UKPC Charge, In private bay at my rented flat |
UKPC Charge, In private bay at my rented flat |
Tue, 27 Aug 2013 - 10:43
Post
#1
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 62 Joined: 27 Aug 2013 Member No.: 64,741 |
Hi all, spent a while reading various threads but thought I had best ask for my own personal advice.
Me and my partner rent a flat which has a gated entrance and you have your own space (corresponding to flat number) ours is in the underground section. We had a parking permit which has the number of the space on it to display on a daily basis. Recently the gates to the carpark have been 'broken' and one side is constantly left open, which now has resulted in three UKPC notices in the space of two weeks. We currently only have her car at the flat and I very rarely use the car, both occasions I have used it and returned to our parking bay I have once forgotten to put the parking permit on the dashboard, returning to the car next morning to see we had a ticket given to us around 4am for not displaying permit. And the second one for the same reason this time however I am 100% certain the permit was placed on the dashboard, however it wasn't there the next morning and another ticket was given (again around 4am, these idiots love a nightshift) The third notice we had received was when we had friends staying for a weekend, we have a visitor permit too, which we were not given any advice about how long this could be used for by our landlord. All we were told is that if using a visitor permit please park in the disabled bays. Now this permit was used constantly for around 2 weeks when we first moved in as we had two cars then, and no problems. I have also noticed other cars at the flats always in the disabled spots and not disabled drivers. But one weekend we gave our permit to friends to park downstairs and my girlfriend parked her car in the visitors bay, on the second night she received another charge notice this time saying that she had over stayed her welcome in the visitors bay. Now I am just looking for what to do with these pieces of paper I have been given, as there is NO WAY I will be paying them a penny! We need to use an electric fob to gain access to the carpark, and our parking spot corresponds with our flat number. So if they are coming in EVERY NIGHT they must see the car in the same bay using the permit, yet the ONE occasions I genuinely know I forgot to display the permit a ticket is slapped straight on. It is funny however how the influx of tickets corresponds with the gated entrance been broken. Thanks for any help. Regards |
|
|
Advertisement |
Tue, 27 Aug 2013 - 10:43
Post
#
|
Advertise here! |
|
|
|
Fri, 9 Nov 2018 - 22:19
Post
#101
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 18,751 Joined: 20 Sep 2009 Member No.: 32,130 |
QUOTE There are two Lessee’s covenants which apply to “Parking” (clause 9 on page 25 of the lease) and the “Parking Space” (clause 19 on pages 28 and 29 of the lease). Neither of these covenants require the Lessee (or the Lessee’s tenants) to display a parking permit when using the parking space or to pay a parking charge in the event of not displaying a parking permit. Hmmm...but...the tickets in this claim are not for non-display of permit. Worse, the above template relies upon the Lease in defence, which this OP should not, given the facts of this case and what the Lease actually says. I say the OP should steer right away from relying on this Lease that they are strangers to, and which they had previously never seen before, because it sets out in simple terms, the contravention they are accused of. Hence why I wrote my reply as I did, which tries to answer and reflect the points made by SCS, rather than talking over them with a template that's not suitable. You also say this in that template: QUOTE the Parking Space clause (clause 8 on page 26 of the lease). That clause actually confers on the Lessee, my landlord, “The right (to the exclusion of all others) to use the car parking space(s) edged green on the Plans or any other parking space{s) (if any) allocated by the Lessor from time to time within the Development for the purpose of parking one fully taxed and licensed private motor car or motor cycle only”. Clearly, the words “to the exclusion of all others” means that your client has no right to use the parking space for the purpose of parking which, in turn, results in your client having no consideration to offer in return for a parking charge. ...but that is not the space this claim relates to, and the OP has no rights to it, to the exclusion of all others. Your quotes are as misconceived as SCS Law's. |
|
|
Sat, 10 Nov 2018 - 09:52
Post
#102
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 28,687 Joined: 27 Nov 2007 Member No.: 15,642 |
It might have addressed SCS points, but unlike SRM doesn't deal with the out of bay nature of this case
Can you elaborate on why not, and leave the attempt to smear our of this thread? Your posturing helps no one. |
|
|
Mon, 12 Nov 2018 - 09:18
Post
#103
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 62 Joined: 27 Aug 2013 Member No.: 64,741 |
Well this thread escalated over the weekend. Thanks for the replies everyone, I have been away for the weekend so just going to settle down and read through what has been posted. Regarding the post above, I have got a copy of the tenancy agreement I just need to edit out the sensitive info from this. I have a copy of the visitors permit still in my possession so I will take a photo of that, and yes I have all the evidence provided including photos of the signs which I will dig out and post too.
I will be back later today. Thanks EDIT - I have to pop out for the morning but I have uploaded the AST now at the following link http://s000.tinyupload.com/index.php?file_...358173255962296 also I thought it was a visitor pass we still had in the drawer but it was a resident one, the pass itself didn't appear legit, it was a photo copy, laminated with address written over the laminate hence why no longer legible. http://s000.tinyupload.com/index.php?file_...368943278434341 Also I have just quickly scanned the evidence bundle and regarding the photos, on one of the alleged contraventions, the photo of the sign was obviously not taken at the same time (as its day/night) and also does not have a timestamp on the sign photo. And on the others the writing on the sign is not readable. I will get round to editing and uploading of this when I am back this afternoon. Thanks again. This post has been edited by boro12856: Mon, 12 Nov 2018 - 10:00 |
|
|
Mon, 12 Nov 2018 - 20:40
Post
#104
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 18,751 Joined: 20 Sep 2009 Member No.: 32,130 |
Also I have just quickly scanned the evidence bundle and regarding the photos, on one of the alleged contraventions, the photo of the sign was obviously not taken at the same time (as its day/night) and also does not have a timestamp on the sign photo. And on the others the writing on the sign is not readable. Good, those are the sort of things that will win you the case at trial. Your AST doesn't mention parking, so can you answer the Qs I asked you in my last post? I repeat my earlier advice and the reply I wrote for you to send, and the advice to get a SAR so you can see ALL photos taken/all letters sent, to see their entire hand in advance. I also take this opportunity to warn you NOT to reply to any private message you might get from a poster...just keep it all here and listen to the consensus of opinion, not the aggressor. This post has been edited by SchoolRunMum: Mon, 12 Nov 2018 - 21:28 |
|
|
Tue, 13 Nov 2018 - 17:38
Post
#105
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 62 Joined: 27 Aug 2013 Member No.: 64,741 |
@ boro12856, what does your Assured Shorthold Tenancy say, and what did the advert for the flat say about parking rights? As you have seen nothing, I do have another agreement type thing we were given when we signed for the flat, I am sure I still have that so I will try and dig it out tomorrow and have a read through, again not sure it mentions parking however. QUOTE What did the permit say? Permit was similar to the one I posted up yesterday apart from saying resident it said VISITOR and could only be used when using the visitor parking spaces QUOTE What do the signs look like? Signs in the car park? Like the sign they posted in the evidence bundle, however we did not take much notice of them. Theres a couple of photos that show the sign and the vehicle in the same picture. One was posted quite low on the back of a bin shed. The other was on a lampost but not visible from the visitor bay as it was central. Say you had 20 parking spaces, the two on the far left were visitor, the two far right visitor and the rest in between residencial, the sign was in the very centre of the row. So unless you walked down you never saw the sign. QUOTE Do they have photos of every event, showing the car and the sign, with readable terms x 5 times? From the evidence bundle, yes they have photos of every event with timestamps. However as previously mentioned, one does NOT have a timestamped photo of the sign (and different time of day), and all the others the photos of the sign no writing is legible at all. Also they mockup of the sign they have included in the evidence bundle too, and on the sign is says a charge of £90 and NOT £150 as they are claiming. It has been my partners birthday today so not been able to get much reading done, shes out at the minute with friends so going to read the replies now and get ready to send a reply to SCS tomorrow morning. This post has been edited by boro12856: Tue, 13 Nov 2018 - 17:50 |
|
|
Wed, 14 Nov 2018 - 20:11
Post
#106
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 18,751 Joined: 20 Sep 2009 Member No.: 32,130 |
QUOTE Theres a couple of photos that show the sign and the vehicle in the same picture. One was posted quite low on the back of a bin shed. The other was on a lampost but not visible from the visitor bay as it was central. Say you had 20 parking spaces, the two on the far left were visitor, the two far right visitor and the rest in between residencial, the sign was in the very centre of the row. So unless you walked down you never saw the sign. OK, so your defence - in due course - will need to go in strong about the signage (or lack of) and certainly not rely on the only thing that states there is a 24/48 hr rule (the lease that isn't yours and which you have never seen). Can't say it clearly enough, do NOT rely on that lease.So sorry about the elephant in the room taking your thread off on a tangent. It's not normal for this forum. |
|
|
Mon, 19 Nov 2018 - 18:03
Post
#107
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 62 Joined: 27 Aug 2013 Member No.: 64,741 |
Evening everyone, so I sent through the drafted response and received a reply from SCS today.
Re: UK Parking Control Ltd I write further to your email below. I would be grateful if you could please provide me with a copy of your tenancy agreement so that our client can consider whether you have any right to park your vehicle at the site in question, as you have suggested. We remind you that parties to litigation are expected to act reasonably with each other in order to understand each other's position. In respect of the other points raised in your email, our client is not included in the Lease nor the Title Register, as our client manages parking at the site pursuant to a contract with the managing agent of the site who acts on behalf of the landowner (this document was provided to you on 21 September 2018). I refer you to Schedule 4, clause 18.1 on page 28 of the Lease; the regulations imposed by the Lessor in regard to the management of the site include the implementation of a parking scheme. Therefore, our client has the right to issue and enforce parking charge notices, if the terms and conditions of parking have not been complied with. Please note, we will respond to you in due course in respect of your Subject Access request. Yours sincerely, |
|
|
Mon, 19 Nov 2018 - 19:26
Post
#108
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 18,751 Joined: 20 Sep 2009 Member No.: 32,130 |
Is that in reply to my suggested response?
I would show them some redacted info from your tenancy agreement that talks about a right of way, right to peaceful enjoyment. But not the full document. And state again that regulations do not include the imposition of the private nuisance of a parking scheme and that this cannot be imposed on residents with no regard paid to their primacy of contract at the location. Finish by reminding them that they have failed to answer the following point: QUOTE ... clause 8.1 on page 15 of the Lease, which states that pursuant to the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999, the Lease does not confer a benefit on any person who is not a party to this lease. Accordingly, it appears that your clients have no right to enforce any sections under the Lease at all and therefore your client does not have any cause of action (unless you can prove otherwise). And that: QUOTE With the SAR reply, I require UKPC to explain to me and clarify the reason for this untrue statement their company made recently, to the Managing Agent about my case:
''Unfortunately these charges have escalated to a stage whereby I cannot cancel them. The charges were issued from 6th April 2014 until 20th June 2014. The charges have gone to a stage where our Legal Team have started to take action to retrieve the monies owed for each of the parking charge notices.'' |
|
|
Tue, 20 Nov 2018 - 15:43
Post
#109
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 62 Joined: 27 Aug 2013 Member No.: 64,741 |
Is that in reply to my suggested response? I would show them some redacted info from your tenancy agreement that talks about a right of way, right to peaceful enjoyment. But not the full document. And state again that regulations do not include the imposition of the private nuisance of a parking scheme and that this cannot be imposed on residents with no regard paid to their primacy of contract at the location. Finish by reminding them that they have failed to answer the following point: QUOTE ... clause 8.1 on page 15 of the Lease, which states that pursuant to the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999, the Lease does not confer a benefit on any person who is not a party to this lease. Accordingly, it appears that your clients have no right to enforce any sections under the Lease at all and therefore your client does not have any cause of action (unless you can prove otherwise). And that: QUOTE With the SAR reply, I require UKPC to explain to me and clarify the reason for this untrue statement their company made recently, to the Managing Agent about my case: ''Unfortunately these charges have escalated to a stage whereby I cannot cancel them. The charges were issued from 6th April 2014 until 20th June 2014. The charges have gone to a stage where our Legal Team have started to take action to retrieve the monies owed for each of the parking charge notices.'' Would the fact the AST is between myself and the landlord and my partner whom the claim is against just lived with me but was not on the tenancy agreement... |
|
|
Wed, 21 Nov 2018 - 09:49
Post
#110
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 28,687 Joined: 27 Nov 2007 Member No.: 15,642 |
So you athorised the defendants vehicle to be parked there
WItness statement to that effect and attendance at court. |
|
|
Wed, 21 Nov 2018 - 10:50
Post
#111
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 62 Joined: 27 Aug 2013 Member No.: 64,741 |
|
|
|
Wed, 21 Nov 2018 - 21:52
Post
#112
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 62 Joined: 27 Aug 2013 Member No.: 64,741 |
Ok so the SAR was delivered today, and all they have sent out is just every letter/email between my partner and SCS law, no other information was sent over...
|
|
|
Wed, 21 Nov 2018 - 22:22
Post
#113
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 18,751 Joined: 20 Sep 2009 Member No.: 32,130 |
Point out what is missing.
I assume this SAR was made to the parking firm, not SCS Law? Never SAR the solicitor. |
|
|
Wed, 21 Nov 2018 - 22:52
Post
#114
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 62 Joined: 27 Aug 2013 Member No.: 64,741 |
Point out what is missing. I assume this SAR was made to the parking firm, not SCS Law? Never SAR the solicitor. No it was to SCS law, as outlined in a reply from yourself which was a response to SCS law with the SAR request at the end. I was never under the understanding this was to be seperate and sent to UKPC edit - reading back the response I sent it reads as I am informing SCS to tell UKPC that I request the SAR. But SCS have decided to just send out all correspondance between my partner and themselves, and not referred this to UKPC This post has been edited by boro12856: Wed, 21 Nov 2018 - 22:55 |
|
|
Thu, 22 Nov 2018 - 09:08
Post
#115
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 28,687 Joined: 27 Nov 2007 Member No.: 15,642 |
You always send the SAR directly to the firm, anyone else can treat it as THEM being SAR'ed
What it does show is that there was no instruction from the operator showing they had performed ANY diligence... |
|
|
Thu, 22 Nov 2018 - 18:06
Post
#116
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 62 Joined: 27 Aug 2013 Member No.: 64,741 |
What it does show is that there was no instruction from the operator showing they had performed ANY diligence... I am confused by what you mean with regards to the above... sorry I will send the SAR request directly to UKPC Finish by reminding them that they have failed to answer the following point: QUOTE ... clause 8.1 on page 15 of the Lease, which states that pursuant to the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999, the Lease does not confer a benefit on any person who is not a party to this lease. Accordingly, it appears that your clients have no right to enforce any sections under the Lease at all and therefore your client does not have any cause of action (unless you can prove otherwise). They did respond saying the following In respect of the other points raised in your email, our client is not included in the Lease nor the Title Register, as our client manages parking at the site pursuant to a contract with the managing agent of the site who acts on behalf of the landowner (this document was provided to you on 21 September 2018). I refer you to Schedule 4, clause 18.1 on page 28 of the Lease; the regulations imposed by the Lessor in regard to the management of the site include the implementation of a parking scheme. Therefore, our client has the right to issue and enforce parking charge notices, if the terms and conditions of parking have not been complied with. Is that not in reply to the point made above? Sorry for all the questions and confusion. |
|
|
Thu, 22 Nov 2018 - 18:07
Post
#117
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 2,356 Joined: 30 Jun 2008 From: Landan Member No.: 20,731 |
You always send the SAR directly to the firm, anyone else can treat it as THEM being SAR'ed What it does show is that there was no instruction from the operator showing they had performed ANY diligence... Have such instructions been provided by lawyers in other cases? There is a legal professional privilege exception to the DPA 2018, which means that personal data consisting of information in respect of which a claim to "legal professional privilege" could be maintained need not be disclosed in response to a SAR. Examples of such information include (a) confidential communications between a lawyer and his or her client for the purpose of giving or receiving legal advice and (b) confidential communications between a lawyer and his or her client, or between a client or his or her lawyer and a third party, for the dominant purpose of litigation that is in prospect or under way. Similarly, the PPC client won't be providing its solicitor instructions, either, but they will have other information that will not be privileged. --Churchmouse |
|
|
Thu, 6 Dec 2018 - 20:55
Post
#118
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 62 Joined: 27 Aug 2013 Member No.: 64,741 |
Is that in reply to my suggested response? I would show them some redacted info from your tenancy agreement that talks about a right of way, right to peaceful enjoyment. But not the full document. And state again that regulations do not include the imposition of the private nuisance of a parking scheme and that this cannot be imposed on residents with no regard paid to their primacy of contract at the location. Finish by reminding them that they have failed to answer the following point: QUOTE ... clause 8.1 on page 15 of the Lease, which states that pursuant to the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999, the Lease does not confer a benefit on any person who is not a party to this lease. Accordingly, it appears that your clients have no right to enforce any sections under the Lease at all and therefore your client does not have any cause of action (unless you can prove otherwise). And that: QUOTE With the SAR reply, I require UKPC to explain to me and clarify the reason for this untrue statement their company made recently, to the Managing Agent about my case: ''Unfortunately these charges have escalated to a stage whereby I cannot cancel them. The charges were issued from 6th April 2014 until 20th June 2014. The charges have gone to a stage where our Legal Team have started to take action to retrieve the monies owed for each of the parking charge notices.'' Sent a reply through with the AST and asking further questions to which I have received the following replies: QUOTE Thank you for your email below. Can you please confirm when you will be able to provide us with your tenancy agreement? The lease is a contract between the lessee and the lessor (i.e. freeholder) and under the terms of the lease the freeholder is required to manage the property. The managing agent is simply an agent of the freeholder and therefore a management company would not be included in the lease nor the Title Register. There would be a separate contract (similar to the one with our client) that the management company would have with the freeholder. By way of clarification, our client is not purporting to have any rights under the lease. The contract between our client and 'Premier Estates Limited' gives our client the authority to manage parking at the site and issue claims in their own right against drivers who do not comply with the terms and conditions of parking. I requested to see the leasehold agreement in order to establish whether you had an unfettered right to park your vehicle at the site and it has been established that you do not. Accordingly, I will not be reiterating the position regarding our client's right to manage parking at the site, as it has already been explained to you in my emails dated 21 September 2018 and 29 November 2018. Please note, your Subject Access Request has been passed to our client who will be in contact with you in due course. Yours sincerely, and QUOTE Thank you for your email below providing me with a copy of your tenancy agreement. I note that there are no provisions in the tenancy agreement which grant you the right to park your vehicle at the site in question and therefore our client's position remains that you are liable for the parking charge notices issued for the total sum of £750.00. Unless, you can refer us to a clause which you believe gave you an 'unfettered' right to park your vehicle in breach of the terms and conditions of parking, then our client will be proceeding forward against you for the recovery of the sums due. I look forward to hearing from you. Yours sincerely, I am personally at a loss as to how to proceed now, I am a little worn out this evening. Appreciate anyones input on this and I will be back tomorrow. |
|
|
Thu, 6 Dec 2018 - 21:21
Post
#119
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 6,898 Joined: 15 Dec 2007 From: South of John O'Groats, north of Cape Town. Member No.: 16,066 |
Clause 9.2 of your AST expressly grants you quiet enjoyment.
-------------------- Cabbyman 11 PPCs 0
|
|
|
Fri, 7 Dec 2018 - 11:56
Post
#120
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 28,687 Joined: 27 Nov 2007 Member No.: 15,642 |
POint out your right to quiet enjoyment at 9.2, and require them to explain how their clients interference with that is not a breach of the AST.
|
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: Thursday, 28th March 2024 - 14:16 |