PePiPoo Helping the motorist get justice

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

UK CPM - Visitor parking PCN
DragonQ
post Mon, 20 Mar 2017 - 18:12
Post #1


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 71
Joined: 31 May 2011
Member No.: 47,126



My car was parked in a visitor's bay in my residential parking area. One morning I woke up to find a Parking Charge Notice attached to it from UK CPM, who have some signs up around the car park. The issue reason is not displaying a valid parking permit. I have a visitor's permit that is in the car but I am not sure how visible it was on this occasion.

UK CPM are a part of IPC, although the sign says they are a BPA member. I have two questions:

- Am I right in thinking that I needn't do anything until I receive a Notice to Keeper through the post?
- Is there any point contacting my management company to ask for the charge to be cleared (since it's designed to stop people who don't live here or aren't visiting using the bays, not to catch people who live here out), or are they likely to just refer me to UK CPM?

I've attached a redacted copy of the PCN and also a photo of the signs up around the area. I've had a quick look through the contract I signed with the management company when buying the property, as well as their "welcome pack", and can't see any mention of parking whatsoever.
Attached thumbnail(s)
Attached Image
Attached Image
 
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
8 Pages V  « < 6 7 8  
Start new topic
Replies (140 - 158)
Advertisement
post Mon, 20 Mar 2017 - 18:12
Post #


Advertise here!









Go to the top of the page
 
Quote Post
nosferatu1001
post Thu, 6 Sep 2018 - 09:10
Post #141


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 17,670
Joined: 27 Nov 2007
Member No.: 15,642



They have definitely accepted attachments before, Id suggest its a size limit
You MUST, if you can only send links, MUST send by post. FIRST CLASS, FREE PROOF OF POST. Not registered.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
DragonQ
post Thu, 6 Sep 2018 - 09:30
Post #142


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 71
Joined: 31 May 2011
Member No.: 47,126



Just dropped off the folder to the court. Pretty crap that all they have is a drop box so there's no receipt or evidence of when I dropped it off.

This post has been edited by DragonQ: Thu, 6 Sep 2018 - 09:32
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
nosferatu1001
post Thu, 6 Sep 2018 - 09:41
Post #143


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 17,670
Joined: 27 Nov 2007
Member No.: 15,642



FIll out a Certificate of FIling. Google it.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
DragonQ
post Thu, 6 Sep 2018 - 10:10
Post #144


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 71
Joined: 31 May 2011
Member No.: 47,126



QUOTE (nosferatu1001 @ Thu, 6 Sep 2018 - 09:10) *
They have definitely accepted attachments before, Id suggest its a size limit
You MUST, if you can only send links, MUST send by post. FIRST CLASS, FREE PROOF OF POST. Not registered.

Yeah I have also now sent them the documents as email attachments as well, split over two emails. I got undelivered messages when sending everything in a single zip file before, even though their mailbox says they can accept attachments up to 25 MB and mine only totalled 21 MB! dry.gif

QUOTE (nosferatu1001 @ Thu, 6 Sep 2018 - 09:41) *
Fill out a Certificate of Filing. Google it.

You mean to register the fact that I served the documents on the claimant's solicitor? Sure, do I then email it to the court?

I did call the court and the automated message said they can't comment on whether they've received documents for 10 working days (ohmy.gif) so I guess I'll have to wait for that.

This post has been edited by DragonQ: Thu, 6 Sep 2018 - 10:15
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
nosferatu1001
post Thu, 6 Sep 2018 - 10:28
Post #145


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 17,670
Joined: 27 Nov 2007
Member No.: 15,642



No, to register the fact you filed the bundle at Court. You file and court, serve on claimant, hence a cert fo filing is to record the date you filed the bundle at court.

No, you dont wait for that.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
DragonQ
post Thu, 6 Sep 2018 - 10:36
Post #146


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 71
Joined: 31 May 2011
Member No.: 47,126



OK now I'm confused. The document I think you're talking about (N215) is a Certificate of Service and doesn't seem to relate to court filings since it has options for defendant, claimant, solicitor, and litigation friend. I cannot find any form called Certificate of Filing.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
ostell
post Thu, 6 Sep 2018 - 10:47
Post #147


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 8,180
Joined: 8 Mar 2013
Member No.: 60,457



Filing/ Service all the same basically. You can also send the form to the court to say you have served the paperwork with Gladstones.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
DragonQ
post Thu, 6 Sep 2018 - 10:56
Post #148


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 71
Joined: 31 May 2011
Member No.: 47,126



OK so shall I fill out one for service on Gladstones, one for filing with the court, and then email them both to the court?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
nosferatu1001
post Thu, 6 Sep 2018 - 10:59
Post #149


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 17,670
Joined: 27 Nov 2007
Member No.: 15,642



Yes, thats a good idea.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
DragonQ
post Thu, 6 Sep 2018 - 16:56
Post #150


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 71
Joined: 31 May 2011
Member No.: 47,126



Received a Notice of Trial Date today. The claimant has 3 weeks to pay the court fee and, if they do, the trial will be a month after that. It goes without saying that Gladstones haven't met the deadline for sending me their witness statement and evidence so I plan to call the court tomorrow to ask what they're going to do about that.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
cabbyman
post Thu, 6 Sep 2018 - 17:19
Post #151


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 5,830
Joined: 15 Dec 2007
From: South of John O'Groats, north of Cape Town.
Member No.: 16,066



Do you need to do that tomorrow or wait for Gladstones to dig a bigger hole? I'm wondering if maybe you wait until you get a notification of the fee being paid and then raise it with the court?

I may be totally wrong so see what others say.


--------------------
Cabbyman 10 PPCs 0
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
nosferatu1001
post Thu, 6 Sep 2018 - 17:38
Post #152


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 17,670
Joined: 27 Nov 2007
Member No.: 15,642



Hearing. Not trial.

Did they get yours ok?
Cal, the court
Ask if the court ha aa copy of their bundle, saying you don't have your copy. Ask that the clerk adds that to the file - late service is a serious disadvantage to you.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
DragonQ
post Thu, 6 Sep 2018 - 18:09
Post #153


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 71
Joined: 31 May 2011
Member No.: 47,126



QUOTE (nosferatu1001 @ Thu, 6 Sep 2018 - 17:38) *
Hearing. Not trial.

Well the form is headed "Notice of Trial Date". tongue.gif

QUOTE (nosferatu1001 @ Thu, 6 Sep 2018 - 17:38) *
Did they get yours ok?

No idea, I called them and the automated message said it takes 10 working days for them to process documents (which is ridiculous) so I thought I'd at least give them a day to fish it out of the document drop box.

QUOTE (nosferatu1001 @ Thu, 6 Sep 2018 - 17:38) *
Cal, the court
Ask if the court ha aa copy of their bundle, saying you don't have your copy. Ask that the clerk adds that to the file - late service is a serious disadvantage to you.

Yeah I will call tomorrow asking about both my and Gladstones' documents.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
DragonQ
post Fri, 7 Sep 2018 - 09:07
Post #154


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 71
Joined: 31 May 2011
Member No.: 47,126



OK so I called the court, they said there is currently a 24 working day wait for documents to be "added to the system" and processed. The advice given was to:

- Call again a couple of weeks before the hearing to check if the documents had been processed and, if not, send an email to the court with the hearing date in the subject to clarify the urgency.
- Email the court now to tell them I hadn't received the claimant's documents, since this is more likely to be seen by the judge than the note the clerk has added to my file.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
nosferatu1001
post Fri, 7 Sep 2018 - 09:44
Post #155


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 17,670
Joined: 27 Nov 2007
Member No.: 15,642



The latter is key
You know the court has the bundle from you so I wouldnt panic there.
However, the fact YOU have not been Served with a copy of the Cs bundle is crucial. You should ask the court to apply the normal sanction for breach of an order, and that the claimants bundle is struck out. As they will have no eiidence to prove their claim, just an unsubstantiated claim form, the claim should also be struck out.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
DragonQ
post Fri, 7 Sep 2018 - 09:46
Post #156


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 71
Joined: 31 May 2011
Member No.: 47,126



Yep, I plan on quoting the original order that said what would happen if deadlines were missed in the email.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
DragonQ
post Fri, 7 Sep 2018 - 15:56
Post #157


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 71
Joined: 31 May 2011
Member No.: 47,126



Got the claimant's witness statement in the post today. I'll still email the court saying it was a day late but I doubt they'll do anything about that.

The claimant reference that they haven't received my defence yet and thus they have no evidence of my right to park. I find it amusing that they describe my response to their request for my defence as "curt" when their request letter was even briefer and attempted to patronise me with incorrect information!

Anyway, their main points of contention seem to be:
- Most leases "contain provisions to allow for estate regulations to be brought in...for better estate management".
- Parking Eye v Beavis [2015] and VCS v HMRC [2013] "made it clear that a contracting party need not show they have a right to do what they have promised in the performance of the contract, nor is the agreement between the [parking operator] and landowner of any relevance".

They also include a copy of the authorisation to provide parking, which suggests that the management company is the freeholder of the communal land.

The rest of it is irrelevant, e.g. going over the rules of parking according to the signs, refuting my request for compensation after wrongful use of my data (which they should know I am not even pursuing in this case), justifying their price hike over the £100 stated on the sign, etc.

I'm going to assume the court will grant them leniency here because presumably it is the court's fault that they don't have my defence. If they do eventually get it, I imagine they will re-do this witness statement, if allowed.


P.S. I am also mildly annoyed that they keep getting my title wrong despite me including it at the end of every letter I've sent them, lol.

This post has been edited by DragonQ: Fri, 7 Sep 2018 - 16:21
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Eljayjay
post Fri, 7 Sep 2018 - 19:56
Post #158


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 821
Joined: 1 Apr 2017
Member No.: 91,235



Leases say lots of things. The comment that most leases "contain provisions to allow for estate regulations to be brought in...for better estate management" may be true. Of course, if estate regulations have been brought in, the Claimant should know and should be able to produce a copy of them in Court. So, if this comes up in Court, your response would be "if there are any such regulations, why have you not included them in your exhibits?".


On VCS v HMRS...

Generally, VCS v HMRC is cited by the parking companies to show that they can enter into a contract with someone to provide parking without owning the land and without even having the permission of the owner or occupier of the land.

That is very true, I could enter into a contract with you to let you park your car next Saturday on Horse Guards Parade for 50p for the day. Recognising a bargain, you accept the offer and you pay me the 50p.

So, we now have a contract. The is an offer, there is an acceptance, and there is your 50p as consideration.

Your problem comes when you are arrested and your car is impounded. My problem comes when you sue me for breach of contract because, incredibly, I do not own the parking rights at Horse Guards Parade and, therefore, I do not have any consideration for your 50p.

And that is what the judgement says except that it talks about traders offering shares for sale which they do not own. The difference is that traders can buy the shares by the time they need to cough them up. So, that does not cause any problems.

But it also talks about Buckingham Palace being offered for sale. Now, that would cause a problem because any person offering to sell that to anyone else is almost certainly not going to acquire the right to sell it by the agreed completion date.

So, the bit of the judgement quoted below actually works against the parking companies not in their favour...

The flaw in the reasoning is that it confuses the making of a contract with the power to
perform it. There is no legal impediment to my contracting to sell you Buckingham Palace.
If (inevitably) I fail to honour my contract then I can be sued for damages. On the stock
market it is commonplace for traders to sell short; in other words to sell shares that they do
not own in the hope of buying them later at a lower price. In order to perform the contract
the trader will have to acquire the required number of shares after the contract of sale is
made.

The parking company in your case did not have the right to offer parking to you and did not acquire that right by the time a parking ticket was affixed to your vehicle. So, they had no consideration for their parking charge.


As regards Parking Eye v Beavis, the reason why Parking Eye did not have to produce evidence of their right to operate on the land was simply because Mr Beavis accepted that they did in order to cut to the chase insofar as the real issues in the case were concerned.


All of that rubbish appears in almost every Gladstones-drafted witness statement.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
DragonQ
post Mon, 10 Sep 2018 - 09:25
Post #159


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 71
Joined: 31 May 2011
Member No.: 47,126



QUOTE (Eljayjay @ Fri, 7 Sep 2018 - 19:56) *
Leases say lots of things. The comment that most leases "contain provisions to allow for estate regulations to be brought in...for better estate management" may be true. Of course, if estate regulations have been brought in, the Claimant should know and should be able to produce a copy of them in Court. So, if this comes up in Court, your response would be "if there are any such regulations, why have you not included them in your exhibits?".

Indeed, there have been no changes to my lease. I actually moved into this property after UK CPM were employed to "look after" the parking areas so you'd have thought the lease would've been updated before I signed on the dotted line.

QUOTE (Eljayjay @ Fri, 7 Sep 2018 - 19:56) *
On VCS v HMRS...

Generally, VCS v HMRC is cited by the parking companies to show that they can enter into a contract with someone to provide parking without owning the land and without even having the permission of the owner or occupier of the land.

That is very true, I could enter into a contract with you to let you park your car next Saturday on Horse Guards Parade for 50p for the day. Recognising a bargain, you accept the offer and you pay me the 50p.

So, we now have a contract. The is an offer, there is an acceptance, and there is your 50p as consideration.

Your problem comes when you are arrested and your car is impounded. My problem comes when you sue me for breach of contract because, incredibly, I do not own the parking rights at Horse Guards Parade and, therefore, I do not have any consideration for your 50p.

And that is what the judgement says except that it talks about traders offering shares for sale which they do not own. The difference is that traders can buy the shares by the time they need to cough them up. So, that does not cause any problems.

But it also talks about Buckingham Palace being offered for sale. Now, that would cause a problem because any person offering to sell that to anyone else is almost certainly not going to acquire the right to sell it by the agreed completion date.

So, the bit of the judgement quoted below actually works against the parking companies not in their favour...

The flaw in the reasoning is that it confuses the making of a contract with the power to
perform it. There is no legal impediment to my contracting to sell you Buckingham Palace.
If (inevitably) I fail to honour my contract then I can be sued for damages. On the stock
market it is commonplace for traders to sell short; in other words to sell shares that they do
not own in the hope of buying them later at a lower price. In order to perform the contract
the trader will have to acquire the required number of shares after the contract of sale is
made.


The parking company in your case did not have the right to offer parking to you and did not acquire that right by the time a parking ticket was affixed to your vehicle. So, they had no consideration for their parking charge.

I guess they would argue their contract with the management company does give them the right to offer me parking. It seems that a closer analogy would be offering the Queen the right to enter Buckingham Palace at £5 a day, and additionally stipulating that by entering Buckingham Palace she automatically agrees to this contract....even though she already has the right to be on the property. rolleyes.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

8 Pages V  « < 6 7 8
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: Wednesday, 26th September 2018 - 11:49
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.