PCN From UK Car Park Management

[pxavier]

Hi All,

So hoping someone can help me out of this one. I recently moved to a new flat which has a parking space attached with the purchase.

I do have a valid permit to park in this space. I basically forgot to put my permit on display, I moved in a week before being issued the fine and am still getting into the habit. I was issued with a PCN, appealed on the basis of this even sent a copy of my permit. They have responded today rejecting my appeal as it was not on display and state their was signage to say this. There is a sign on display its not immediately visible unless you look around for it and the lighting in order to read it is minimal as it is under a sheltered alcove.

Is there any advice anyone has to take this further, as I don't see why I should pay £60 for a space I kind of own/legally entitled to park in. Permit or no permit.

In the rejected appeal letter I have not been given a popla reference either.

Many thanks

[ostell]

Re: PCN From UK Car Park Management

Ok, get your lease out and look for what it says about parking. Bet it doesn't say you have to display a permit nor pay if you do not UKCPM are trying to say that they are offering you a contract to park on your own land but you already have rights to do that. Your lease has primacy of contract and a third party, a stranger to the lease, can't modify it.

Was this a windscreen ticket or ticket through the post?

Post up a photo of the sign

Have a read of this link to give you heart

[pxavier]

Re: PCN From UK Car Park Management

Thanks Ostell for your advice.

I have checked my lease and will upload a copy as well. It was a windscreen ticket. Based on all this do you think I have a good chance of winning this one.

[charitynjw]

Re: PCN From UK Car Park Management

Pretty good, I reckon.

Does the lease mention 'quiet enjoyment' at all (or anything about non-interference with leaseholder rights etc)?

Re the 'no POPLA code' matter, did you appeal to the parking co by the relevant deadline?

[ostell]

Re: PCN From UK Car Park Management

Here's another summary of your rights etc
And a selection of template letters that you amend to suit taking care as they will not have obtained your details from the DVLA and therefore DPA has not, yet, been breached.

Post up your letter for critique before you post off.

[pxavier]

Re: PCN From UK Car Park Management

Hi Ostell,

Thank you for all your help, I have taken bits out of the template letters you suggested. I believe all the below applies to me. I will send this with copy of my permit and lease. UKPC have stated the appeal should be lodged with the IAS, was I supposed to be given anything similar like a POPLA code when dealing with them?


Your PCN draws to my attention that you are using my allocated car parking space for your own business purposes. My lease allows unfettered occupational rights to the parking areas, which means you are operating a predatory business on land which you have no overriding rights in. As this parking space is one directly allocated to me on the lease, you have not sought approval for the use of it from the actual landholder, ie myself. You have trespassed on my leased land.
Your involvement on this land will have supposedly been to prevent parking by uninvited persons, for the benefit of the actual leaseholders and their invited guests. Instead you carry out a predatory operation on those very people whose interests you are purportedly there to uphold. In any case, my lease in respect of the common areas of the grounds and my designated parking area places no restrictions on the parking facilities such as those you have tried to imply, let alone a penalty regime for an alleged contractual offer to use my own allocated parking area I already have such rights or to place restrictions on visiting guests.
You cannot offer me something I already have, and I am not obliged to accept an offer in such circumstances. My lease remains the same as when it was originally agreed as part of my residential rights. There are no restrictions on parking within it and I believe you are acting unlawfully by attempting to take legal action when I have an absolute right of peaceful enjoyment on the land including allowing my guests free use of it. If you feel that you have been misled by the Managing Agents insofar as they have contracted with you to operate here, then that is something you must take up with them directly.
It is of little interest to me as I have unequivocal unfettered right of peaceful enjoyment on the land. I draw you attention to the case of Jopson v Homeguard , case 2906J in Oxford County Court where the appeal heard by his honour Judge Harris QC. This was an appeal against a previous hearing which was awarded in favour of Homeguard, in similar circumstances as those addressed in my dispute with you. The Judge allowed the appeal in favour of Mrs Jopson. I also draw your attention to PACE v Mr (N Redacted), case C6GF14F0 in Croydon county court where the case was heard by District Judge Coonan. In summing up he stated " I have before me a tenancy agreement which gives Mr [N. redacted] the right to park on the estate and it does not say “on condition that you display a permit”. It does not say that, so he has that right. What Pace Recovery is seeking to do is, unilaterally outside the contract, restrict that right to only when a permit is displayed. Pace Recovery cannot do that."
As you have seen fit to attempt to charge me the sum of £60.00 as a legitimate amount for the use of my own leaseholder rights to the areas of the property, I hereby claim an amount of £100.00 for damages for the tort of trespass and tortious interference of my leaseholder rights, occasioned by the attempt to restrict my rightful use of the designated area.

[ostell]

Re: PCN From UK Car Park Management

That looks good. Also add that you want your details removed from their records and confirmation of this and the removal of the charge to be received within 14 days and you do not expect any further contact after this.

And don't forget to get free proof of posting from a post office.

[pxavier]

Re: PCN From UK Car Park Management

Appeal dismissed

The adjudicator made their decision on 08/08/2017 16:07:04

It is important that the Appellant understands that the adjudicator is not in a position to give his legal advice. The adjudicator's role is to look at whether the parking charge has a basis in law and was properly issued in the circumstances of each particular case. The adjudicator's decision is not legally binding on the Appellant (it is intended to be a guide) and they are free to obtain independent legal advice if they so wish. However, the adjudicator is legally qualified (a barrister or solicitor) and decides the appeal according to their understanding of the law and legal principles.

The terms of this appeal are that I am only allowed to consider the charge being appealed and not the circumstances of other drivers or other parking events. The guidance to this appeal also makes it clear that I am bound by the law of contract and can only consider legal challenges not mistakes or extenuating circumstances.

For the avoidance of doubt, this charge has been issued on the basis that no valid permit was clearly displayed in the vehicle at the time of the parking event. I am presented with photographic evidence from the Operator that no valid permit was on display at the time the Parking Charge Notice (PCN) was issued. The signage throughout the site makes it clear that the restrictions apply to all vehicles parked at this site and that if vehicles park otherwise than in accordance with the terms a charge will be payable. I am satisfied that there is no evidence of a valid permit correctly displayed, or displayed at all. While noting the Appellant's comments, having considered the contract provided, and the fact that the Appellant is a leaseholder retailer than the freehold owner of the land in question, I am satisfied that the Operator has the authority to issue and enforce PCNs at this location.

Whether a driver feels that they have permission to park or not, the contractual terms require a driver to properly display a valid permit and by not displaying properly any such permit they agree to pay the charge. The Appellant should have ensured that a valid permit was clearly displayed in the vehicle otherwise they should have parked elsewhere.

It is the driver’s (rather than a third party’s) responsibility to ensure that the terms and conditions of parking are complied with. The vehicle was secure, stationary and unoccupied with no valid permit correctly on display and therefore, in accordance with the advertised terms, the driver is liable to pay a charge. The signage on site complies with current regulations and is sufficient to have brought the terms of parking to the driver’s attention. The signage is neither misleading nor unclear. The contractual terms require the driver to display a valid permit, otherwise by parking they agree to pay the charge. If for any reason the driver cannot display a valid permit they can either park elsewhere, or remain parked and agree to pay the charge. The Appellant chose the latter option.

I am satisfied that the Operator has proven their prima facie case. Whilst having some sympathy with the Appellant’s circumstances, once liability has been established, only the Operator has the discretion to vary or cancel the parking charge based on mitigating circumstances. Accordingly this appeal is dismissed.

[ostell]

Re: PCN From UK Car Park Management

That's a load of crock !! He said he was a lawyer but doesn't seem to understand primacy of the lease. But then this sort of result was expected from the IAS.

[pressandgo]

Re: PCN From UK Car Park Management

subbing, -as I have a similar issue, management company directors altering parking regs at a whim, they live on the development but think they own all of it.