehicle has no expiry date written on it (see photocopy evidence of permit supplied).
2. ‘Mr S’ received no correspondence from the parking management company informing him of the expiry of the existing permit.
3. ‘Mr S’ has not been supplied with a new permit.

As ‘Mr S’ pays for parking facilities through his service charge, we feel it’s reasonable to expect the parking management company to make adequate arrangements to inform him of the decision to invalidate his existing permit (given there was no expiry date on the permit) and provide him with a new one. This is something the parking management company failed to do. As a result neither of us was aware that the parking management company had invalidated the displayed permit and required us to display a new one.

It is relevant to inform you that the vehicle is rarely used or viewed by either of us as we generally cycle and / or use London public transport. Because of this, there became a build-up of tickets on the vehicle without us noticing. However, we note that not all of the tickets have been recovered from the vehicle as some appear to have been removed without our knowledge (we are not in possession of these tickets). A comprehensive list of ticket numbers has subsequently been established by phoning the number on debt recovery letters received at the registered owners address, ‘Mr C’, at <registered vehicle address>. However, these letters were received late owing to the property being under renovation and the charge notices arriving delayed (and in bulk) at ‘Mr C’s forwarding address at <Mr C’s forwarding address>.

Given the circumstances detailed above, I would be grateful if you could retract the charges relating to displaying an expired permit. In relation to the first charge (PM1), the permit had fallen down the dash and wasn’t displayed (as shown in the photographic evidence). This was our fault and we are happy to pay this charge however, owing to the same issues described above, we request that that the initial charge of £60 is applied as part of this appeal?

Can I also ask that you supply ‘Mr S’ with a valid permit as he is still not in receipt of one and unable to use the space which has been paid for. Also, please note that the car has now been sold (as we have nowhere to park) and ‘Mr C’ is no longer the registered owner of the vehicle.

I look forward to hearing from you

Yours Sincerely

‘Mr S’ & ‘Mr C’


Dear Mr C

Thank you for your correspondence regarding above Parking Charge Notice (PCN).

We are unable to process your appeal as your case is with one of our external debt collection agencies. You will now need to contract them regarding your case, all contact details for them can be found on previous correspondence they have sent you.

Debt Recovery Plus Ltd - <Telephone number>
Trace Debt Recovery Uk Ltd - <Telephone number>

The Independent Appeals Service (www.IAS.org) provides an Alternative Dispute Resolution scheme for disputes of this type. Debt Recovery Companies will not engage with the IAS Non-Standard Appeals Service at this stage

Yours Sincerely
PCM Appeals Team
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
10 Pages V  < 1 2 3 4 5 > »   
Start new topic
Replies (40 - 59)
Advertisement
post Thu, 11 May 2017 - 15:32
Post #


Advertise here!









Go to the top of the page
 
Quote Post
alfxlon
post Tue, 23 May 2017 - 14:37
Post #41


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 59
Joined: 11 May 2017
Member No.: 91,917



Thanks All

I've attached my draft final letter - would be grateful for any feedback. To be honest, I'm not sure re the amounts i'm claiming and how I've justified them. Taking Gan's point, I'm just tempted to ask for £250 so they just go away if that's the sweet spot. If it does go to court, can I make my claim higher or am i committed by the amounts in this letter??

thanks again
Attached File(s)
Attached File  AnSecondLettertoPCMV3.pdf ( 343.67K ) Number of downloads: 48
 
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
nosferatu1001
post Wed, 24 May 2017 - 07:32
Post #42


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 17,987
Joined: 27 Nov 2007
Member No.: 15,642



Gan actually pointed out that £1200 is utterly justifiable, as there is a legitimate interest in preventing misuse, and there hasbeen misuse of your info.

I would suggest you use PE vs Beavis as the additional justificaiton - as Gan already gave you.

Personally I think that draft based on teh template from Lynzzer is too long. It spends too long getting to the point, and hides the important info too deep inside.

This post has been edited by nosferatu1001: Wed, 24 May 2017 - 07:33
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
alfxlon
post Wed, 24 May 2017 - 16:08
Post #43


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 59
Joined: 11 May 2017
Member No.: 91,917



thanks

can you send the link on the beavis case where it relates to justifiable amounts for misuse of personal data? When I google, it's just references a long case that went to supreme court where Beavis lost - relating to size of the charge.

Also which bits of the letter do you think are long winded...i've cut a lot out and seems to flow pretty well - perhaps cutting out quotes from rulings??

cheers
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Gan
post Wed, 24 May 2017 - 16:28
Post #44


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 22,678
Joined: 23 Mar 2009
Member No.: 27,239



It doesn't say anything about the misuse of personal data

The central issue of Beavis was whether a company can issue a penalty under contract law that exceeded its loss

The Supreme Court decided that it could if there was legitimate public interest and the amount was no larger than necessary to act as a disincentive
It also accepted that the amount had to be large enough to be worth recovering

Courts are uncomfortable with the Google v Vidal-Hall judgement that a claimant doesn't have to prove an actual loss to claim for damages as a result of a DPA breach
I'm therefore suggesting that it's in the public interest that parking companies are discouraged from misusing individual's personal information and putting them to great inconvenience even if it doesn't amount to distress or expense
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Lynnzer
post Thu, 25 May 2017 - 06:01
Post #45


Member


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



QUOTE (grgori @ Wed, 24 May 2017 - 17:08) *
thanks

can you send the link on the beavis case where it relates to justifiable amounts for misuse of personal data? When I google, it's just references a long case that went to supreme court where Beavis lost - relating to size of the charge.

Also which bits of the letter do you think are long winded...i've cut a lot out and seems to flow pretty well - perhaps cutting out quotes from rulings??

cheers

Beavis wasn't about data control use/release.

What you pull from that is about proportionality of the charge as a means of deterrent. ie, as you put it, the size of the charge.
If you take another look at my 1st template letter you'll find a new inclusion about Data Controller. ie

I draw your attention to the case of Lireza Ittihadieh v 5-11 Cheyne 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.
This is borne out by the DVLA KADOE Contract in D1.4. Section 4(4) of the DPA states that it is the duty of the Data Controller to comply with the data protection principles (as listed in Schedule 1 of the DPA). The Customer, separately from the DVLA, shall be the Data Controller of each item of Data received from the DVLA from the point of receipt of that Data by the Customer or its Link Provider and shall be responsible for complying with the principles of the DPA in relation to its further Processing of that Data. .


You need to be able to kill any potential for the judge to say they aren't data controllers. That should do it. So another addition rather than a shortening eh?

Make sure you have a copy of all the cases you rely on as a judge might not be aware of them. A short version might not be acceptable much as redacted contract cannot accurately convey ALL the terms and conditions within it. They have to be transparent.

This post has been edited by Lynnzer: Thu, 25 May 2017 - 06:03


--------------------
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
alfxlon
post Thu, 25 May 2017 - 13:21
Post #46


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 59
Joined: 11 May 2017
Member No.: 91,917



Thanks everyone...I think i get it now...

will update me draft and post


cheers
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
alfxlon
post Sat, 27 May 2017 - 07:54
Post #47


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 59
Joined: 11 May 2017
Member No.: 91,917



Hi Everyone...
I've drafted a shortened letter. Would be grateful for advice on a few questions:

1. I’ve removed the claims for compensation in this letter. Just stating that if it isn’t resolved, I will take legal action for the misuse of my data. Is that unwise? Is it best to state an exact claim amount, and if I don’t will this affect my ability to claim if it does go to court? (paragraph 7)

2. I’ve outline my belief that, now they are in possession of all the facts, they are committing an act of Fraud by misrepresentation – Does this hold any merit ? Also in terms of getting the charges withdrawn? (paragraph 8)

3. My previous drafts of the letter contain a lot more detail about judgements on previous cases to support my argument, which I’ve trimmed down quite a lot. If this goes to court, can these be added to my case evidence or is it best to get it all on this letter to the PCM company now?

4. As it’s my mate’s property (Mr S), I haven’t conveyed this information to the management agency or the Freehold Landlord – is it wise to cc them in / write something of similar affect to them? As it’s a breach of my mate’s lease, it seems odd writing to them complaining of breach of contract when it’s not my contract.

5.Finally, it appears that their strategy is to regard each charge as a separate case applying legal fees separately on each one (my last letter with all charge notices cited received 12 separate letter responses!). Does this mean they can take me to court 12 times? Is there any way I can force them to manage as one case ??– I’m wondering if I can achieved this by my making this letter an official complaint with a claim amount requested? – any ideas??


Thanks again for your help


Dear .....

The above Notices to Keeper have been served on me as the registered keeper of vehicle Registration XXX XXX (Mr S being an insured driver). Further review has drawn to my attention to the fact that you are using Mr S’s car parking space (number 33 on his lease plan – ref 4) for your own business purposes unlawfully.

You introduced a parking permit / penalty system at <address> some time after Mr S moved in to his residence and his leasehold contract came in to affect. Mr S’s lease, in respect of the common areas of the grounds and his designated parking area (refs 1-4), places no restrictions on the parking facilities such as those you are attempting to subsequently enforce. As this parking space is one directly allocated to Mr S on his lease (see refs 3 and 4 attached), you have not sought approval from the actual landholder, i.e. Mr S, to operate your business on his leased land.

As per Mr S’s lease, we already have the right to “peaceably enjoy the Premises during the Term without any lawful interruption by the Landlord or any person rightfully claiming under or in trust for it”. You cannot offer us something we already have, and we are not obliged to accept an offer in such circumstances. Mr S’s lease remains the same as when it was originally agreed as part of his residential rights. There are no restrictions on parking within it (ref 1) and you are acting unlawfully by attempting to take legal action when we have an absolute right of peaceful enjoyment on the land (refs 2, 3 and 4). I draw your attention to the case of PACE v Mr (N Redacted), case C6GF14F0 in Croydon county court and the summarisation by District Judge Coonan.

You will know this is a residential location and that 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 residents’ rights in respect of the use of parking spaces. 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.

I also note that you have obtained my details from the DVLA when you had no rights to do so. Moreover, you passed my personal details on to a number of third party agencies, namely TRACE Debt Recovery and Gladstone’s Solicitors. These are clear breaches of my rights as detailed in the Data Protection Act (1998) which requires you to ensure that you have legitimate grounds for collecting and using my personal data including ensuring that you use it for purposes that are not unlawful.

This is a serious matter and one which is been both stressful and degrading for me. For each of your charge notices (12 in total), I continue to receive countless letters from you, the debt collection agency TRACE and threatening letters from Gladstone’s solicitors explicitly stating I could face county court judgements that will affect my ability to apply for credit, plus costings for escalating legal charges now being applied separately to each charge (currently totalling £2560).

As we 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. If this issue isn’t resolved I will be submitting a complaint to both the DVLA and the Information Commissioner’s Office about your misuse of my personal data. Should this situation result in court action, I will claim punitive damages against you for each individual breach of your use of my personal data.

Please also be aware that I am also consider escalating my case to the appropriate authorities as I believe you have conducted your business in a way that is knowingly dishonest and misleading in order to make financial gain. Considering I have now brought all facts to your attention, it is my view that continuing to pursue and harass me for money represents an act of Fraud by false representation.

In summary, I request that you immediately cancel all claims you currently make against me confirming this in writing. I also request that you put right all breaches of the misuse of my personal data as described in this letter. Failure to do this will result in further legal action being taken.





Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
ostell
post Sat, 27 May 2017 - 08:51
Post #48


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 8,401
Joined: 8 Mar 2013
Member No.: 60,457



Your details being passed to their agents such as PACE and Gladstones is not against the DPA as they are acting as agents and your details have not been sold on. I would remove that section.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
hexaflexagon
post Sat, 27 May 2017 - 10:02
Post #49


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 935
Joined: 18 Apr 2015
From: Oop t'north
Member No.: 76,816



As I said in #21

"Personally and at this stage I wouldn't complicate your argument by referring to the fact that it's your mate who is the leaseholder. That just gives a wedge to muddy the waters. You can honestly say that the Lease of the premises including the car park space gives you the the right to park there without mentioning how you acquire that right."

I'm still of that opinion - as indeed did post #21 from SRM

Just make the point the lease gives you the right to park There's no need to go into the minutae of how you acquire that right. You'll also reduce the size of the first three paragraphs.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
alfxlon
post Sun, 28 May 2017 - 10:16
Post #50


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 59
Joined: 11 May 2017
Member No.: 91,917



Ostell / Hexaflexagon - thanks for the feedback!

I've updated as you've advised....does this read OK now?

Any ideas on my previous questions??

1. I’ve removed the claims for compensation in this letter. Just stating that if it isn’t resolved, I will take legal action for the misuse of my data. Is that unwise? Is it best to state an exact claim amount, and if I don’t will this affect my ability to claim if it does go to court? (paragraph 7)

2. I’ve outline my belief that, now they are in possession of all the facts, they are committing an act of Fraud by misrepresentation – Does this hold any merit ? Also in terms of getting the charges withdrawn? (paragraph 8)

3. My previous drafts of the letter contain a lot more detail about judgements on previous cases to support my argument, which I’ve trimmed down quite a lot. If this goes to court, can these be added to my case evidence or is it best to get it all on this letter to the PCM company now?

4. As it’s my mate’s property (Mr S), I haven’t conveyed this information to the management agency or the Freehold Landlord – is it wise to cc them in / write something of similar affect to them? As it’s a breach of my mate’s lease, it seems odd writing to them complaining of breach of contract when it’s not my contract.

5.Finally, it appears that their strategy is to regard each charge as a separate case applying legal fees separately on each one (my last letter with all charge notices cited received 12 separate letter responses!). Does this mean they can take me to court 12 times? Is there any way I can force them to manage as one case ??– I’m wondering if I can achieved this by my making this letter an official complaint with a claim amount requested? – any ideas??


Dear...

The above Notices to Keeper have been served on me as the registered keeper of vehicle Registration XXX XXX. Further review has drawn to my attention to the fact that you are using our car parking space (number 33 on the lease plan – ref 4) for your own business purposes unlawfully.

You introduced a parking permit / penalty system at <address> some time after the leasehold contract came in to affect. The leasehold contract, in respect of the common areas of the grounds and the designated parking area (refs 1-4), places no restrictions on the parking facilities such as those you are attempting to subsequently enforce. As this parking space is one explicitly allocated on the lease (see refs 3 and 4 attached), you have not sought approval from the actual landholder.

As per the leasehold contract, we already have the right to “peaceably enjoy the Premises during the Term without any lawful interruption by the Landlord or any person rightfully claiming under or in trust for it”. You cannot offer us something we already have, and we are not obliged to accept an offer in such circumstances. The lease remains the same as when it was originally agreed as part of the residential rights. There are no restrictions on parking within it (ref 1) and you are acting unlawfully by attempting to take legal action when we have an absolute right of peaceful enjoyment on the land (refs 2, 3 and 4). I draw your attention to the case of PACE v Mr (N Redacted), case C6GF14F0 in Croydon county court and the summarisation by District Judge Coonan.

You will know this is a residential location and that 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 residents’ rights in respect of the use of parking spaces. 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.

I also note that you have obtained my personal details from the DVLA on 12 separate occasions. As we 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. These are clear breaches of my rights as detailed in the Data Protection Act (1998) which requires you to ensure that you have legitimate grounds for collecting and using my personal data including ensuring that you use it for purposes that are not unlawful.

If this issue isn’t resolved I will be submitting a complaint to both the DVLA and the Information Commissioner’s Office about your misuse of my personal data. Should this situation result in court action, I will claim punitive damages against you for each individual breach of your use of my personal data. This is a serious matter and one which is been both stressful and degrading for me. For each of your charge notices (12 in total), I continue to receive countless letters from you, the debt collection agency TRACE and threatening letters from Gladstone’s solicitors explicitly stating I could face county court judgements that will affect my ability to apply for credit, plus costings for escalating legal charges now being applied separately to each charge.

Please also be aware that I am also consider escalating my case to the appropriate authorities as I believe you have conducted your business in a way that is knowingly dishonest and misleading in order to make financial gain. Considering I have now brought all facts to your attention, it is my view that continuing to pursue and harass me for money represents an act of Fraud by False Representation.

In summary, I request that you immediately cancel all claims you currently make against me. I also request that you (and all third party agents you have employed) desist in the misuse of my personal data as described in this letter. Failure to do this will result in further legal action being taken.

Yours sincerely



Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
nosferatu1001
post Mon, 29 May 2017 - 07:30
Post #51


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 17,987
Joined: 27 Nov 2007
Member No.: 15,642



1) Include an amount, IF you will actually then claim for it. It gives them fair warning.
2) Yes, but as that is criminal, do you really think it will do anything in a civil court? If youre that concerned get onto trading standards. Aggressive and misleading business practice. It will not scare them with you just alleging it. Seriously, why do you think it would, tiven your research on these scum?

I mean seriously "I am also considerign escalating my case...." is just waffle. Its insanely weak (considering escalating? Why not "ive already done so" - and WHAT relevant authorities?) as it just sounds like bluster.
3) Of course you can reference court cases. That would be in your defence. Just having the names X vs Y and date and the conclusion from it is more than sufficient at this pre action stage.
4) Get your mate to write to the MA, and tell the MA to tell the PPC to kindly FRO
5) Yes, they will almost certainly attempt to file 12 seperate cases, using identifcal particulars, so they can claim 12x£50 filing fee each time. IF this happens, and you have NO WAY OF STOPPING THEM DOING THIS, then all you can do is, in each of your 12 defences, and in each of your 12 DQs, and .... is ask the court to a) strike claims 2-12 as an abuse of the court process, as it is a blatant attempt at double recovery and is a blatant waste of courts time given the neaer identical situation in each case, and b) if they dont strike then can they at least be heard together, and the claim amounts reduced appropriately - for example 11x£50 filing fee taken off the total.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
hexaflexagon
post Mon, 29 May 2017 - 08:25
Post #52


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 935
Joined: 18 Apr 2015
From: Oop t'north
Member No.: 76,816



Can we just have a recap here.

You have already written to the PPC and they rejected your appeal, passing your case over to a DR company and eventually Gallstones.

All the stuff you're showing in the draft letter is very useful and helps you become focused and clear in your own mind about the various factors that will be good defence points if this ever gets to court. And if that happens the points that you will use for a claim against them will be added to your defence statement as a Counterclaim.

However since they've already rejected your original appeal and if these things go true to form they'll just ignore anything you write at the moment. Unless you get a formal letter before claim there seems little to gain by saying anything more at the moment.

Isn't it best to avoid further stress at the moment and let this play itself out. It's a racing certainty that Gallstones are reading this thread and will be noting the strong points being made and forming a view as to whether or not to pursue this.

Que sera sera

Just my 2 ps worth.


Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
SchoolRunMum
post Mon, 29 May 2017 - 19:34
Post #53


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 17,868
Joined: 20 Sep 2009
Member No.: 32,130



QUOTE
It's a racing certainty that Gallstones are reading this thread and will be noting the strong points being made and forming a view as to whether or not to pursue this.


FWIW, I don't think Gladstones read this forum, any more than I think for one minute that Excel read the forum thread where they *suddenly came by a copy* of pepipoo postings that they produced in court with a flourish, in fact making them - and whoever might have fed it to them - look stupid, which was a point of much hilarity in certain quarters.

I wouldn't worry about Gladstones reading pepipoo threads. There are too many here, for a start, and they work as a robo-claim firm so couldn't join the dots if they tried.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
hexaflexagon
post Mon, 29 May 2017 - 21:06
Post #54


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 935
Joined: 18 Apr 2015
From: Oop t'north
Member No.: 76,816



QUOTE (SchoolRunMum @ Mon, 29 May 2017 - 20:34) *
QUOTE
It's a racing certainty that Gallstones are reading this thread and will be noting the strong points being made and forming a view as to whether or not to pursue this.


FWIW, I don't think Gladstones read this forum, any more than I think for one minute that Excel read the forum thread where they *suddenly came by a copy* of pepipoo postings that they produced in court with a flourish, in fact making them - and whoever might have fed it to them - look stupid, which was a point of much hilarity in certain quarters.

I wouldn't worry about Gladstones reading pepipoo threads. There are too many here, for a start, and they work as a robo-claim firm so couldn't join the dots if they tried.


I'm not so sanguine. This is not about speculative trawling of the forum. We've had evidence posted here that one PPC has specifically stated that they've been following a particular thread. It's reasonable to assume that the PPC would pass such information over to their solicitor of choice who would then presumably continue to monitor in their own right.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
SchoolRunMum
post Mon, 29 May 2017 - 21:18
Post #55


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 17,868
Joined: 20 Sep 2009
Member No.: 32,130



Maybe you are right - but we've never seen it in a Gladstones case. Although all posters should always be careful what they post in public about their case/who was driving.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
alfxlon
post Mon, 5 Mar 2018 - 12:10
Post #56


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 59
Joined: 11 May 2017
Member No.: 91,917



Hi Everyone….

I’ve finally received a "Letter Before Claim" so it looks like it’s going to court. Thanks for all the help provided before…Could I get your advice again on a few points on taking this forward please?

Just to recap, I got 12 parking charge notices totaling £1920 (£160 each where £60 has been added to each for cost of recovering charge). After help from this site, I managed to establish that the parking company is operating in the car park unlawfully as they are charging us to use our own car parking space granted to us in the flat leasehold contract. Note, the parking company were bought in several years after we moved in and the parking restrictions were unilaterally applied without contract variation:

• Schedule 2 (part 1) grants “The right for the Leaseholder and all persons authorised by the Leaseholder (in common with all other persons entitled to the like right) at all times to”… “© use the parking space shown edged blue on the Plan in connection with the beneficial use and occupation of the Premises (but not further or otherwise)”.

• Section 5(1) “Landlords covenants” defines the beneficial use of occupation of the premises as to “peaceably enjoy the Premises during the Term without any lawful interruption by the Landlord or any person rightfully claiming under or in trust for it”.
• Section 3(24) “Restrictions on Parking” places no restrictions on the parking facilities such as those trying to be enforced, i.e. permits, charges and penalties (see attached for full description of parking restrictions).



My questions are as follows:
1. The Letter Before Claim is saying amount due is £1920 (12 charges at £160 each). The letter states “The charge amount includes £60 claimed by our Client for its time spent and resource facilitating the recovery of the charge. Does this mean the legal costs have been applied?

2. If this goes to court would they be able to add hefty legal costs that I couldn’t afford if I lose? In a nutshell, how much could this end up costing me if it all goes wrong?

3. I have to go on their site and register to submit a reply form. Before I do this, are there any traps to avoid / tips you could give? Do I need to supply as much of my evidence as I can? Should I provide them with the lease, relevant excerpts from the lease or just tell them they are in breach of it?

4. Do I need to inform them that I intend to counterclaim? – if so, do I need to indicate how much I’m claiming for and on what grounds etc?? - I'm plan to claim the exact same amount back so its proportional.

5. Finally, is it worth me writing to the parking company directly about them breaching my contract, acting unlawfully, breaching data protection, etc? I’m concerned that Gladstones won’t care if I have a case or not as long as they get their fee for taking me to court. If the parking company is aware directly that they don’t have a case and it could get messy for them, it might push them to contact Glastones to call it off.

6. Is there anything else I should be doing that I’ve missed?

Thanks again for your help
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
4101
post Mon, 5 Mar 2018 - 12:17
Post #57


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 353
Joined: 19 Dec 2017
Member No.: 95,634



if the case goes to trial then it will be small claims so neither side pays costs UNLESS court decides they have been unreasonable.
This has no legal definition, but generally means, dishonest, not cooperating with court process, bringing hopeless case etc.

The £60 is not IMO enforceable, so each pcn is £120.

The case will be heard in your local county court. No big deal.

The parking co. will probably be reading this, and with 12 pcns they will know who you are, so be careful.

This post has been edited by 4101: Mon, 5 Mar 2018 - 12:19
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
nosferatu1001
post Mon, 5 Mar 2018 - 12:25
Post #58


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 17,987
Joined: 27 Nov 2007
Member No.: 15,642



£100, not £120

They can add on:
1) court fee. Look it up, its based on value - small claims track fees are on gov.uk
2) hearing fee, again possibly scales by value
3) UP TO £50 for a sol to file the form. Of course they all charge £50...

Gladstones CANNOT make you sign up to get copies of the form.

Send the LONG FORM MSE forum response, from the NEWBIES thread (its on page 1, no searching for it, easy to fiind near the top) saying how their repsonse FAILS to meet the new PAP for debt claims, that they must supply you with PAPER copies of all forms etc.

You would then state you intend to counterclaim for £x for torious interference with your lease, £y for trespass, £z for breach of the DPA (IF and ONLY IF they got your address and name from DVLA) and if you told them this was harassment, £Z for harassment. Juicy numbers here.

I would supply them with an EXCEPRT of the lease, state their client has no chance of success as your lease has primacy and the grantor may not derogate from their grant, their client is a stranger and has been treated as such. They must cancel the sharges, and undertake to never trespass on your space again, otherwise you will seek an injunction against them.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Redivi
post Mon, 5 Mar 2018 - 12:32
Post #59


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 1,927
Joined: 31 Jan 2018
Member No.: 96,238



1 You put the Claimant to proof of the costs.
You also argue that it cannot claim the cost of staff performing the tasks that they're employed for and essential to its business plan
2 Unless you've acted unreasonably, legal costs can't be recovered in Small Claims Court
3 You can tell Gladstones to send you a paper version of the Reply Form and associated documents
4 My understanding is that you don't have to tell them although I think you should
You would have to base the claim on trespass, harassment and tortious interference with the quiet enjoyment of your property
A counter-claim based on the Data Protection Act will fail - the company is entitled to process your information for the the purpose of recovery a payment no matter how unfounded its belief that the debt is owed
Damages for trespass are limited to the actual loss or, if none, the benefit the trespasser obtained
PCM values each act of trespass pre-discount as £100 but a court would probably consider £1200 excessive
I would leave it vague for now perhaps phrasing it as "I note that your client values the discounted price of each trespass as £60"
5 If a parking company has engaged a solicitor, you don't contact it directly
If Gladstones fails to warn it about a potential counter-claim, they can explain it to their client
6 Have a look for threads regarding documents that you want from Gladstones
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
The Rookie
post Mon, 5 Mar 2018 - 16:30
Post #60


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 39,683
Joined: 9 Sep 2003
From: Warwickshire
Member No.: 317



1&2 are only true if Beavis doesn't apply, for a residential case it should be easily distinguishable.

I would also add that it was their own failure to provide the permit that created the issue in the first place (I've not read the whole thread to see what the explanation for that is) and they shouldn't be seeking to profit from their own failure.


--------------------
There is no such thing as a law abiding motorist, just those who have been scammed and those yet to be scammed!

S172's
Rookies 1-0 Kent

Council PCN's
Rookies 1-0 Warwick
Rookies 1-0 Birmingham

PPC PCN's
Rookies 8-0 PPC's
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

10 Pages V  < 1 2 3 4 5 > » 
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: Tuesday, 16th October 2018 - 04:38
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.