Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: UK CPM - Visitor parking PCN
FightBack Forums > Queries > Private Parking Tickets & Clamping
Pages: 1, 2, 3, 4
DragonQ
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.
SchoolRunMum
QUOTE
- 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...


Yes and yes. But don't say who parked.

When complaining, write as the 'keeper' of the car and be assertive and insist there must be scope for the agent to cancel these for permit holders and if it costs a tenner you'll pay that (if you agree to do so, to get shot of this trash). Often there is a week or two window to do so, after which a landowner says get lost.

Add that, as you own the flat, you have rights and easements under your lease and a right to peaceful enjoyment. This is a baseless attempt to charge in a free car park area, where parking and rights of way are already offered in the lease, without caveat. Tell them that these pseudo 'charges' are not a feature of your contract and cannot be incorporated now without formal variation of the lease, which you will not agree to.

Tell them that you believe they, as Managing Agents, have a conflict of interests and are likely to be taking a kickback from each 'PCN', yet the entire regime is a matter of derogation from grant, contrary to the rights of residents. Even worse is the fact that UKCPM are notorious ex-clampers in a rotten industry and are known to sue residents for parking in their own car parks.

This has incensed you and you require these charges are quashed immediately. Finally, draw their attention to the case of Jopson v Home Guard (a persuasive appeal case)* attach the Jopson transcript and suggest that they need to seek legal advice because they are disregarding the rights of leaseholders and in the Jopson case, she claimed over £2000 in costs to beat a similar scam. Call it as it is.


*
http://nebula.wsimg.com/f6d657adf7df70d27e...p;alloworigin=1
DragonQ
Thanks for the reply. It's actually a house that I own, which includes a single parking space. I am not actually sure who owns the visitor bays within the car park, so I'm not sure what actually gives me the right to use the visitor bays (aside from the fact that I was given a permit for one).
SchoolRunMum
Modern leases include rights of way and easements. That plus the fact you have a visitors permit, suggests you have primacy of contract.
DragonQ
I have received a NTK and am drafting a response letter based on the MSE template for IPC members. Is there any way I can use their incorrect use of "BPA member" logos on their signs against them? Anything else I can add that's specific to this case?

By the way, I never received a reply from the management company. I'll be following up that too.
Lynnzer
See my signature templates.
Use the 1st one then the other for Tortious Interferance.

In my opinion these are not appeal-able. You have no need to appeal when they are presumably using your own allocated or one that you have been granted the use of from the lease. You should instead put them to task.

Amend the letters and send them out.
DragonQ
Thanks for the reply. Should I remove the part about "you must only operate on land where you have the landholder’s permission" since this is a communal space?

Also what kind of amount is reasonable for trespass (if it even applies in this case)?
nosferatu1001
If you have rights over the space, you are a joint landholder. Theyd need to get agreement from all those with interest.

£250 is a good start. Its aggravated because theyre operating a business from your land.
Lynnzer
QUOTE (DragonQ @ Wed, 3 May 2017 - 19:24) *
Thanks for the reply. Should I remove the part about "you must only operate on land where you have the landholder’s permission" since this is a communal space?

Also what kind of amount is reasonable for trespass (if it even applies in this case)?

They shouldn't even have agreed a parking regime without the Landowner's authority. See my Flamepit topic
DragonQ
I actually found the part about my parking rights in the property title:

"The right...to the use in common with all others entitled to a like right on a first come first served basis any visitors parking space in the vicinity of the property for the temporary parking of private motor vehicles." smile.gif

They have an online enquiry form but the PCN says everything should be done in writing so sending it via recorded delivery might work better?
AOneVs
I'm going to court at the end of this month with these cowboys. Same situation, but no permit required. Their signs had the BPA AOS logo too, when they are IPC.

I can't see how the IPC\IAS can disallow an appeal on the grounds the signage breaches the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008 by displaying the BPA logo.

I'll let you know how I get on in court.

Good luck!
DragonQ
QUOTE (AOneVs @ Thu, 4 May 2017 - 21:08) *
I'm going to court at the end of this month with these cowboys. Same situation, but no permit required. Their signs had the BPA AOS logo too, when they are IPC.

I can't see how the IPC\IAS can disallow an appeal on the grounds the signage breaches the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008 by displaying the BPA logo.

I'll let you know how I get on in court.

Good luck!

Nice, will be interested to hear how it goes.
nosferatu1001
QUOTE (AOneVs @ Thu, 4 May 2017 - 20:08) *
I'm going to court at the end of this month with these cowboys. Same situation, but no permit required. Their signs had the BPA AOS logo too, when they are IPC.

I can't see how the IPC\IAS can disallow an appeal on the grounds the signage breaches the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008 by displaying the BPA logo.

I'll let you know how I get on in court.

Good luck!

Because the IAS are a kangaroo court that g'tee to uphold 80%+ of parking charges.
Lynnzer
QUOTE (AOneVs @ Thu, 4 May 2017 - 21:08) *
I'm going to court at the end of this month with these cowboys. Same situation, but no permit required. Their signs had the BPA AOS logo too, when they are IPC.

I can't see how the IPC\IAS can disallow an appeal on the grounds the signage breaches the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008 by displaying the BPA logo.

I'll let you know how I get on in court.

Good luck!

Corporate BPA member only. They can do this but they don't do POPLA.
I really can;t understand why the BPA allows Corporate Membership to IPC mebers. Seems a confict of interst to me. But,,,,,, this is the greedy parking industry.
DragonQ
QUOTE (Lynnzer @ Fri, 5 May 2017 - 09:59) *
Corporate BPA member only. They can do this but they don't do POPLA.
I really can;t understand why the BPA allows Corporate Membership to IPC mebers. Seems a confict of interst to me. But,,,,,, this is the greedy parking industry.

I've made a complaint to the BPA about their incorrect claims of being BPA AOS members. Don't really care but if it causes them grief that's fine with me. I've also submitted the letter to them, let's see what happens! Need to contact the management company again since they just ignored my original letter. Might call them to confirm they received it.
DragonQ
Got a reply from UK CPM:

QUOTE
Within your letter, you state that UK Car Park Management are using your allocated bay for our own business purposes, please see below one of the images that was taken. of your vehicle at the time of the contravention. (All other images can be viewed on www.paymyticket.co.uk).

As you can see your vehicle was parked in a marked ‘V’ bay, not your allocated parking bay. The visitor bays are for visitors and whilst vehicles are parked within these bays a valid UK CPM visitor permit must be displayed at all times.

The parking conditions are in place to stop unauthorised parking, without a valid UK CPM permit displayed the operatives are unable to ascertain which vehicles are authorised to be parked. As a resident and permit holder you are fully aware of the terms and conditions for parking and that parking in breach of those terms may result in your vehicle being issued with a parking charge notice.

We have not breached the Data Protection Act by obtaining your details from the DVLA as your details were requested through the Reasonable Cause criteria of pursuing an outstanding parking charge. A PCN was correctly issued to your vehicle, as you ignored this notice a First Reminder was sent.

UK Car Park Management fully complies with the IPC’s Code of Practice. We do not own the land the vehicle was parked upon, however we do hold a legal contract that authorises our enforcement officers to monitor and maintain. the parking areas on behalf of the landowner. This therefore entitles UK CPM to issue and uphold all parking charge notices given to those who have breached the parking restrictions.

We will not be paying for trespass as no trespass has occurred, as we have already stated your vehicle was parked in a visitor bay.

It is not within your jurisdiction to claim for damages for misuse of the data from the DVLA as you are not the DVLA. Irrespective of this your details were correctly obtained to pursue an outstanding parking charge and nothing else. Therefore, there has been no wrongful application or misuse of the data from the DVLA.

Most of their reply is irrelevant because I never actually said they were using my "allocated bay" - I said it was an "allocated parking area" of mine (i.e. a visitor space). I get the feeling they are replying to the original template letter rather than the actual letter I wrote! They make the point that I am aware of the terms and conditions, ignoring the fact that my original letter stated that their terms and conditions are irrelevant as they are trumped by my property deeds, which state I can use the visitor bays without any mention of restrictions. Interestingly, the letter makes no mention of whether they will be pursuing the original parking charge or not but their language suggests they still expect me to pay it.
Lynnzer
So progress this to the Managing Agents for their action.

What you need to do is build up a few rejections of your request for cancellation based on your leaseholder rights.
Then when they all fail to address this you are in a place of comfort to start a claim against the MA and UKCPS.
See this and you'll get an idea of how this was constructed by a legally trained person.
DragonQ
Neither the NTK nor subsequent letter from UK CPM actually mentions any potential legal action so that kind of letter seems a bit premature, although I definitely think I need to contact the management agency again.
nosferatu1001
It isnt prematrure to enforce your leased rights.
DragonQ
QUOTE (nosferatu1001 @ Fri, 26 May 2017 - 08:50) *
It isnt prematrure to enforce your leased rights.

I agree but the letter is centred around including the management agent in a threatened court case, which hasn't (yet) happened. I can say that I intend to add them as a party if UK CPM try to take me to court and then cut out the irrelevent parts of the letter though.

P.S. I own the property, I don't rent it.
Lynnzer
QUOTE (DragonQ @ Fri, 26 May 2017 - 10:07) *
QUOTE (nosferatu1001 @ Fri, 26 May 2017 - 08:50) *
It isn't premature to enforce your leased rights.

I agree but the letter is centred around including the management agent in a threatened court case, which hasn't (yet) happened. I can say that I intend to add them as a party if UK CPM try to take me to court and then cut out the irrelevant parts of the letter though.

P.S. I own the property, I don't rent it.

The earlier you get both the managing agent and the landowner/lessor into this the better.
Tell them to get this nonsense taken care of and put them on notice of a joint action for damages.
Also warn them any further ticketing on you car will be considered a derogation of grant with similar action taken.
nosferatu1001
QUOTE (DragonQ @ Fri, 26 May 2017 - 10:07) *
QUOTE (nosferatu1001 @ Fri, 26 May 2017 - 08:50) *
It isnt prematrure to enforce your leased rights.

I agree but the letter is centred around including the management agent in a threatened court case, which hasn't (yet) happened. I can say that I intend to add them as a party if UK CPM try to take me to court and then cut out the irrelevent parts of the letter though.

P.S. I own the property, I don't rent it.

Do you have freehold title to the parking space? If not, do you have a leasehold interest in the space?
Lynnzer
QUOTE (nosferatu1001 @ Fri, 26 May 2017 - 11:56) *
QUOTE (DragonQ @ Fri, 26 May 2017 - 10:07) *
QUOTE (nosferatu1001 @ Fri, 26 May 2017 - 08:50) *
It isnt prematrure to enforce your leased rights.

I agree but the letter is centred around including the management agent in a threatened court case, which hasn't (yet) happened. I can say that I intend to add them as a party if UK CPM try to take me to court and then cut out the irrelevent parts of the letter though.

P.S. I own the property, I don't rent it.

Do you have freehold title to the parking space? If not, do you have a leasehold interest in the space?

The OP says the lease provides for this "The right...to the use in common with all others entitled to a like right on a first come first served basis any visitors parking space in the vicinity of the property for the temporary parking of private motor vehicles."

In any case UKCPM WILL NOT know who has rights of any sort on any space. They don't have a list of "visitor" cars; permit or no permit, and it would be entirely unable to say that the OP had no rights to use it.
Do you have to display a permit in your own allocated bay?
nosferatu1001
I was more making te point that you still have leased rights, even though you own the space, because you dont own the freehold to that space.
DragonQ
QUOTE (Lynnzer @ Fri, 26 May 2017 - 12:15) *
Do you have to display a permit in your own allocated bay?

According to UK CPM, yes. Again, nothing in the deeds about it though. It just says:

QUOTE
The right...to the exclusive use of the parking space comprised within the Management Land and numbered with the plot number relating to the property.
nosferatu1001
UKCPM have no right to vary your lease.
Lynnzer
More to the point, you weren't ticketed for using the visitors bay then. You were done for not displaying a permit and they haven't a clue who has rights to any bay.

You can defend this on the presumption of them ticketing you in your allocated bay but with the overrider that in any case, you had rights to the use of any visitor bay too as part of your lease.

Start off now by sending a letter to the managing agent and the landowner/lessor and tell them you want this damn thing sorted or they will be named as joint parties to a claim for derogation of grant.

Then do the one to UKCPM for the damages claim for breach of the DPA.
I take it you saw this?
DragonQ
QUOTE (Lynnzer @ Fri, 26 May 2017 - 22:44) *
More to the point, you weren't ticketed for using the visitors bay then. You were done for not displaying a permit and they haven't a clue who has rights to any bay.

You can defend this on the presumption of them ticketing you in your allocated bay but with the overrider that in any case, you had rights to the use of any visitor bay too as part of your lease.

Start off now by sending a letter to the managing agent and the landowner/lessor and tell them you want this damn thing sorted or they will be named as joint parties to a claim for derogation of grant.

Then do the one to UKCPM for the damages claim for breach of the DPA.
I take it you saw this?

This thread is getting way too confusing. It feels like people are just popping in saying stuff without reading the thread. Let me clarify a few things:

1) I own a property. It comes with an allocated parking space. However, my own allocated parking space is irrelevant: UK CPM are charging me because my car was parked in a visitor bay without a permit being displayed (so they claim). Their photos show the visitor bay marking.
2) I sent an email to the management agent upon seeing the ticket on my car. I demanded that they contact UK CPM and cancel the charge. They have not replied.
3) I received the NTK. I replied to the NTK using the template here.
4) I received a reply from UK CPM to my letter, basically saying that I don't own the space and I was aware of the conditions of having to display a permit due to the signs (see this post).
5) I plan to send a second email to the management agent.
ostell
1) You have the right to park given in you lease. The "Charge" was for failing to display a permit. Where in your lease, which takes priority, does it say you have to display a permit?
2) & 5) hassle the managing agent again
4) See 1)
Lynnzer
QUOTE (ostell @ Sat, 27 May 2017 - 07:31) *
1) You have the right to park given in you lease. The "Charge" was for failing to display a permit. Where in your lease, which takes priority, does it say you have to display a permit?
2) & 5) hassle the managing agent again
And add in the landowner. Derogation of grant
QUOTE
4) See 1)

DragonQ
QUOTE (ostell @ Sat, 27 May 2017 - 07:31) *
1) You have the right to park given in you lease. The "Charge" was for failing to display a permit. Where in your lease, which takes priority, does it say you have to display a permit?

The deeds say nothing about needing a permit, hence my letter to UK CPM telling them to get stuffed.

QUOTE (ostell @ Sat, 27 May 2017 - 07:31) *
2) & 5) hassle the managing agent again

Yep, I plan to.

QUOTE (Lynnzer @ Sat, 27 May 2017 - 08:14) *
And add in the landowner. Derogation of grant

I have no idea who the landowner is. In the deeds the common areas, including visitor spaces, are merely labelled "management land".
Lynnzer
QUOTE (DragonQ @ Sun, 28 May 2017 - 13:09) *
QUOTE (ostell @ Sat, 27 May 2017 - 07:31) *
1) You have the right to park given in you lease. The "Charge" was for failing to display a permit. Where in your lease, which takes priority, does it say you have to display a permit?

The deeds say nothing about needing a permit, hence my letter to UK CPM telling them to get stuffed.

QUOTE (ostell @ Sat, 27 May 2017 - 07:31) *
2) & 5) hassle the managing agent again

Yep, I plan to.

QUOTE (Lynnzer @ Sat, 27 May 2017 - 08:14) *
And add in the landowner. Derogation of grant

I have no idea who the landowner is. In the deeds the common areas, including visitor spaces, are merely labelled "management land".

It costs a tenner to find out from the Land Registry I believe. You can also ask the managing agent. They are obliged to let you know.
DragonQ
Should I post the draft of the letter I intend to send the management company here first?
DragonQ
Turns out the management company itself owns the land, at least that's what they've told me.
Lynnzer
QUOTE (DragonQ @ Fri, 2 Jun 2017 - 17:45) *
Turns out the management company itself owns the land, at least that's what they've told me.

Yeah, but are they the Lessor?
ostell
This has been mentioned in another case in abither thread but it was in fact two different companies at Companies House. Get the full names of both. Even if they do reckon they own it then they cannot vary your lease at a whim.
DragonQ
Quick update: I've received a Letter Before Claim from UKCPM's solicitor. I am preparing a response at the moment. Should I reply directly to UKCPM or to the solicitor that sent me the LBC?
cabbyman
Show us the LBC, suitably redacted, and your proposed response. Gladstones????
DragonQ
Hilariously non-compliant LBC attached, still working on the response. Yes it's Gladstones, how did guess? wink.gif

I do notice though that they refer to the Pre-Action Protocol for Debt Claims, which came into force on 01/10/2017. Is there anything new here that would make any advice here or at the MSE forums out of date? For example the Practice Direction's list of stuff that needs to be in an LBC is for "pre-action procedures where no pre-action protocol or other formal pre-action procedure applies"; since the PAP for Debt Claims now exists, this list may no longer be relevant?

Click to view attachment
cabbyman
My initial reaction is that you can't respond under PAP because they haven't sent you a compliant PAP!!!

I haven't familiarised my self with the protocol yet but others have and will advise in detail.
nosferatu1001
You respond requiring them to send a compliant lba.
DragonQ
OK here's my proposed response, is it OK? I don't know where to send the letter though as they have given no reply address, only a link to their website where I can fill in the "reply form" (Annex 1 of the PAP for Debt Claims). Filling in the official form would basically entail explaining why I am not liable for the debt and also what documents I require from the claimant. I won't fill this in though until/unless I get a response from this letter.

QUOTE
Re: LETTER BEFORE CLAIM dated <date>

I am writing to acknowledge receipt of the above letter.

As instructed by your letter, I have read the Pre-Action Protocol for Debt Claims under the Civil Procedure Rules 1998 (hereby referred to as “the PAP”) and the Practice Direction on Pre-Action Conduct (hereby referred to as the “PD”). I refer you to Annex A of the PD which clearly lays out in section 2 what the claimant’s Letter Before Claim (hereby referred to as the “LBC”) should contain. I do not believe your LBC complies with the PD as it neglects to include various pieces of information listed within. I have attached a copy of this section of the PD as an appendix for your reference.

I am not legally trained and find it astonishing that you, a solicitor, are either not aware of, or are choosing not to comply with, the PD. I wish to remind you that paragraph 4 of the PD states that the court has the power to apply sanctions for non-compliance with the PD. The fact that you refer to the PAP suggests to me that you believe you have sent me a compliant LBC and that I am liable to respond under the PAP, yet the fact that your letter does not comply with the PD suggests that I am not. If you are indeed asking for a response under the PAP, please explain why you have not complied with the PD and send a new LBC that does comply with the PD. I will then be able to comply with my obligations under the PD.

I am sure many other non-legally trained motorists who receive such confusing letters are resigned to paying charges that they may not be liable for, in order to avoid unnecessary hassle. I find this unacceptable, particularly for such a well-known group of solicitors.

I expect an actual response to my letter rather than another generic template letter that does not address my questions and concerns.
nosferatu1001
Send to Gladstones postal address
Pretty sure if you search there is an email address as well.
DragonQ
Got a very short letter from the solicitor, along with an FAQ, a copy of the initial response I sent to CPM and their evidence reply:

Click to view attachment

I notice it does not address at all the question I asked them:

QUOTE (Me)
If you are indeed asking for a response under the PAP, please explain why you have not complied with the PD and send a new LBC that does comply with the PD. I will then be able to comply with my obligations under the PD.


The FAQs do include things like a (supposed) breakdown of the costs. I've included some of the most relevant ones too:

Click to view attachment

Any recommendations on how to proceed from here?
DragonQ
Bump
Redivi
Dear Sir

Ref ****

Thank You for your letter dated ****

For the avoidance of doubt, I deny that any payment is owed to your client
Notwithstanding that I dispute a number of its other assertions, a valid permit was displayed in the vehicle

Please send a paper version of the PAP documents so that I can make a full response

Yours Faithfully
antiBully
Perhaps try a variation of this? biggrin.gif https://twitter.com/Parking_Justice/status/...072887650287621
Ronie
Hi

I have got similar letter for the PCN issued in April 2017.

They stopped it after Nov 2017 but now sent me similar letter.

In my case it was ticket which was moved and was not displayed properly. Though, I showed it to Parking attendant (who does not have have any id and was not employed by UKCPM). He refused to cancel the PCN and wanted me to talk to UKCPM

There was no detail to contact or appeal on the PCN but I googled and send them detail but they refused. My paid ticket does have last three digit of my car and time.

Do you think I should reply to Gladstone with something? Letter is same what is attached in the above thread but with my detail on it.

Thanks
Ronie
nosferatu1001
You should start your own thread, as the rules you agreed to told you - one case, one thread.

Would you like other people to comment on your thread, about their issues, and drag it away?

If you have a lba you MUST RESPOND. there's no choice here.
Ronie
Thanks

My thread is already there: http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showto...p;#entry1384104

I did not get LBA though but got Letter before claim.

Do they go to court? Most of threads says forget it smile.gif....Have you got court orders yet?
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.
Invision Power Board © 2001-2024 Invision Power Services, Inc.