Jump to content

  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • a) Debit transfer into his personal account  b) i - yes     ii - yes   iii - initially quoted £25,000 - £30,000 for the whole job.  This escalated to nearly £44,000.  Would ask for money in stages for materials and labour. c) Runs a Ltd company with his wife d) Assets include van, own digger, dumper and cement mixer but kept in unknown location    Solicitor advised not to throw good money after bad as he could just shut down company.  
    • I've had another look at their WS and as it definitely states that they are pursuing you as the keeper in point 19 they must lose their case because their PCN is not compliant with PoFA on two counts.  First is the fact that they must have a parking period and it is quite clear that entering and leaving the car park does not constitute a parking period since some of the time the motorist is either driving around looking for a parking spot then leaving the spot and driving to the exit. All that takes time so that is one fail. The other fail is in their wording when they are trying to transfer the liability of the alleged debt from the driver to the keeper. They are supposed to include at Schedule 4 s9 [2][f] this "(if all the applicable conditions under this Schedule are met)". That in itself makes it non compliant but the fact that they haven't got a parking period means they haven't met the applicable conditions.   Looking at their contract, the names of the signatories and their positions in their respective  companys have been redacted. You do need strict proof of who actually signed. There is no specific authorisation from the Client to allow Court action in pursuit of non payers. In section 11 which is like an addendum it states" the Company shall provide parking control" but doesn't state if that includes legal pursuit as well and it does not appear to be signed.   The entrance sign does not include the T&Cs so it is only an offer to treat  not  an offer of a contract. Their only appears to be one type of sign inside the car park which is unusual and a lot of the signage is in too small a print to be acceptable in Law as capable of forming a contract. The signage also includes unlawful demands for extra charges which makes the whole contract invalid.  PoFA 2012 made it quite clear that the maximum  amount claimed was the amount on the sign. This has been reinforced by the Private Parking Code of Practice which states that no extra charges can be made over the signage figure. Indeed a Government Minister is quoted as saying that the extra charges demanded by parking companies are "a rip off" yet they still include them. They are an abuse of process and should be subject to adding exemplary costs payable to the motorist to act as a deterrent to rogue car parking companies.   They have no planning permission for their signs and ANPR cameras which means that in addition to them being unlawful because of the extra charges they are also illegal because they have not been given permission to be there under  the Town and Country [Advertisements} Regulations  1969. They are supposed to comply with the Law and the IPC code of Conduct and they have done neither. The new Private Parking Code of Practice  draws attention to it as well  s14.1 [g]  "g) responsibility for obtaining relevant consents e.g. planning or advertising consents relating to signs."   So it is not as if this is a secret-since it has been out since February 7th 2022 . You would have thought that as this Code was designed to root out the rogues in the industry that the parking industry would already have made adjustments to their activities in order to align themselves with the will of Parliament as proposed by Minister Neil O'Brien  who said   "The publication of this Code therefore marks the start of an adjustment period in which parking companies will be expected to follow as many of these new rules as possible."   Ignorance of the Law is no excuse but even Gladstones are surely aware that the extra charges are unlawful  it beggars belief that they can aver that they have told the truth on their WS.
    • Evening all,   I am looking for a little bit of advice, any would be appreciated. I am a bit hesitant in giving all the in's and out's as I am not sure of the forums procedures and I do not want to compromise my situation.   Basically as a result of a few issues in my life inflicted/self inflicted I ended up in a bad situation financially. A company brought a debt off a lender I had used and took me to court, I really mis-managed this and although I attended court with a case the verdict went against me. I accepted this but never heard anything back from them and admittedly as I was struggling didn't pro actively seek them out to make payment. So, on my Credit report I had a CCJ due to expire Sept. 2022, which I associated to that particular incident. Anyhow, I have recently received a Notice of Application for Attachment of earnings order, however, this is regarding a completely different debt/Court procedure to the one I participated in. The creditor, to my knowledge has never contacted me and until this week I have never received any correspondence to this case from the creditor or county court.    Basically, I was just after a bit of advice, on how to go about this. I am worried that if my employer is advised of the CCJ, it makes my position uncomfortable, maybe untenable which will only be negative to my situation.    So can I still contest this and possibly get it removed via the courts, can I delay it for 3 months to get it statue barred, do I pay the whole amount (to a company whom brought it at a pittance) or do pay it off and if so, can the figure be negotiated and how long would it affect me credit score?   I apologise for the number of questions, and appreciate any advice. My concern is the application ruining a very good job for me.   Thanks in advance
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

  • Recommended Topics

I think this is wrong...

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4793 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


Start your own new thread

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



Recommended Posts

30 month STA. Commencing 9 Feb 2008, expiring 8 Aug 2010.


Individually negotiated term:-

"The landlord and tenant are both able to issue 3 month notice in writing upon each other with notice being served on or before the anniversary of the tenancy commencement after the first six month period."


LA issued an S21 in October 2008 with expiry date of 8 January 2009.



LA issued "N1 Claim Form" (ie an all-purpose claim form) in December 2008. On the front of the page, under "brief details of claim", they have written "rent arrears" and on the reverse of the claim after giving details of the arrears they have written "notice of possession has been served on Mr X to vacate on 8 Jan 2009."


This was defended because the claimant had made numerous errors on the claim and it was argued the S21 was wrong as it expired before the 12 month anniversary.


A hearing date is set for May 2009.



LA issued "N5 Claim form for Possession of Property" in March 2009. On the reverse of the claim form under "grounds for possession" they have marked "rent arrears".


On the attached N119 "Particulars of Claim for Possession) they state

"On 28 January 2009 the claimant's solicitors served a notice exercising the break clause terminating his tenancy on 29th April 2009 by first class post. The claimant's solicitors further served a notice pursuat to S21(1)(b) of the Housing Act 1998 requiring possession of the property after 29 April 2009."

"If the Court must exercise its discretion in considering whether to grant a possession order, would the court have regard to the fact that if a possession order is not granted in these proceedgins then the claimant will commence new proceedings at the expiry of the S21 notice in any event which will result in unnecessary additional costs being incurred by both the claimant and the defendant. A copy of the letter date 28 January 2009 wtih attached S21 notice is attached."


A hearing date is set for April 2009.


1. The defendant did not receive this alleged letter of 28 January 2009 with S21 notice attached.

2. The 28 January 2009 letter exhibited with the court papers shows an S21 notice and an S8 notice (but it seems there is no mention of the S8 notice int he court papers)

3. Is it right to issue an S21 and S8 notice together?

4. Is is right to start two actions, both for rent arrears, against the same tenant? We assume Claim 2 was launched because they did not like the date allocated for Claim 1's hearing.

5. We would like to get Claim 2 kicked out as it is anticipated that funds to cover arrears will be available shortly.


Comments/ advice gratefully received.

My posts are offered informally, without prejudice and without liability. You should seek the advice of a qualified insured professional.

Link to post
Share on other sites


  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?

  • Create New...