Jump to content


PPM /gladstones windscreen PCN - high St Slough


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2475 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

It isnt.

 

The first contact with the council is normally with some lowly person who wouldnt know the difference between deemed consent and the various categories and classes of consent and permissions.

 

The company needs to apply and then they get it on the nod if all the other regulations are adhered to regarding size, illumination and whether it is a conservation area for example.

 

As for the response, that is precisely why they need the permission.

Parking Lie used to trot that one out but every time they got rumbled

it just made things worse for themselves so they prefer to blame their client for not applying on their behalf instead.

 

Look at the Mansfield thread and quote the part of the act verbatim you can lift from there.

 

PE had to apply for permission for their signs and cameras, same as the did at Aldi, Selsdon, Croydona nd were told to change them as the existing illegal ones were inadequate.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 72
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

you can either use the info to push the council for a more definitive answer- ie no PP granted or use it to show that it hasnt been applied for and so the parking co not able to offer a contract due to criminality by way of not having pp or rely on the judge knowing about planning law or previous cases.

also read the parking pranksters blog to find other examples of claims being chucked out for this reason.

I has been a defence for a while now but rarely used as generally the clims were rejected on other grounds and it is easy for the cowboys to remedy this by applying for permission and getting it on the nod. However as said they are often too lazy to apply and so try their luck by saying they dont need it for various spurious reasons.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi EB,

 

Sorry for the delay in responding, work shifts are a nightmare.

I have just realised I have a mere 4 days to file a defence :/ So I have a choice to reply to SBC asking them to provide more information or refer to it in my defence?

I need to start my defence too, I am off from work from tomorrow so will really knuckle down. Where is a good place to start?

 

In regards to SBC I will go back to them & ask them to have another look into this because there is no way the company can display signs without an application. I think you were spot on about the initial response not having alot of information about this problem.

 

Thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

file the defence and just state that you do not believe that the parking co has planning permission (and let them prove they do).

 

The reason I say get the info from the council first hand is that many parking co's tell lies to judges about this

 

so as long as you have read up on the matter and can quote the chapter and verse of the law in your FULL defence that you have to exchange with the parking co a fortnight before the hearing then you are home and dry.

 

You dont have to prove a thing,

they are saying that they have all of the proof so make them show it.

 

getting the ful story from the council just proves they are liars and the judge will ahve to dismiss their claim as it is a criminal offence to not have PP

and you cannot enter into a criminal compact.

(ie you cant agree to break the law or claim damages from a criminal act

. If you could I would just sue the local bank for not letting me rob it))

Edited by dx100uk
Link to post
Share on other sites

Lol I like that example :) Ok, so for now I submit a part defence or full?

Also, trying to think how to word the email for the council and find myself keep on deleting and re-typing - not working.

 

Any pointers?

Link to post
Share on other sites

You are defending in full,

the part bit is when you admit you owe some money but not all of it.

 

 

You are submitting a skeleton defence so just bullet points needed to show roughly what your defence is based around

so first point will be no contract entered into with XXX so no debt exists.

You will then have to exchange documents about a fortnight before.

 

pick up the phone and ask them

"do XXX have planning permission for their signage at (location) under the Town and Country Planning Act?

if they cant answer or offer some rubbish answer rather than yes or no

read the Mansfield thread and then ask in writing quoting the exact part of the advertising hoardings regs

that show that PP is needed.

 

The deemed consent bit refers to things like bus stops, fire hydrants and even your house number,

not bloody great signs (well they have to be a minimum size to be compliant to be considered legible)

ADVERTISING a unilateral contract.

Yes, it does apply to private land.

 

Sorry but you have to do a bit of work for yourself and look up the things mentioned.

We are haapy to offer guidance but it would be a full time job if we did everything for you

and that would mean less time to help others.

 

 

I say this because I seem to be repeating myself and you are letting the clock tick away.

Edited by honeybee13
Paras.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the info EB.

I completely misunderstood and was under the impression this is a full essay with reference type defence.

 

for a skeleton defence it's just bullet points until I have the supporting documents which are provided at a later date?

 

Apologies it does look like I'm sitting here arms crossed

but there is definitely research being done,

just don't have alot of free time unfortunately with working long hours.

 

 

I have drawn up a few bullet points.

Am I right in saying I need a solid yes/no answer from the council

before I can put the bullet point about planning application?

 

So far I've come up with the below, is this too little?

 

- There is no breach of contract as none was entered to with Parking & Property Management LTD.

 

- The claimant does not have permission from the local authority to be displaying signs thus making any claim invalid

 

- There was no NTK sent to the defendant, this is a requirement as per paragraph 8&9 PoFA 2012.

This invalidates the claim in question.

Link to post
Share on other sites

docs they intend to rely upon should come via the CPR

but its only a request and they don't have to reply.

 

however should they wish to progress the case

then they will have to fwd these to you and the court under at the DQ/WS stage

 

you need to be sure they don't have planning permission for the signs before you include that.

 

I would also drop the last line regarding the invalidation of the claim due to POFA - not your call.

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

do not make the statement about pp but put

"I do not believe they have PP under the town and country planning act 2007" or similar wording ( that forces them to show they have).

 

 

You will have months to get a sensible answer out of the council that will answer this properly.

 

as for the protocols of the POFA if they havent followed them say that they havent followed them and thus ni keeper liability is created (you being the keeper) and that forces them to show that when suing you they have a reason for doing so-they cant just assume you were the driver.

 

Again, it is all about burden of proof.

If they cannot show they have got things absolutely right they lose.

You dont have to prove you are right or they are wrong but on the day being honest and raising the right points to leave questions in the judges mind is enough.

 

all of this will be expanded on when you exchange documents.

Anything they have failed to answer in their bundle regarding your CPR 31.14 will then give them big problems as judges dont like it when companies using solicitors waste their time or fail to follow procedure.

 

 

Gladstones know that and have a track record of being wrong and getting an earful because of it.

 

 

If they continue to lose their clients money at the current rate you may well find that they drop the matter just before the hearing date but you should still prepare yourself in case they dont

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yep realised I cannot put it in there for sure until I have something concrete from the council.

I have made some amendments to the points,

also would it be worth mentioning the fact loss of revenue would have been minimal?

Or leave that out?

 

- There is no breach of contract as none was entered to with Parking & Property Management LTD.

 

- I do not believe Parking & Property Management LTD have the relevant planning permission

to display their signs under the town and country planning act 2007.

 

- There was no NTK sent to the defendant.

As Per Schedule 4 Paragraph 6 of Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 the claimant must send a compliant NTK to the registered keeper of the vehicle.

Failure to comply means that the registered keeper cannot be held to account for the alleged debt of the driver

 

Also regarding the CPR 31.14 - this was recieved and signed for by Gladstones on the 12th July.

 

Nothing heard to date..

Link to post
Share on other sites

leave out losses as they dont have to show one (Beavis)

 

as regard the nTK,

this reinforces the lack of contractual obligation so the 2 are tied.

 

 

They will probaby try and argue that just because they are breaking the law

and are wrong procedurally you are still somehow have the desire to enter a contract you havent been offered....

 

As for CPR request, raise this with the court if you dont get anything when you are ordered to exchange documents .

Link to post
Share on other sites

as regard the nTK,

this reinforces the lack of contractual obligation so the 2 are tied.

 

Sorry don't think I read this correctly, is my information contradicting is that what you are saying?

Link to post
Share on other sites

no, I said they are tied.

 

When it comes to writing up your statements later

you should make sure that the lack of NTK means no keeper liability.

 

Likewise, no PP no contract.

 

Either way there is no contractual obligation

so the detail of that contract doesnt really matter

but it is always best to pick holes in it anyway

in case something new happens in another court that binds the judge in yours.

Link to post
Share on other sites

no. You are not wrting a letter you are filling out a box on a form. Simple as that.

You wont get anywhere near a court within the next 6 months, you will be asked when you cant make it on the allocation questionnaire .

 

Ok all done yesterday :) Thanks eb

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 months later...

wait for the begging letters I bet.

 

 

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 7 months later...
Ok all done yesterday :) Thanks eb

 

Hi petroholic, I'm in a similar boat. Any updates on your case that might be helpful in mine too. I'm yet to AOS and do create Defence statement.

Link to post
Share on other sites

you MUST start a new thread

your OWN

cag2k

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • dx100uk changed the title to PPM /gladstones windscreen PCN - high St Slough
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...