Jump to content

tissot

Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Content Count

    67
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1 Neutral

About tissot

  • Rank
    Basic Account Holder
  1. Just recieved a CPR 27.9 'our client hereby gives notice that it will not be attending the hearing' from Gladstones. Does that mean just the PPC won't be attending or Gladdys themselves ? Regards tissot
  2. Unfortunately lease on land registry does not include anything about spaces however the LL states it is in theirs ! I think the spaces were added on afterwards.
  3. I can try but they were quite adamant they didn't want to. I just want to know if the argument that, they should prove to me that the lease has been amended to allow them to issue charges in their own name and not me have to prove they cant? Regards, tissot
  4. These two pieces of case law are already included in my WS that I sent but appreciate the help regardless Regards tissot
  5. I submitted my WS and I then received a supplementary WS trying to disprove the points in my WS. Can anyone shed any light on this one? The case they refer to states the claimant didn't have any mention of a parking space in his tenancy agreement however I do. The only thing I don't have is the Lease as the LL isn't comfortable with giving me a copy. Kind Regards, Tissot CLAIMANT SUPP WS REDACTED.pdf
  6. Hey EB, I found this, PACE v Lengyel C7GF6E3R http://nebula.wsimg.com/07b493fc1a4ea8623a8fe73dce20287a?AccessKeyId=4CB8F2392A09CF228A46&disposition=0&alloworigin=1 Specifically Para 9 shows some similarities to the contract produced to me. What do you think ? Regards, tissot
  7. This is my WS so far, I am really out of my depth here so am going through other WS and looking up cases for reference that have been used before that may apply to my case. I thought it best to submit as it is so far so I dont go down a path thats ultimately going to end badly! PARKING AND PROPERTY MANAGEMENT LIMITED (CLAIMANT) -AND- XXXXXXXXXXXX (DEFENDANT) WITNESS STATEMENT OF XXXXXXXXXX I, XXXXXXXXXXXX WILL SAY AS FOLLOWS: The facts and matters set out in this statement are within my own knowledge unless otherwise stated and I believe them to be true. Where I refer to information supplied by others, the source of the information is identified; facts and matters derived from other sources are true to the best of my knowledge and belief. I am an unrepresented consumer who has never attended the county court before. 1. The defendant has supremacy of contract as the legal tenant of the property which includes the use of the parking space in question. 2. Parking and Property Management are uninterested third parties as they do not have a contract with the Freeholder or Leaseholder. 3. The only contract that exists is that between Parking and Property Management and the Estate Management company who have not shown authority to offer such contracts. 4. If such a contract existed that would require a change in the lease conditions and the Leaseholder has not received as such. 5. As per the claimants implied contract on their signage, there is no bare license to allow anyone to park, their signage and the permit scheme is prohibitive. 6. There is no genuine offer of terms to park, the signage is prohibitive in nature so there cannot be that meeting of minds to agree terms. 7. A contract can not be formed by agreeing that the only way of completing it is to break it. That makes the charge an unlawful penalty and thus unenforceable. 8. Parking Eye v Sharma (3QT62646 Brentford County Court) examined the contract and dismissed the claim for the reason that the Claimant had no ownership of, or proprietary interest in, the land; it followed that the Claimant, acting as an agent, had no locus standi to bring court proceedings in its own name. 9. Parking Eye v Gardam (3QT60598) similarly examined the contract and found the Sharma judgment persuasive. 10. I also refer the court to Parking Eye v Somerfield (2012) (EWCA Civ 1338 case A3/2011/0909) that examined Parking Eye contracts. This stated that any debt was due to Somerfield and that Parking Eye did not have the authority to issue proceedings. It follows therefore that if a debt exists, it is owed to the landowner, not the Claimant. 11. The claimant failed to send the defendant the ‘particulars of claim’ during this claim process. Meaning a full defence can not be submitted due to little information provided about the claim. Now I understand its not finished and I am genuinely trying here but would appreciate any help and directions to go down. regards tissot
  8. Hi Ethel, Yes I am indeed the tenant and I am in fact trying to get a copy of the original lease from the leaseholder (Landlord) to see what it says. The actual tenancy agreement does not state anything about permits etc or restrictions on parking, would this not be supremacy of contract ? Or would it need to be evidenced in the lease itself ?
  9. Here is the Claimant WS in PDF and suitably redacted, could an Admin remove the JPEGS from my last post please. Thanks tissot CLAIMANT_WS_REDACTED.pdf
  10. Yes of course, I am using a tablet at the moment and don't have access to a PC so will do that as soon as possible !
  11. Not sure where to start with the witness statement but seems the point is still valid about a contract between landowner and parking company, even if the contract exists between PPM and estate management ?
  12. So they have given a date for the hearing 13th Feb, attached is claimant witness statement. And the contract they have with the estate management, no contract existsts with the freeholder or leaseholder.
  13. So I called the courts again to clarify and turns out they have filed the relevant documents but I was never sent them from Gladstone's and they have just been sent to the court ! They have said it has now been allocated to the judge awaiting a date.
  14. So a fair amount of time had passed and I phoned the courts to ask what was going on. Turns out I didn't receive a letter from the courts on the 11th June. The letter was just for my reference asking the claimant to.comply with CPR PD 7.3, 7.4 or 7.5 and serving documents. Turns out they haven't done this by the requested date 2nd July. The person I called from the local county court said this means I can apply for it to be struck off. Not sure how I go about this ? Kind Regards Tissot
×
×
  • Create New...