UKPC/SCS PCN Claim Form**DISCONTINUED**

[djb215]

Morning everyone,

 

First time poster on here, bit nervous as I've been a bit poorly recently but seen that this site has been fantastic support to so many people!

 

I've received a claim form from UKPC/SCS Law regarding 5 PCNs from 2015 and are issued in a retail park car park where I worked in one of the stores up until about 3 weeks ago.

 

The car park is a 3 hour max stay car park.

 

I have not acknowledged or appealed any of the PCNs

(I was following the advice of 'ignore all' but this now transpires may not be the best way, and I have lost some of the PCNs and NTKs) or entered into any correspondence with UKPC/DRP/SCS Law.

 

 

I have not yet contacted the management company for the retail park as I thought it best to seek advice on here first before entering into any correspondence.

 

LBA from SCS Law received 28/10/16 stating 14 days for payment.

Claim Form from Northampton County Court Business Centre received 17/11/16.

 

I'm going to acknowledge the claim on the MCOL website this morning.

 

Any advice would be greatly appreciated!

 

Thanks in advance.

[honeybee13]

Hello and welcome to CAG.

 

Could you fill in the information we ask for in this forum stikky and post it up please? It will help the guys to advise you.

 

As you say, you just need to acknowledge the claim for now, we can help if you get stuck on which answers to put. Sometimes the MCOL site is a bit slow at weekends, but you'll get there.

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?465231-Received-a-Court-Claim-From-A-Private-parking-Speculative-invoice-How-To-Deal-With-It-HERE***Updated-Aug-2016***(1-Viewing)-nbsp

 

HB

[silverfox1961]

Hi and welcome to CAG

 

My opinion. This may be difficult but not impossible. Ignoring hasn't been an option since 2012. (except in rare circumstances)

 

Use this thread to give us some ideas of what stage you were at prior to the court case.

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?462118-Have-you-received-a-Parking-Ticket-(1-Viewing)-nbsp

 

Can you get proof that you worked at the store(s) on every occasion you got a charge?

Was your car on a whitelist? (A whitelist is where employees on site should not get a ticket)

When you got the tickets, did you inform your bosses? If so, what did they do?

Did you at any time contact the landowner.

 

In the meantime, can you get some pictures from the site showing the signage.

[djb215]

Hi guys thanks for responding so quickly!

 

 

In order for us to help you we require the following information:-

 

Name of the Claimant ? UK PARKING CONTROL LTD

 

Date of issue – 17 NOV 2016

 

Date to acknowledge) = 5.12.16

 

 

Date to submit defence = 19.12.16 (33 days in total) -

 

What is the claim for –

 

 

1. The claimant claims from the defendant the sum of £800 in respect of unpaid parking notices issued as a result of the defendant's breach of terms and conditions of parking at a site managed by the claimant.

I will provide the defendant with separate detailed particulars within 14 days after service of the claim form.

 

What is the value of the claim? £930. £800 amount claimed, £60 court fee, £70 legal representative's costs.

 

Has the claim been issued by the original creditor

or was the account assigned and it is the Debt purchaser who has issued the claim ? UKPC

 

Were you aware the account had been assigned – did you receive a Notice of Assignment? Nothing received

Hi silverforx1961 in answer to your questions:

Proof of working on site should be possible,

car not on a whitelist

- there is a separate 'staff parking area' at the other end of the retail park (10 mins walk) but is not always accessible because it is gate controlled and would often be broken and only had limited spaces and was full regularly.

 

 

I was one of the bosses at the store and other colleagues in the past had gone to the security office on the retail park and they point blank refused to help.

 

 

Working on getting the signage.

Not been in touch with the land owner/site management company yet.

 

Thanks!

[djb215]

Letter before action/Claim form attached (minus identifying info)

UKPC.pdf

[dx100uk]

all good

they've only done this because they can see £ signs in their eyes if its not defended

should be easy to bat it away and win.

[djb215]

Re the signs - I'm going to drive back there today/tomorrow to get some pictures to double check.

 

There's 2 entrances to the retail park, the main one and a rear/barrier controlled one which I used.

 

A quick look on Google street (image dated May 2016)

the main entrance doesn't have any visible UKPC signage but has some generic signposts about 3 hour limit.

 

The best part is the rear entrance that I used didn't have the UKPC signage but had signage from the previous 'management company' Excel parking...

[dx100uk]

oh that's great even better no sign in their name...

eric will love this one

[ericsbrother]

From what you say this claim will be fairly easy to defeat but you must do certain things in the right timescale to knock this claim down. Get the AOS sent off asap and then prepare a skeleton defence- bullet points you wish to expand on later should it be necessary.

 

Also note that the amount climed does not reflect the contractual sum for breach of contract offered and the additional legal fees are also spurious as they havent actually done anything yet to warrant the charge.

 

As you were employed to be there was there an arrangement between your employer and the landowner for staff parking (assuming retail development where all of the stores rent the property from developer who owns car park)? were you told anything about staff parking when you started work there?

 

What letters do you still possess that were sent to you as keeper of the vehicle and were the original notices tickets slapped on the windscreen of was it number palte capture and demand through the post? Do you still have any of these.

 

Along with the photos of site entrances and signage there should be enough to make them reconsider this action but you will need to send them a CPR 31.14 request for information to demand sight of their contract with the landowner that assigns the right to enter into contracts and make legal claims in their own name and the date this became active. Also details of the planning permission for their signage.

 

Give them 14 days to respond, get this off now and you can add a letter to your defenec saying that they have no cause for action (detail to be added) if they dont respond with the proof of "locus". This CPR request goes to the solicitors.

Edited November 20, 2016 by honeybee13
Paras.

[djb215]

Good morning everyone,

 

Firstly, apologies for being absent from this thread,

 

needless to say I've had a very horrible two weeks since I started this help thread with a very sudden family bereavement and funeral which knocked me for six, to the point where I thought sod it I'm just going to pay to get them off my back

but I've been re-reading other peoples' stories and cases and despite still not being 100% I am determined to fight this!

 

I've been catching up with Rebecca91's case on here too as we are fighting a similar battle.

 

The CPR request is going in the post tomorrow using the same wording with great help from ericsbrother.

 

I have also tried to contact the site management company both locally and their national office with no response as of yet.

 

The initial signage on entry to the car park has no mention of UKPC whatsoever,

 

it is only when you enter the car park that their notices are sporadically placed on lamp posts and they have attached one on the wall next to the entrance of each retailer.

 

My concern is this;

looking at all the other cases that I have seen,

the statements mention that the defendant admits to being the registered keeper of the vehicle, not the driver, (which I was the registered keeper at the time, I am no longer),

 

if my defence bullet points use this entry,

does this mean I will not be able to challenge that I was parking as an employee of a retailer on the site?

 

ericsbrother to follow up on your previous questions.

 

I've searched and (stupidly) I no longer possess any of the original PCNs or NTKs because I followed the advice of "ignore all" and assumed that it had gone away!

 

I was never officially informed of the staff parking area by the site management company.

Interestingly, I spoke to one of my former colleagues and I mentioned about what was going on regarding UKPC court action, and she said she was told by one of the parking attendants that it was ok to park there as it "he knows" which are staff cars.

 

The PCNs that UKPC are pursuing me for are x1 July 2015 and x4 November 2015

- I started there before July '15 and worked until October '16 but have only sporadically received PCNs,

 

I didn't receive one every day that I worked or that an attendant was on duty (if that makes sense!).

 

Thanks all!

#stayingstrong

[renegadeimp]

Never pay UKPC. They always and without question mess up on something.

 

The main issue theyve messed up on is signage, then theres supremancy of contract, among other stuff.

[dx100uk]

should be an easy win

esp as there are no UKPC signs at the entrance etc.

but you'd use the std bullet points as well.

 

just don't miss the filing date!!

 

post up your defence idea here first

[ericsbrother]

dont waste your time with the site managemtn co,

they arent going to tell you the truth,

partially because they more than likely get money out of this deal when it is not theirs to enter into.

 

The thing that people say such as

"the defendant admits being the keeper of the vehicle"

well, you dont need to say that,

it is something people copy down because they have seen it on the internet.

 

 

If a lawyer was writing this on your behalf they would say that so their client is identified.

You are not a lawyer nor representing anyone else so it is just another 2 lines of wasted ink.

 

Their claims are for the dates given and if you were present on those dates then that is that.

When UKPC presents its evidence of its claim you should make sure that it includes copies of the orininal tickets, NTK's etc and if they arent there you make a submission for the claim being struck out on the basis that they havent shown a cause for action

(they have to follow certain procedures and if they are too lazy to show they have followed them they wont get a penny)

 

So, in brief,

your defence will be that no contract was ever formed so there can be no cause for action by UKPC against you.

 

Later on you can further this argument by saying about the lack of signage, superiority of contract, inadequate wording of signage to form a contract and contract not formed by performance (in other words they havent enforced the contract so it has fallen by the wayside).

 

You can also send another CPR 31.14 request for copies of all the tickets, NTK and other letters they intend to rely on to show that a contract exists between them and the keeper of the vehicle that has caused this action.

 

 

They will be hard pushed to deny you that as they will have to produce them anyway

but if they dont hand them over in a timely manner

you can make a complaint to the court

- we will tell you more about that when the claim progresses.

[djb215]

Hello guys,

 

Again thank you for your continued advice and support.

Things are still not great at home and the thought of having to deal with UKPC is making me boil

but I am still determined to fight this.

 

I'm drafting up my skeleton argument which I will be able to post up in a day or two for you to check if that's ok?

 

In the meantime

I have attached pictures of the signage at the site.

 

I've attached a picture of the UKPC sign,

there are numerous copies of this sign placed around the car park on lamp posts and walls,

but at the main entrance of the site there is only a generic 3 hour limit sign with no mention whatsoever of UKPC and its proximity to the entrance

- it's only when you enter the car park that you see the UKPC signage

- hoping this will work well in my defence as the signage I presume only offers a contract/mention to shoppers and no mention of staff or a staff parking area?

 

ericsbrother - the management company - you were correct, as useful as a chocolate fireguard.

 

Cheers!

#stayingstrong

[dx100uk]

why have you blanked out parts ??

 

put them up unredacted

and pop them all into ONE multipage PDF file

that way we can zoom them...

[djb215]

Hi dx100uk

 

Apologies, I thought I had to blank out the site name as per the identifiable info at the start of the thread.

 

Pictures attached - your thoughts would be welcome!

 

I have also sent off for the land owner information through the Land Registry.

 

 

When I spoke to the managing agent for the site they claimed that they don't employ UKPC themselves.

Signage.pdf

[ericsbrother]

Generally signs like that are invitations to treat and not contracts so you havent agreed to or broken any contract offered by that sign.

 

 

the good thing is that you can then decide to decline the contract offered by other signs and still park there as it doesnt say you cant, it says 3 hours, not no parking if you dont read our other signs.

 

When you blank out identifiable bits we mean things that identify you to the public reading this thread,

 

 

not things that identify the parking coweboys woeful errors.

 

 

We need to see the signs and know where they are relative to the public highway as well so name the place precisely.

[djb215]

Hi guys, here is the bullet point defence I am suggesting to submit on MCOL. Any input would be greatly appreciated.

 

1. It is admitted that the Defendant parked in Crown Point Retail Park, Leeds (“the site”) at the times mentioned in the Particulars of Claim, as a full time employee of [retailer] Ltd, a retail tenant of the site.
   
   
2. It is denied that the Claimant entered into a contract with the Defendant. As held by the Upper Tax Tribunal in Vehicle Control Services Limited v HMRC [2012] UKUT 129 (TCC), any contract requires offer and acceptance. The Claimant was simply contracted by the landowner to provide car-park management services and is not capable of entering into a contract with the Defendant on its own account, as the carpark is owned by and the terms of entry set by the landowner. Accordingly, it is denied that the Claimant has authority to bring this claim. The proper Claimant is the landowner.
   
   
   
3. If there was a contract, it is denied that the penalty charge is incorporated into the contract. As per Thornton v Shoe Lane Parking [1971] 2 QB 163, the relevant term must be made known before a contract was formed. Here, the charge was not incorporated into the contract because signage on entry to the carpark makes no reference or gives any authority to the Claimant to form a contract.
   
   
4. Alternatively, even if there was a contract, the provision requiring payment of £160 is an unenforceable penalty clause. Following Dunlop Pneumatic Tyre Co Ltd v Selfridge & Co Ltd [1915] AC 847, clauses designed to punish a party for breach of contract may only be upheld if they represent a genuine pre-estimate of loss. The provision is a penalty and not a genuine pre-estimate of loss for the following reasons: (a) as the Claimant is not the landowner and suffers no loss whatsoever as a result of a parking overstay; (b) the amount claimed is evidently disproportionate to any loss suffered by the Claimant; © the penalty bears no relation to the circumstances because it remains the same no matter whether a motorist overstays by ten seconds or ten years; and (d) the clause is specifically expressed to be a penalty on the Claimant's signs.
   
   
   
5. Save as expressly mentioned above, the Particulars of Claim is denied in its entirety. It is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief at all.
   

[ericsbrother]

scrap it all

it merely shows that you have read the same bit on the internet that 15k other people have and that you actually dont know anything.

 

 

It misses the points you need to make so just use plain english and say:

 

no monies are owed to the claimant by the defendant because no contract was ever offered by them so none can possibly have been entered into.

 

this covers everything you will need to build upon when the time comes but for the moment this is enough.

 

 

If you use the detail you have indictaed then you cant go into anything else and what else you need to say is far more important than this becasue it is too specific and is mostly irrelevant to your case.

 

When you have to exchange documents then you can raise these points in plain english but more importantly point out all of the faults with their signage

 

 

that means the contract cannot be offered by them to you UKPC normally lose at court because they are rubbish at joined up writing and I doubt if this will be any different.

 

 

You wil be able to quote previous cases and we can dig up a dozen that are UKPC rather than any other parking co so they will be shooting themselves in the foot.

 

 

Dont you do the same.

[djb215]

Great stuff, thanks so much for your advice ericsbrother

 

 

I will submit the plain English defence on MCOL now, didn't realise it could be plain English if that makes sense! Thought it had to be written in a more formal/structured manner.

[ericsbrother]

only if you are earning £200 an hour for writing jargon is it necessary.

That is why latin is used in law as well,

they dont want the masses knowing it is actually not that difficult.

 

Small claims hearings are quite informal,

generally judges will let you ramble on abiout almost anything and when both side have finished they give a precis as they see it into the microphone and tell you what points of law they believe are the relevant and telling ones and make a decision.

 

 

Usually that is there and then.

If you have forgotten something or have been banging on about the wrong thing it is unlikely they will stop you in full flow, you only find out at the end.

 

This is why you use as little detail at this point and find out everthing there is to know about it and have it in your evidnce bundle for court.

 

 

You can answer questions,

explain points and go into detail that is not written down

but you cant add new things or suddenly decide to try another argument altogether at this late stage without permission.

 

 

Likewise the claimant has to have all of their evidence in your hands so contracts, permissions etc that you ask for under CPR 31.14 and they havent supplied they wont be able to introduce or mention on the day

[djb215]

Hello everyone hope you had a great Christmas and New Year.

 

 

Just to update you with the progress of this case so far, I submitted my skeleton argument on MCOL and received a letter from HM Courts & Tribunals acknowledging my defence submission.

 

 

On NYE I received 2 letters in the post from SCS Law.

 

 

The first one was a copy of their contract between the owners of the retail park (I've not yet read it in great detail but the signature sheet on the 2nd page shows a contract signed by the representative of the land owner company which matches what is on the title deed) and UKPC.

 

 

The second letter was a letter claiming they were confident of being successful in court, citing the Beavis case, and have offered to settle the matter without prejudice for £465 (half the value of their claim) - to be accepted by Fri 13th Jan or the offer will be withdrawn.

 

 

Any thoughts/advice would be much appreciated!

 

 

Cheers

[dx100uk]

offering 50% off eh..doesn't bode well they are confident of winning then...

 

 

dx

[ericsbrother]

where is the image of the sign saying excel parking? This will kill them.

 

of course they cite beavis but it is almost irrelevent to anything other than level of damages claimed for breach of contract. It doesnt mean they have a right to claim in the first place

 

Post up the contract so we can pick holes in it if possible,

 

 

saw one from Ethical today that doesnt give them the right to make claims in their own name so they cant do court!

[djb215]

Unfortunately the Excel parking sign was my mistake

- when I looked on Google Street view I realised that one of the entrances to the retail park (the rear entrance) the image on Street View was dated August 2008 but the main entrance was dated July 2015.

 

When I went back to photograph the signs in December there was no Excel parking signs at all (so that one's my bad, apologies!)

 

I'm working on photographing the contract and uploading, it's a fair few pages but should hopefully be up tomorrow.