**DISCONTINUED!!** Parking Control Management. Gladstones submitted Court Claim

[Hollean]

I have received a county court claim form N1, as a result of a claim submitted by Gladstones solicitors on behalf of Parking Control Management and would appreciate any guidance.

The situation can be summarised as follows:

The car in question is registered to me and at the time of the alleged offence was on loan to my son.
My son was a tenant of the flats and had permission to park in that car park

A valid parking permit was displayed on the dashboard and can be seen in the photograph taken by PCM. However, from the front, it was partially obscured by the shading of the windscreen, However the valid date is clearly visible.

I have written to PCM appealing the PCN but they are having none of it and have issued a county court claim form. I have acknowledged the form and stated that I will be submitting a defence.

My proposed defence is based on 3 items

1. The parking spaces are only 2.1m wide, vs a recommended minimum of 2.4 m, ( Government planning portal , Parking standards) so can not be considered to be true parking space within the meaning of the law.
2. A valid permit was displayed and can be seen in the photo submitted by PCM. It is possible that, had the employee been able to look in the side window then they would have been able to see the whole permit. However if another vehicle was parked in the adjacent space, it may have been difficult for them to get access, due to the narrow space. However that’s not under my control.
3. The penalty is not a genuine pre estimate of loss. The car that was parked in that space was the one which was entitled to park there, and therefore no loss was incurred by anyone.

In my defence I will also ask for disclosure of all documents held by them, including proof of right of authority to issue parking charges

How does that sound ? Do I have a leg to stand on ? Thanks in advance for any guidance.

[Kati]

NEW Update.Today I received notice of discontinuance. In a way I was looking forward to my day in court. I felt I had a strong case and was looking forward to presenting it. Well, at least it's over and I have won.
Many thanks to Ostell and CHARITYNJW for all your help. THANK YOU.

and just after I'd moved it to the court claims section lol (I'll move it again now)

Congrats Hollean xx

[Hollean]

NEW Update.Today I received notice of discontinuance. In a way I was looking forward to my day in court. I felt I had a strong case and was looking forward to presenting it. Well, at least it's over and I have won.
Many thanks to Ostell and CHARITYNJW for all your help. THANK YOU.

[Kati]

Should this thread be moved to the forum dealing with impending cases ?

sorted xx

[ostell]

You can only claim limited costs when you win. Loss of salary/holiday max £95. Mileage at 45p and parking.

So in the intervening 2 months have you found out anything at all about the relationship between the MA and the PPC, any parking in the lease, Quiet Enjoyment in the lease?

[Hollean]

My case comes up in a few weeks. I'm still looking for an answer to the question "Can I claim my costs if I win ?" If so what costs are considered reasonable ?

Should this thread be moved to the forum dealing with impending cases ?

[Hollean]

I doubt the MA has much information on what contract there is with PCM. Their job is just to find tenants and deal with any issues which arise. The car park is a shared car park behind the block of flats with some spaces allocated to that block. Most likely scenario is that car park owner has a contract with freeholder of block to allocate spaces and a contract with PCM to police it . My sons tenancy agreement, through the MA was probably with leaseholder of his flat. I'd really need to see the contract between the carpark owner and the freeholder of the flats to see if there is anything in that which takes precedence over the contract between car park owner and PCM, but that maybe difficult to track down.

[ostell]

I think as a litigant in person the judge will overlook that.

That letter from the MA, especially if the contract is with them, would be very helpful. The MA might not be in a position to award contracts. In court you want sight of the contract the PPC have, which should be be with the landholder, and if it is with the MA then ask for proof of the contract chain to the the landholder by asking, in court, for the MA to Landholder contract. I think the Code of Practise required a contract with the landholder so get a copy of that section.

Just show that picture of the permit on the dash. Don't mention the tinting.

[Hollean]

Ostell
Thanks for that reminder. i believe I have covered right of authority in my original defence submitted in response to the claim

Quote
" I request the court orders the Claimants to provide the necessary documentation in order for me to fully plead my case, else the Claim should stand struck out.
This should include, but not be restricted to;

1. Proof of their claims
2. Proof of right of authority
3. Genuine pre estimate of Loss with workings showing how this was derived.

In the event that the relevant documents are received from the Claimants I will then be in a position to amend my defence, and would ask that the Claimants allow sufficient time for inspection."

end quote
They haven't supplied anything so I'll have to wait to see if it's included in the documents they supply prior to hearing. If not it'll be another point I can challenge.

I realise I've made a mistake in the N180 in that i said I would be calling no witnesses. I should have said 1, myself. Will that rule me out from putting my case ? Should I try to get that amended ?

[ostell]

You can also add that you believe that the PPC do not have a contract that allows them to take people to court and you require a copy of the alleged contract they are relying on.

As you seem to be friendly with the MA perhaps they can tell you who the PPC contract is with.

[Hollean]

I've now received a notification of allocation to the small claims track and a hearing date, which isn't for 3 months but I may a well start preparing. First question, does that mean this thread has to be moved to a different section ? If so can admin please do that for me.

I'm required to deliver all documents on which my defense relies on to the court at least 14 days prior to the hearing.
My sons landlord has said they are willing to provide a letter to support my case and I should let them know what to say.
I'm thinking of;

We xxxx, are managing agents for "address" and we confirm that "name" was a tenant of "address" from x to y and had permission to park in the spaces allocated to that address in xxx car park.

Should there be anything else in their letter ?


I'll also submit the photo taken by the parking company , uploaded earlier, which shows the permit on the dash although partially obscured by the tinting.

since I'm challenging the validity of the notice to keeper, should I also provide that, or can I rely on the parking firm to provide that as part of their supporting documentation?

Anything else I should submit ?

If I am successful, am I entitled to claim any costs for my time and effort ? If so any guidance on the accepted basis for that ?

[Amethyst]

Re: Parking Control Management. Gladstones submitted Court Claim

The one they have sent you is what they have sent to the court in response to the allocation to track they have received. When you complete your N180 you send it to the court and a copy to the claimant. If the court does then send you an N159 having considered the questionnaires you will have opportunity to complete a part on there to say that you do not agree it should be dealt with on papers and return that to the court ( copy to claimant ).

[Hollean]

Re: Parking Control Management. Gladstones submitted Court Claim

Having submitted my defence, I have now received a letter from Gladstones saying
a) They have notified the court of their clients intention to proceed
b) They have elected not to mediate
c) A copy of the completed directions questionnaire is enclosed

In fact what was enclosed was a totally blank N180 (Directions questionnaire) and a standard printed sheet request for special direction asking that the court sends the N159 form attached to the defendent (me) with a request that the case is heard on the papers alone

Copies of both are attached.
They didn't supply any of the additional documentation which I requested.

This was followed 2 days later by a letter from the court with an N149, notice of proposed allocation to small claims court. This makes no mention of the request from Gladstones that it is heard "on the paper"


Am i right in thnking that there is no extra charge to me in going to court ? If so that's what I would like to do so that I have an opportunity to plead my case in front of an impartial judge.

As a reminder my case is
- The charge is unjustified as my son had permission to park in that location. The permit was displayed and, although partially obscured, can be seen in the photo provided by the parking company.
- Beavis does not apply as there is no commercial need to maintain a turnover of parking spaces in residential parking
- Therfore they need to supply a GPOL.
- There is no loss to anyone
- The notice to keeper was non compliant as it didn't use the correct wording
- The claim on a registered keeper can not exceed the original penalty, so all the add on costs are unjustified.

In short I believe they are using intimidatory tactics to extract money to which they are not entitled.

In which case I just fill in the N149 and ask that the case is heard in my local court.

[Hollean]

Re: Parking Control Management. Gladstones submitted Court Claim

Excellent. I'll add that in.
Thanks

Where it says "required" this is a misstatement of their authority and implying non existent legal requirements on the defendant.

[ostell]

Re: Parking Control Management. Gladstones submitted Court Claim

Where it says "required" this is a misstatement of their authority and implying non existent legal requirements on the defendant.