Jump to content

 

BankFodder BankFodder

hitman126

Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Content Count

    49
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1 Neutral

1 Follower

About hitman126

  • Rank
    Basic Account Holder
  1. Well, well, well.......this case developed further when a few days ago I received the below email, on the back of the letter I wrote to DPR in response to their demand letter. Would be grateful for any helpful feedback on how to treat this. I have truncated and/or stripped out bits of it to ensure anonymity. Start of Email PS: By the way, the parking company involved in this case have now been replaced at the car park in question by a new parking company. Thank you for your email regarding the above Parking Charge Notices (PCNs). The time to challenge these charges has now expired and therefore access to the Independent Appeals Service (if applicable) is no longer available. However, in order to resolve this matter, I will offer the following comments as to why these PCNs were correctly issued and are still payable. My findings The sites in question are subject to terms and conditions, which are stated on signs throughout the area. Those signs state that there is a time limit at the site. On the dates in question the vehicle was parked for longer than the time stated and a PCN was correctly and legitimately issued as a result.Please be advised, there are currently seven outstanding Parking Charge Notices (PCNs) under the vehicle registration. The claim in question is based in contract law. When you parked your vehicle on the site in question, you contractually agreed to abide by the terms and conditions attached to that site. As stated, these terms and conditions are adequately displayed on signage at the site. If you did not wish to abide by these terms and conditions, you were under no obligation to park on the property in question. I draw your attention to the decision made by the Supreme Court in ParkingEye vs Beavis [2015]. The Supreme Court ruled that the charge appealed did not contravene the penalty rule or the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 and was therefore enforceable. The charge in that case was ruled not to be a penalty as both ParkingEye and the landowners had a legitimate interest in charging motorists who contravene parking restrictions, which extended beyond the recovery of any loss. The interest of the landowners was the provision and efficient management of parking. The interest of ParkingEye was in income from the charge, which met the running costs of a legitimate scheme plus a profit margin. Further, the charge was neither extravagant nor unconscionable, having regard to the practices around the United Kingdom and taking into account the use of the particular car park and the clear wording of the signs. Please see this link for a summary of the Judgment: https://www.supremecourt.uk/cases/docs/uksc-2013-0280-press-summary.pdf The signage on site is sufficient and is in line with the guidelines laid down by the British Parking Association (BPA). The majority of motorists who park at the site do so without receiving a PCN. This is undoubtedly due to the fact that they are aware of the terms and conditions of the site. If, as you claim, the signage was inadequate, the terms and conditions of the site would be unknown to the majority of drivers and many more PCNs would be issued here. If you refer to the British Parking Association’s code of practice, you will discover that the sum in question is within what this body deems reasonable. I also draw your attention to the decision made by the Supreme Court in ParkingEye vs Beavis [2015]. The Supreme Court ruled that the charge appealed did not contravene the penalty rule or the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 and was therefore enforceable. The charge in that case was ruled not to be a penalty as both ParkingEye and the landowners had a legitimate interest in charging motorists who contravene parking restrictions, which extended beyond the recovery of any loss. The interest of the landowners was the provision and efficient management of parking. The interest of ParkingEye was in income from the charge, which met the running costs of a legitimate scheme plus a profit margin. Further, the charge was neither extravagant nor unconscionable, having regard to the practices around the United Kingdom and taking into account the use of the particular car park and the clear wording of the signs. Please see this link for a summary of the Judgment: https://www.supremecourt.uk/cases/docs/uksc-2013-0280-press-summary.pdf I must also stress that simply sending in standard template responses, most likely obtained from the internet, will not resolve the matter. In addition, I would recommend that professional legal advice be sought on this matter as an alternative. What you need to do now Please ensure that £xxxx.xx is paid by xx/01/2017. Payment can be made online or by phone. End of Email
  2. I believe so, but as I was away for a few months, I believe it/they got binned. Let's just assume therefore that I did receive an NTK but no longer have it. All, Drafted the below letter which I plan to send to SCS Law and Debt Recovery Plus. I'm therefore desperately in need of some kind, expert review and some feedback please. As I have no NTK letter(s), I'm particularly unsure whether it's worth stating this in the letter below and requesting for a copy/copies. Thank you --------------------------- LBCC Response Letter ------------------ Dear Sirs, Re: Debt owed to Highview Parking Ltd - Reference xxxxxx Thank you for your letter of DD-MM-2017. As registered keeper of the vehicle, this is a formal response to challenge the Parking Charge Notice in question, on the basis of the key points outlined below. You letter fails to: Supply any photographic evidence, nor even the 'contract' (in this case presumably a sign). Set out clearly, the basis upon which you are attempting to hold me liable, with the charge disingenuously described in your letter as your ‘debt’. State what the cause of action is, nor contain any mention of what evidence your client intends to rely on, or enclose copies of such evidence. This action on the part of your client is a clear breach of its pre-action obligations set out in the Practice Direction - Pre-Action Conduct, with which as solicitors you must surely be familiar (and with which your client, a serial litigator of small claims, must also be familiar). As you (and your client) must know, the Practice Direction binds all potential litigants, whatever the size or type of the claim. Its express purpose is to assist parties in understanding the claim and their respective positions in relation to it, to enable parties to take stock of their positions and to negotiate a settlement, or at least narrow the issues, without incurring the costs of court proceedings or using up valuable court time. Nobody, including your client, is immune from the requirements and obligations of the Practice Direction. I therefore require your client to comply with its obligations by sending me the following information/documents: An explanation of the cause of action. Whether they are pursuing me as driver or keeper. Whether they are relying on the provisions of Schedule 4 of POFA 2012. What the details of the claim are (where it is claimed the car was parked, for how long, how the monies being claimed arose and have been calculated, what contractual breach (if any) is being claimed). A copy of the contract with the landowner under which they assert authority to bring the claim. A copy of any alleged contract with the driver. A plan showing where any signs were displayed. Details of the signs displayed (size of sign, size of font, height at which displayed). If they have added anything on to the original charge, what that represents and how it has been calculated. I am clearly entitled to this information under paragraphs 6(a) and 6© of the Practice Direction. I also need it in order to comply with my own obligations under paragraph 6(b). If your client does not provide me with this information then I put you on notice that I will be relying on the cases of Webb Resolutions Ltd v Waller Needham & Green [2012] EWHC 3529 (Ch), Daejan Investments Limited v The Park West Club Limited (Part 20) – Buxton Associates [2003] EWHC 2872, Charles Church Developments Ltd v Stent Foundations Limited & Peter Dann Limited [2007] EWHC 855 in asking the court to impose sanctions on your client and to order a stay of the proceedings, pursuant to paragraphs 13 ,15(b) and © and 16. I will draw to the court the fact that I have expressly requested this information, yet been denied it by your client. Until your client has complied with its obligations and provided this information within 14 days from the date of this letter, I am unable to respond properly to the alleged claim and to consider my position in relation to it, and it is entirely premature (and a waste of costs and court time) for your client to issue proceedings. Should your client do so, then I will seek an immediate stay pursuant to paragraph 15(b) of the Practice Direction and an order that this information is provided. Otherwise, I expect to hear from you within 14 days, confirming that the charge is cancelled. Yours faithfully, [Name and Address of Vehicle Keeper]
  3. Well, so this is the current state of affairs. I contacted the gym to request for the ticket to be cancelled as advised and received a call back. If I have to be honest, I'm not entirely sure who's probably annoyed me more - Highview Parking Ltd, or the rather obnoxious gentleman from the gym who contacted me. He was rude, unhelpful and even had the temerity to insist that I had no option than to pay the fine and that based on past experience, no amount of intervention from the gym would change the outcome. As a result, I believe I can well and truly now forget about wasting any more time seeking any assistance from the gym, take the bull by the horns and directly challenge SCS Law and/or Highview Parking. What do we therefore do next kind friends?
  4. By the way, also now uploaded is a copy of the letter received from SCS Law as requested.
  5. In the absence of any positive response or assistance from the gym, what would be the next best course of action to take on my part?
  6. Thanks for the feedback @dx100uk. Followed the link you provided and can confirm this particular case falls under the one titled - "For PNC's received through the post [ANPR camera capture]" Now, there's no record of receiving any Notice To Keeper letter(s) and even if any was sent, it is definitely not currently available. The alleged incident is saidto have occurred at the start of March this year and one fact is that I was also abroad for 3 months from the end of April till end of July. As there's currently no NTK to refer to at this point in time, I cannot also ascertain any of the following: 1. The date on the NTK [including if received within 14 days from the 'offence' date] 2. Date received 3. Whether the NTK mentions schedule 4 of The Protections of Freedoms Act 2012? 4. If there's any photographic evidence of the event? With this in mind, how can one proceed please? For example, should I be requesting for copies of the NTK for starters? Should I submit an appeal and if so to whom? To date, no appeal has been made yet to the parking company, SCS Law or the debt recovery company. Thank you.
  7. Hello, I have today received a letter from SCS Law who claim they've been instructed by Highview Parking Limited to recover an alleged penalty charge notice incurred by myself/my vehicle. Incensed by the content of this letter, I sought to establish what the address of the alleged contravention was supposed to have taken place it turns out to be my local gym where I've been a member for nearly 20 years and as such a legitimate user of their car park. I initially contacted Highview Parking to enquire about the reason for the letter and/or alleged contravention was advised by a lady to write to their Appeals Team who're based in Barnet. A second call to SCS Law drew a complete blank as the gentleman on the line advised that the firm had not been given any details on the alleged offence and had only been instructed by Highview to send out to me an initial notification letter. Now, knowing how some of these cases can be won and lost through technicalities and not wanting to allow my heated emotions overrule any logical thinking on my part, I'd be grateful for any advice on how I should proceed with this please, e.g. how and who to contact, my line of argument, etc. Thank you.
  8. Well, well, well, guys. Some rather unfortunate and unpleasant developments. I left the UK on 30th April for a trip abroad and only just returned last Friday, 28th July. Prior to my departure and following the submission of my defence tothe claim, I contacted the Northampton County Court to discuss my impending trip and whether it would have any possible impact on my case was advised that nothing could be done and that I had to simply wait until the court contacted me again. Alas, upon my return, I found two letters delivered from the court and named as follows: 1. General Form of Judgment or Order, dated 15 June 2017 2. Judgment for Claimant (in default), dated 14 July 2017 Crucially, the first letter (General Form of Judgment or Order) mentioned that if I failed to file a Directions Questionnaire with the County Court Business Centre before a certain date, my defence/counterclaim would be struck out without further order of the Court. Whether this was by design or just my rotten luck, I have found absolutely no sign or trace of this Directions Questionnaire among the pile of mail diligently and carefully set aside for me by my wife, in my absence. I even phoned Northampton County Court to point this out, but was unfortunate enough to have to deal with the most unhelpful and unpleasant court clerk I could have wished for and made no headway. Bottom line is, I now have a default judgment of just under £270 to pay the Claimant would like to apply for the judgment to be set aside, as I strongly believe that I have a sound defence and it's only right that I be granted an opportunity to present this defence and receive a fair hearing. As I'm currently unemployed, a number of questions have also been racing through my mind including.... a) Considering the application to set aside judgment incurs a fee of £255 and considering the judgment sum is just under £270, is it worth my while putting in this application at all? b) As I'm now unemployed, can I have the application fee waived or reduced when applying to have the judgment set aside? c) If the application fee cannot be waived or reduced, can I claim it back from the Court or the Claimant if I'm successful with my appeal? d) Should I have to proceed with the application to set aside judgment, can anyone provide some advice/guidance on how I should go about this please? Thank you.
  9. Well, well, well, guys. Some rather unfortunate and unpleasant developments. I left the UK on 30th April for a trip abroad and only just returned last Friday, 28th July. Prior to my departure and following the submission of my defence to the claim, I contacted the Northampton County Court to discuss my impending trip and whether it would have any possible impact on my case and was advised that nothing could be done and that I had to simply wait until the court contacted me again. Alas, upon my return, I found two letters delivered from the court and named as follows: 1. General Form of Judgment or Order, dated 15 June 2017 2. Judgment for Claimant (in default), dated 14 July 2017 Crucially, the first letter (General Form of Judgment or Order) mentioned that if I failed to file a Directions Questionnaire with the County Court Business Centre before a certain date, my defence/counterclaim would be struck out without further order of the Court. Whether this was by design or just my rotten luck, I have found absolutely no sign or trace of this Directions Questionnaire among the pile of mail diligently and carefully set aside for me by my wife, in my absence. I even phoned Northampton County Court to point this out, but was unfortunate enough to have to deal with the most unhelpful and unpleasant court clerk I could have wished for and made no headway. Bottom line is, I now have a default judgment of just under £270 to pay the Claimant would like to apply for the judgment to be set aside, as I strongly believe that I have a sound defence and it's only right that I be granted an opportunity to present this defence and receive a fair hearing. As I'm currently unemployed, a number of questions have also been racing through my mind including.... a) Considering the application to set aside judgment incurs a fee of £255 and considering the judgment sum is just under £270, is it worth my while putting in this application at all? b) As I'm now unemployed, can I have the application fee waived or reduced when applying to have the judgment set aside? c) If the application fee cannot be waived or reduced, can I claim it back from the Court or the Claimant if I'm successful with my appeal? d) Should I have to proceed with the application to set aside judgment, can anyone provide some advice/guidance on how I should go about this please? Thank you.
  10. Hello, I need help desperately and would be extremely grateful for some kind assistance. A county court claim was recently made against me by Pace Recovery and Storage for an alleged breach of the terms of parking on the land behind a shop in Surrey. I proceeded to submit my Acknowledgment of Service on MCOL within the required deadline, however I got the deadline for filing my defence horribly wrong and now appear to have missed it. As a result, the MCOL site even rejects all my attempts to log on to submit the defence. What contributed mostly to this aberration is that I submitted a CPR 31.14 request to the claimant's solicitors, giving them 14 days to respond to my request. This 14 day deadline officially ended today and not surprisingly, I have to date received no response from the solicitor. It was therefore my intention to include this bit of information as part of my defence to be submitted on MCOL today. Other important dates relating to this case are as follows: Claim Issue Date: 10th March 2017 Day of Service: 15th March 2017 Acknowledgment of Service: 27th March 2017 I am at a loss now what to do, as I certainly don't wish to pay this claim and I definitely wish to submit a defence. Someone please, please, help. Thank you.
  11. @dx100uk, Thanks very much for the advise. By some coincidence, I received notification of your message on my phone inside my local post office where I was about to send my CPR31.14 Request to Gladstones Solicitors. Thanks @silverfox1961. Unfortunately, I kept any of the letters received previously. Hopefully though, Gladstones Solicitors will send me copies, following my CPR 31.14 Request. @dx100uk, not sure I'm with you. Please clarify which link you're referring to. Thanks
  12. Hello, A number of PCNs from Pace Recovery and Storage Limited of Croydon were delivered to my address in the last few weeks, for an alleged breach of the terms of parking at the rear of a shop where it is claimed a vehicle owned by myself was parked one Sunday in November 2016. All of the PCNs, which also failed to include any photo evidence of the alleged breach, were ignored and are no longer available. In February, the PCNs were followed by a "Letter Before Claim" from Gladstones Solicitors which was also ignored. Finally, a few days ago a Claim form issued by the County Court Business Centre of Katharine Street in Northampton was delivered, stating the following Particulars of Claim: The driver of the vehicle registration XXXXXX (the "Vehicle") ignored the parking charge(s) on [date] for breaching the terms of parking on the land at [Address of premises]. The Defendant was driving the Vehicle and/or is the Keeper of the Vehicle. AND THE CLAIMANT CLAIMS £160 for Parking Charges / Damages and indemnity costs if applicable, together with interest of £2.42 pursuant to s69 of the County Courts Act 1984 at 8% pa, continuing to Judgment at £0.04 per day Would now appreciate the kind assistance of our very valued forum members to advice on how to defend this claim successfully, having submitted my Acknowledgment of Service in the last few days. Should I kick things off for instance by submitting a CPR 31.14 request to the Gladstones Solicitors? Thank you.
  13. Hello, A number of PCNs from Smart Parking were delivered to my address in the last few weeks, for an alleged breach of the terms of parking at Matalan in Sutton, Surrey. This was subsequently followed by a Notice of Intended Court Action letter from Debt Recovery Plus (DRP), stating the reason for the PCN being issued as: "Overstayed Paid Time". Earlier this week, another letter was received from SCS Law who claim to act on behalf of Smart Parking Ltd who have allegedly instructed this law firm to recover the PCN charges. The letter then goes on to state that Smart Parking are entitled to the outstanding sum under contract law, adding: "When your vehicle parked at the above mentioned site(s), the driver of the vehicle agreed to be bound by the terms and conditions of parking which was displayed on signage throughout the site(s). The driver of the vehicle breached the terms and conditions of parking on each of the above stated occasions for the reason stated. For each contravention, a parking charge notice was issued, for which the sums owed remain outstanding. We refer you to the Supreme Court decision in ParkingEye Ltd v Beavis [2015] UKSC 67. In this case, the Supreme Court found that parking charge notices do not contravene the penalty rule or Unfair Terms in Consumer Contract Regulations 1999 provided they protect a legitimate interest. Unless payment is made within the next 14 days, we are instructed to issue court proceedings to recover the same and any of our client's legal costs, without further recourse to you". I visited the Matalan store last weekend and discussed my issue with a member of staff, with the hope Matalan would intervene and request for the PCN to be cancelled, being a regular customer of the store. The member of staff was not very helpful but did advise me to contact Smart Parking directly for any resolution and also pointed out that Smart Parking were no longer the contracted to manage the car park. I would now appreciate the kind assistance of our very valued forum members to advice on how to fight this PCN successfully and have provided some relevant pictures from the car park, if this helps construct a solid defence. Thank you.
×
×
  • Create New...