• Welcome to the LegalBeagles Consumer and Legal Forum.
    Please Register to get the most out of the forum. Registration is free and only needs a username and email address.
    REGISTER
    Please do not post your full name, reference numbers or any identifiable details on the forum.

PCM & Gladstones solicitors sending multiple warnings

Collapse
Loading...
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • PCM & Gladstones solicitors sending multiple warnings

    Hi Guys,

    Where i used to live was monitored by PCM (Parking Control Management (UK) Ltd)

    I had sometimes forgotten to display my parking permit on some occasions and although i understand that is my responsibility i find it frustrating that they are requesting money for this when they have seen my car there multiple times everyday, with a valid parking permit.

    I have attempted to contact PCM for a previous one and they are just very difficult to reach out to in order to speak to.

    I am not very happy with them preying on the public as they do specially for something like this where I had a permit and forgot to display it.

    Firstly, should i take this to court or should i just pay it off?
    Secondly is there any worth in me fighting the case?
    Thirdly shall I attempt to reach out to PCM and try get them to reduce the amount, I imagine they wont because theyve already got their solicitors involved.
    Tags: None

  • #2
    So post copies of the notices and the signs

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by ostell View Post
      So post copies of the notices and the signs
      https://drive.google.com/drive/folde...Sf?usp=sharing

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by ostell View Post
        So post copies of the notices and the signs
        The thing is I know i am in the wrong which stings me. It was simply an error but its not the first time ive parked there either.

        I hate parking attendants who dont take this into consideration specially if they see your car parked in a single bay a number of times

        Comment


        • #5
          Can't get to your pictures. Use something like imgur for posting

          Comment


          • #6
            So what did your lease say a out parking

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by ostell View Post
              So what did your lease say a out parking
              https://imgur.com/a/Za57Vs3 theres the link.

              The lease said the permit needed to be displayed, but i am going off my car being recognised and seen multiple times with the [permit so why can security cameras not be checked to investigate whether a car is regularly seen there and this may have been a one off occurrence that the permit was missing.

              I am thinking of mentioning that I had lost the permit and was in the process of receiving a new one (its not true but its the best i have)

              Comment


              • #8
                Have a read of this:

                The signage in the car park is of a “forbidding” nature. It is limited to cars displaying a valid permit only and therefore the terms cannot apply to cars without a permit because the signage does not offer an invitation to park on certain terms. The terms are forbidding. This means that there was never a contractual relationship. I refer you to the following case law: PCM-UK v Bull et all B4GF26K6 [2016], UKPC v Masterson B4GF26K6[2016], Horizon Parking v Mr J C5GF17X2 [2016] – In all three of these cases the signage was found to be forbidding and thus only a trespass had occurred and would be a matter for the landowner.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by ostell View Post
                  Have a read of this:

                  The signage in the car park is of a “forbidding” nature. It is limited to cars displaying a valid permit only and therefore the terms cannot apply to cars without a permit because the signage does not offer an invitation to park on certain terms. The terms are forbidding. This means that there was never a contractual relationship. I refer you to the following case law: PCM-UK v Bull et all B4GF26K6 [2016], UKPC v Masterson B4GF26K6[2016], Horizon Parking v Mr J C5GF17X2 [2016] – In all three of these cases the signage was found to be forbidding and thus only a trespass had occurred and would be a matter for the landowner.
                  I am going to take a closer look into this, thank you for sharing but i am not of legal knowledge or understanding, does this mean the company cannot do anything and is the landowners responsibility to issue charges? if this is the case, doesnt the land owner hire these companies to oversee the parking?

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    If there is o contract created then there can be no breach and therefore no money due

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by ostell View Post
                      If there is o contract created then there can be no breach and therefore no money due
                      I think i will wait two weeks and see if the court papers come, I have until the court papers arrive to pay the fee.

                      If court papers dont arrive ill just let it prolong

                      Comment

                      View our Terms and Conditions

                      LegalBeagles Group uses cookies to enhance your browsing experience and to create a secure and effective website. By using this website, you are consenting to such use.To find out more and learn how to manage cookies please read our Cookie and Privacy Policy.

                      If you would like to opt in, or out, of receiving news and marketing from LegalBeagles Group Ltd you can amend your settings at any time here.


                      If you would like to cancel your registration please Contact Us. We will delete your user details on request, however, any previously posted user content will remain on the site with your username removed and 'Guest' inserted.
                      Working...
                      X