CAG thread for that case

https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?377246-UKPC-liable-for-trespass-**SUCCESS**

their letter makes it clear that by returning the permit you arent participating in their scheme. that doesnt mean that they now have a right to force you to participate under a different contract.

I bet their signage is prohibitive in nature and not an offer of terms as the letters does indicate this. The only way they can make any money at this site is by getting people to agree to whatever terms THEY decide upon and then charging you for some petty breach that doesn't affect parking management or safety.

If that doesnt earn them any money they will introduce some other conditions until someone has to fall foul of them.

That is why you see restrictions in parking times dropped from say 3 hours to often 30 or 45 minutes in supermarket car parks. The parking co dont make a penny from actual parking so they have to change the "rules" to chisel money from the lawful behaviour of the customer of that store

Again there are some good examples of this such as Davey v UKPC ( see both that and UKPC v Davey for full story)

CAG thread for that case

 

https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?377246-UKPC-liable-for-trespass-**SUCCESS**

UKPC -vs- Davey is an entirely different case legally. Mr Davey owned his parking space freehold. So there was no possibility UKPC could ever have established they had a right to PCN his car as no lessor/management company could exist to give UKPC authority to do it. The case tells us nothing about the rights parking companies might have when the parking space is owned leasehold and so is subject to the wording of the lease.

Ethel,

can you give an example of where a parking co has won a court claim when they only have an agreement with a third party ( managing agent) ? I cant.

Even when they argue a chain of authority it is shot down because they cant show it in writing even when the wording of the lease gives a great deal of authority to the MA, the courts will accept that the landowner wouldnt intend to assign their rights to someone who has no relationship with them.

Parking co's like to claim they have authority but have yet to win that argument but of course they have to try but they are just a busted flush.

I would still bet on any signage being prohibitive rather than contractual. there wont be a sign saying private land, please park here but expect to pay someone who has nothing to do with this land a small fortune for doing so. It will say permit holders only and as the OP doesnt have a permit the other terms wont apply either.

I don't know of any reported case where a parking company has either won or lost a case based on legal arguments about whether the lessor/managing agent has the power under the lease to impose a parking permit scheme. I don't have access to the databases of decided cases that would let me search for those.

Wherever a case has been posted on here which is alleged to have decided that it always turns out that the judge never got to consider legal arguments about the lease wording because the PPC lost the case either by not turning up at all or through their usual incompetence - not having the written evidence of their authority, cr@ppy signage, non-compliant paperwork etc.

I wouldn't be at all surprised if their signage is faulty here too. All my comments have been about the "supremacy of contract" which is claimed to defeat any attempt to enforce the PCN in court. It doesn't automatically do that, each contract (lease) needs to be read to see what it actually says.

most cases are on parking prankster.

Ill post a picture of the signage which is behind my space.

Should I reply to their appeal response saying see them in court or should I request a copy of the lease from my landlady or even ask her if the lease allows the management agent to employ a third party such a PPM to act/enforce parking restrictions on their behalf?

Might be worth asking her she might not even know about the PPC

I would suspect that your landlady would have no idea what is going on. She has an address (I assume) for all her personal mail so it's likely she didn't get informed about the parking situation. Only she can answer that.

What I would ask her is if she bought the home freehold rather than leasehold. That would put a different spin on things.

Absolutely read your agreement to see exactly what it says about parking. I would also be asking the management company whether they have the right to unilaterally impose conditions on the land in question or whether they should have included you all before implementing the scheme.

Ask LL what it says in the lease/deeds. Sometime there are bits on the title deeds regarding this but not always as the lease terms can be a separate document so if you dot get any joy the looking at the deeds via the Land Registry will tell you somehting but not necessarily all.

ok thanks.

Apparently, my neighbour who is also going through the same difficulty (they own their apartment) is checking theirs also, I assume the lease will be the same.

Whats-more, they also discovered meetings are held regarding the development of which I have never known or received an invite too since living here! surely that goes in my favour as well?

Whats-more, they also discovered meetings are held regarding the development of which I have never known or received an invite too since living here! surely that goes in my favour as well?

No relevance to the PCN whatsoever. You've already told the PPC that you received the letter about the parking permit scheme. So whether you received letters about meetings on anything else is not really relevant to what you do about the PCN.

So neighbours have informed me the lease doesn't mention about the management company being allowed to enforce a parking enforcement company. I really don't know what to do, pay the fine or see what happens. time is ticking, what do you guys/girls recommend?

fine?where does their paperwork say that please?

It's not a fine it's a speculative Invoice.

haha sorry sorry! I meant is it worth paying the speculative invoice or respond saying see you in court or just not respond?

is it worth contacting a lawyer to see whether they would take the case should it end in court? apologies for what may seem stupid questions but this really isn't my area of expertise and I'm fully stuck in limbo

you need to get reading up RJ

you've not read ONE other private parking thread here at all

unless you've done it whilst not logged in...

then you'd have the answers to all the above q's and you wouldn't call it a fine, and that's not funny either..but you are not alone as amost of the media call them fines..a private PPC cannot fine you for breaking some imaginary contract you didnt even know you'd entered into.

no you don't need a lawyer

apologies, I appreciate there are many other threads, unfortunately I have a pretty relentless job which doesnt allow me alot of free time hence why I dont post until the next day on most occasions. I will read up on a few over the next couple days.

I do fully appreciate each and everyone once of all of your replies, apologies if my 'haha' came across as a joke. I did read the parking pranksters win against PPM. is there any particular threads I should read?

thanks again

well its not in court and very few residential ones end that way.

its not any one specific thread

just any or more here

its general things in many / all of them

but granted..time can be precious for people like yourselves.

So, reading through a couple of other similar threads i notice you guys often mention NTK (notice to keeper) is this some sort of summons of some sort like a final demand to pay this 'invoice' or they will go to court.

I appealed before knowing any of this and come to this forum, they have rejected my appeal so I'm guessing i should now sit tight and wait for the NTK if it ever arrives. I also waiting for my landlady to send/read the lease. i am checking my tenancy agreement to see my rights in regards to the car space but i guess that is probably irrelevant its the lease that holds supremacy?

no NTK is nothing to do with court impending or otherwise...

it s purely a process they must go thru, but yes in some instances your response sort of makes it irrelevant though that's down to its wording, but they will send one I bet.

then it might bounce around to powerless Debt collection agencies [A DCA] who are TOTALLY powerless on all 'debts' they are NOT BAILIFFS and have ZERO legal powers.

in all truth the only letters you ever need to sit up and tell us about are a 'letter of/before claim' from one of the many fake/tame paper only solicitors

or

a claimform from northants bulk court.

and if those happen in this case it could be quite fun, as its not even been established who took the photos so the NTK with the photo evidence [if they send them] could be a giggle.

we have know other patrons of the same residential area to be paid to go around taking photos and emailing them to the PPC and they pop off and place a speculative invoice on your windscreen.

IMHO you have little to worry over here..

Thanks again, ill keep an eye out for any further correspondence and sit tight. I wont reply to their appeal rejection letter either.

Ill post pictures of signage tomorrow, ill also take photos of the entrance and my car space etc for reference.

:thumb:

yea one multipage PDF please

read upload.

If you read a bit of the first forum sticky "PPC Successes" you'll see that these conmen have been beaten on many occasions, thanks to advice from the forum and determination of the motorist to not just give in.

Residential parking cases similar to yours will be most useful.

These fleecers work on the assumption that most people will be frightened by the threat of legal action and just pay up (and sadly that is the case) but in reality if you fight back it is usually quite easy to win.

in regard of NTK.

You must read more on the subject, esp the Protection of Freedond Act 2012 so you understand what is supposed to happen. As you appealed the screen ticket you wont get an NTK as they dont need to send one as you jumped in feet first at the very beginning so they knwo who the driver was.

Anywaqy with a residential situation it is always going to be that the keeper is the driver when your car is parked in your space.