PPC issue Claimform for parking in disabled bay without blue badge.

[pontefract]

You normally can't.

There is often a template contract on the PPC's website, but the VCS argument relies on the fact there could never be any contract written (seen or unseen) which would give them the right to invite you to park on the land, and so be able to form a contract with you.

Only the landowner (or someone with equal rights) can do that.

 

I mean the contract that gives PPC rights to prosecute on land owners behalf, or am I being a bit dumb and you have answered it...

[peanutsallergy]

I don't know if any actually exist that give them the right to take anyone to court.

From memory the somerfield one that was in the public domain (at least partly from the court case) specifically said they couldn't, (didn't seem to stop them though), I've never seen any others apart from standard ones on a PPC's website, and there is no way to know if that's been the one used between them and their client, or if it's been negotiated independently.

[pontefract]

So under what law is the RK being taken to court on here? Or would seeing the terms and conditions explain that.

Does the so called infringement come into play at all regarding the bay or is it the argument of if the PPC had the right in the first place.

[pontefract]

hello again, a small update but hoping someone can advise too.

 

the RK issued a CPR 31.14 received by recorded delivery over 1 week ago now.

 

There has been no response from the claimant so wondering if it was worded correctly and if someone wants to have a look and advise its appreciated.

 

The other matter is the court made an error and a letter that was cc to them was actually taken by the court as a defence or part of,

the court was informed of this error and they advised to still issue the CPR 31.14 while the error on the paperwork was sorted out,

could this be any reason for non compliance of the order and/or does it create any issues on the RK part.

 

If that makes no difference then what is the next step.

 

Thanks

[Surfer01]

Have you requested a copy of the contract between PPC and LL that entitles the PPC to collect charges on behalf of the LL? As there was no contract between RK and PPC, I cannot understand how they will get the RK to pay? Law states can "pursue" but surely no court can make someone pay for some one else's "offence"?

[pontefract]

Have you requested a copy of the contract between PPC and LL that entitles the PPC to collect charges on behalf of the LL? As there was no contract between RK and PPC, I cannot understand how they will get the RK to pay? Law states can "pursue" but surely no court can make someone pay for some one else's "offence"?

 

Yes contract requested but not received, PPC response was all documents required by court will be supplied when required in accordance with court. What a lot of hot air bs.

 

Main argument for PPC is the bay parked in and the blue badge not being displayed.

 

I think PPC can pursue RK if no driver is named under freedoms act.

[Surfer01]

"Pursue" does not mean doing court. We have contract law on the one side which is older and a newer Protection of Freedom Act wheer there is no obligation to name the driver. They would need to prove a contract existed before they can pursue.

[pontefract]

They are going after the RK as they can if no driver is named, the RK is being taken to court, the process is going ahead unless the PPC pulls out at the last minute. The advice being sought now is what is the procedure next as the PPC has failed to comply with a CPR 31.14.

[pontefract]

Is it a waste of time issuing the CPR 31.14 for proof of details mentioned in the poc? There has been no response from the claimant, what next?

[citizenB]

You can use CPR as long as the claim is still proceeding. So yes, send the CPR31.14 for anything that is mentioned/implied within the PoC. If there is something you want that is not in the PoC then you can use CPR part 18 as long as you are only asking for information. Then depending on what the response is you could possibly then make a request for further documents.

[pontefract]

You can use CPR as long as the claim is still proceeding. So yes, send the CPR31.14 for anything that is mentioned/implied within the PoC. If there is something you want that is not in the PoC then you can use CPR part 18 as long as you are only asking for information. Then depending on what the response is you could possibly then make a request for further documents.

 

So if the CPR 31.14 is ignored then what would be the next step? Does a judge order the claimant to respond? Can the claim be struck out for non compliance?

[slick132]

You will draw the judges attention to the failure of the Claimant to respond to, or supply info requested in, the Defendant's letter sent in accordance with CPR 31.14.

 

It is for the judge to decide if the Claimant should supply this info and (s)he can make an order to this effect. It's possible that such an order can include the threat of a Strike Out if the Claimant fails to supply info as required by the court.

 

[lamma]

The landowner can pursue the RK under POFA IF the PPC is Schedule 4 compliant. Is it ? Failing that its the usual show who was driving/in the vehicle. Pursuing is is not the same as establishing liability.

[Surfer01]

The landowner can pursue the RK under POFA IF the PPC is Schedule 4 compliant. Is it ? Failing that its the usual show who was driving/in the vehicle. Pursuing is is not the same as establishing liability.

 

As per your comment above, a PPC can pursue a RK into court, but the RK can deny liability and walk away scot free as PPC was unable to establish the driver's details? Can the court compell the RK to reveal the driver's details and if so under what law?

[lamma]

In Small Claims anything can happen, and frequently does. It is not the criminal standard of proof.