CPM 5*PCNs - residential parking - No Permit - but parked in my allocated space - appealed - Victoria House, Ferndown

[10shinhan]

Hi all

I am a leaseholder in a block of flats, and I have an allocated space.

Parking enforcement was brought in last year, but as of recently, I received a ticket (7th Feb), then I received 4 more tickets over the next few days. The tickets started at £60 each and now have gone up to £100 and then next £160.

The director/management company has brought in a parking company (Countrywide Parking Management) and is forcing us to use a paper parking permit, which I was not using at the time, but I have now used to stop the constant tickets I'm getting.

I complained to the management company, explaining I have the right to park there and that I did not want to use a permit, explaining that this is poor practice when you could easily whitelist licence plates. I also mentioned the lease allows us to us the parking space without having to show a permit. They responded:

"Having reviewed the lease I can confirm, the parking space is a retained part and therefore not included in your demised property. As a leaseholder you have the right to park in the space but must comply with the regulations set out by the landlord which relate to use of the retained parts.

The management company can give instruction for there to be parking management on site, the company that has been instructed operate through the use of permits and not number plates.

I would advise you display your permit to ensure the regulations are followed and tickets are not received.

If the parking company have rejected your appeal then they feel a ticket has been provided in line with the restrictions and you would need to pass any further disputes through their dispute processes, this is not something I can change unfortunately."

I think the managing agent is talking about this statement in the lease:

To comply with all variations of these Regulations and all other reasonable and proper regulations made by the Landlord or its agents from time to time in accordance with the principles of good estate management and notified to the Tenant that relate to

(a) the use of the Retained Parts
(b) the management of the Building and the welfare of its occupants. 

 I checked the lease, I found this:

"Use of retained parts

The right for the Tenant and all persons authorised by the tenant: To park a private motor car or private motor cycle belonging to the tenant or its visitor in the Parking space."

Any advise, please? Have I got a case against these scammers?

[lolerz]

Thread title updated.

Your lease takes precedence over any private parking contracts.

If your lease states you can park there, you can park there. End of.

 

Don't appeal to the parking company.

Can you fill this out please and scan a copy of the PCN?
 

 

[10shinhan]

Thanks for your response

I have already appealed. Was that a big mistake?

1 Date of the infringement I have 5 tickets over a period of a week, 6/7/8/12/13 of February 2024

2 Date on the NTK [this must have been received within 14 days from the 'offence' date] 7/9/9/13/14 of February 2024

I have uploaded the 1st ticket. Please let me know if you want the others, they are all the same except the dates.

3 Date received 14/2/2024

4 Does the NTK mention schedule 4 of The Protections of Freedoms Act 2012? [Y/N?] N

5 Is there any photographic evidence of the event? Yes, they have taken a lot of pictures

6 Have you appealed? [Y/N?] I've appealed and been rejected with this appeal, I'm on the next step with the IAS. I've appeal 2 others yesterday, and the other 2 are now too late to appeal.

"I was issued with a parking ticket for parking at *Address* on 07/02/2024 (contravention date 06/02/2024 at 12:18pm). I have been charged £100, with the option to pay £60.

This is actually my vehicle and my own space for my flat which I own. Please can you quash this ticket."

Have you had a response? [Y/N?] Y

Issue date: 07/02/2024

Thank you for your appeal received on 14/02/2024 in relation to the above detailed Parking Charge.
We are writing to advise you, that, after careful consideration, we have concluded that the PCN was issued correctly and therefore your appeal has been unsuccessful.
The terms & conditions of parking at *Address* have been exceptionally well advertised and are brought to the attention of the driver by way of the onsite warning signs. They inform the driver that they must clearly display a valid parking permit within the windscreen when parking within the car park.

At the time of the contravention, you were not clearly displaying a valid parking permit which is a breach of the terms & conditions and were therefore issued a Parking Charge. Whilst we appreciate
your explanation, the signage does clearly state that a valid parking permit must be displayed in the windscreen when parking within the car park.

After reviewing the evidence, we are satisfied that the
PCN was issued correctly and as such, must now be paid in full.
The reduced rate of £60.00 is now payable by 01/03/2024. If payment is not received by 01/03/2024 the amount due will increase to £100.00. You can pay your PCN by visiting www.payapcn.co.uk or by calling 0333 023 0058.

You have now reached the end of our internal appeals procedure. If you disagree with our decision, you can submit an appeal to the Independent Appeals Service (IAS) by visiting www.theias.org.
Appeals to the IAS must be submitted within 21 days from the date of this letter.

Please note, should you decide to submit an appeal to the IAS and it is subsequently rejected, the option to pay the discounted amount will no longer be available and the full amount will become due.

7 Who is the parking company? Countrywide Parking Management

8. Where exactly [carpark name and town] Victoria House, Ferndown

For either option, does it say which appeals body they operate under.

IAS

If you have received any other correspondence, please mention it here

I have had reminders from all 5 tickets. I have appealed a ticket to the IAS and I'm waiting for the result.

 

2024-02-07 CPM NTK for PCN 2024-02-06 .pdf

[lolerz]

NEVER appeal a Private parking invoice. The they have absolutely no reason to uphold the appeal (they lose money) and you lose vital protections under PoFA. You also run the risk of outing yourself as the driver.

If you can another PCN from anywhere please come here FIRST before doing anything.

Tagging my fellow site colleague @FTMDave to advise further once he's available.

[lolerz]

Quote removed in post #3.

No need to quote just type. It makes it a mess for people reading on mobile.

[10shinhan]

Okay, thanks. In the future, I won't appeal.

Have I messed it up? Or can I still avoid paying?

[lolerz]

Unlikely you've messed up completely but you certainly haven't helped yourself.

You've got 2 options.

1. Pay their invoice and the matter will go away.

2. Listen to us and fight the PPC.

We'd rather you take option 2.

The good news is that when people listen to us, take our advice, and fight it, most of the time countrywide don't do court.

There was a similar case to yours a few years ago with Countrywide. They did take the driver to court but as they listened to us the case was dismissed TWICE and costs were awarded to the CAGger both times.

If you're willing to take option 2. You should simply sit on your hands until when/if you get a Letter of Claim. Then come back here and we'll help you draft a snotty letter to Countrywide.

[lookinforinfo]

If you appeal in the right way [for example not revealing who was driving ] there are some occasions when POPLA may cancel  the PCN. With the other mob at the IAS I am not sure they even know how to cancel PCNs.

Your appeal did not reveal who was driving -just. That being said  and without me trying to be offensive  it was among the poorest appeals I have seen. Most motorists at least put up a reason however weak in mitigation. Though here even had you advanced the finest reason to cancel, I fear it would have fallen on deaf ears.

However I am assuming that you only appealed one PCN which means that your other PCNs will be thrown out in Court as there is no keeper liability. The PCN you showed [I am assuming they are all the same wording?] is a joke. It doesn't even masquerade as being PoFA compliant . Quite frankly I wouldn't bother about their PCNs and you can safely advise all the other tenants not to appeal and never to pay. 

Explanation. PoFA stands for  the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule 4 which governs the private parking industry. If the rogues comply with the Act they are allowed to pursue the keeper if the driver does not pay. Your PCN fails to comply with at least three  of the Act's requirements so the keeper is never liable in those circumstances to pay. Only the driver is liable and in Court Judges do not accept that the keeper and the driver are the same person.

If your MA though this would be a money spinner for them and the rogues they can surely think again. My advice is don't any of you pay. They cannot win in court as long as no one appeals and reveals that they were driving.

I am nor even sure that they could introduce that parking rubbish without the permission of the tenants. Have you checked the lease for that?

 

 

 

 

[lolerz]

My word, I completely missed the appeal! Is that all you sent?

No wonder they declined it.

[dx100uk]

have you got the 5 windscreen tickets still?

thread title updated

[10shinhan]

Thank you very much! I choose option 2. I will sit on my hands and come back.

 

Really appreciate your help.

Edited March 12 by lolerz
Quote removed

[lookinforinfo]

Nothing like rubbing salt into the wound Lolerz.  At least I couched mine with a bit of humour. But one could say that at least the driver was not outed?  A partner or family member could have    parked it.       

[10shinhan]

The lease doesn't mention anything about parking permits. I'm asking the Management company if they got the 75% majority to change the variation of the lease, which I'm sure they haven't.

As stated in Section 37 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1987, in order to establish a right to impose unilateral terms which vary the terms of the lease, you must have such variation approved by at least 75% of the leaseholders with no more than 10% objecting.

My appeal was poor. I thought it was an open-and-shut case. I've learned my lesson now.

 

4 minutes ago, dx100uk said:

have you got the 5 windscreen tickets still?

They were posted. I've got all of them

8 minutes ago, lolerz said:

My word, I completely missed the appeal! Is that all you sent?

No wonder they declined it.

[lolerz]

Just type, no need to quote.

[lolerz]

To be fair @lookinforinfo they might have actually read an appeal that short instead of just immediately rejecting it.

[lookinforinfo]

You think they read appeals? Can amoebas even read?

[10shinhan]

[dx100uk]

25 minutes ago, 10shinhan said:

They were posted. I've got all of them

they should be issuing windscreen tickets. 

so theres a cpm operator taking photos or is this some resident dobbing people in for a backhander.

[10shinhan]

Not sure. One day they came, and they just gave out as many as possible.

They sometimes seem to target cars, so maybe someone is dobbing.

[FTMDave]

I've just looked through our Countrywide threads.

There is yours.  The one Lolerz mentioned where they obsessively pursued a Cagger and got thrashed in court - twice.  And 27 other cases where they haven't dared try court.

So they are not very litigious.  Plus the one time they did try court they got an absolute hammering so they will be very careful about doing court again.

The problem is their greed as £160 x 5 = £800 and avarice may cause them to chance it.  So it's best you factor in that you may well have to face them in court in the long run where their magnificent win rate is exactly 0% 

3 hours ago, lolerz said:

Your lease takes precedence over any private parking contracts.

If your lease states you can park there, you can park there. End of.

Nail hit on head.

Can you please post up your appeal to the IAS?  If the matter ever does get to court Countrywide will have a big problem as they have no-one to sue.  They don't know who the driver of the vehicle was.  They could have pursued the keeper if they had bothered to respect the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 but as LFI has pointed out that was far, far too difficult for them. 

But that protection will be thrown away if you have outed yourself as the driver so we need to see the appeal.

And as others have said - stop appealing!

[lolerz]

Appeal is in post #3 @FTMDave but it's easy to miss

[FTMDave]

I did actually notice it but was wondering if they version to the IAS was any different.

[10shinhan]

I will definitely stop appealing, this was my IAS appeal, although it is not completed yet and it's waiting for my response to the operator:

The space was allocated to me when I purchased the property.

I appreciate that the parking company is doing their job, but this is my space, which belongs to me.

I'm sure you would agree that charging me for parking in my own space would be unfair.

I have a parking permit, which I displayed.

I found out after I got the ticket that my permit had fallen from my dashboard, and since then I have secured it to the windscreen.

So this is just a misunderstanding; I was surprised that they even denied the claim.

Thank you.

I have attached the now displayed valid permit.

 

Although I've just seen this, under motorist details:

"You reported that you were the driver and the registered keeper at the time the parking charge was issued.

You reported that you are being held liable for the parking charge."

I don't remember saying this.

What can I do?

Should I correct it by saying I was not the driver?

 

[FTMDave]

@10shinhan Do you know the history of the IAS?

Once upon a time there was only one parking association, the British Parking Association, which had a half-decent appeals body which often found in favour of the motorist.

The worst of the PPCs were incandescent about this so, seeing a hole in the market, the directors of the firm of solicitors who got most of the parking work decided to set up a rival trade association, the IPC, and its appeals body the IAS.  So the trade association, the appeals body and the solicitors getting the parking work were all run by the same two people.  No conflict of interest there!

If you had absolute proof that you were in prison in Australia at the time of the contraventions and the vehicle was scrapped 20 years ago, the IAS would still find a reason to say you were in the wrong.

We have never seen one, not even one successful appeal to the IAS on CAG.

I was just about to send this and your last post popped up.

You reported that you were the driver and the registered keeper at the time the parking charge was issued.

You reported that you are being held liable for the parking charge

Who wrote this?  Countrywide or the IAS?

[10shinhan]

I didn't write it, but I'm wondering if it's a selectable option. I can check by starting (but not completing) another claim. See what the options are.