Two tickets with "Capital Car Park Control"

[chuck990]

Hi,

I have two tickets outstanding with "Capital Car Park Control". Reading around, I have found mention that this is an unlimited company/a trading name of a sole trader - Terry Szmidt.
First and foremost, does anyone know if Capital/Terry are likely to take me to court?
Secondly, as a sole trader, by law any contract with him, or invoice (including a PCN) must declare both his own identity and the name under which he is trading.. which they dont! As he is in breach here, does he have a leg to stand on if he does progress to taking me to court?

Furthermore, I have considerable complaints about the tickets themselves:


The first I received was a ticket on the windscreen (06/06/17) - parked in residential parking without displaying a permit. I am a resident here and awaiting permit from landlord, sent an appeal letter following instructions on ticket (14/7/17) but got no reply. Sent an email chasing this up (23/6/17) and then a further week later (30/6/17), and then another (4/7/17)... In the last week I've called twice, once gotten through to a 3rd party message taking service and the other time to someone "in the main office" who I have recorded talking about the pcn as a fine. Have also spoken to the actual footman that gives out tickets here and he's said he'll pass on my email address and point out I've been trying to get in contact for a month.
If they are completely un-contactable what happens to both the 14 day appeal and low payment windows? Can they take me to court if I have a long paper trail of them being impossible to contact?


Second one, I knew nothing about for a long time but was supposedly issued 04/05/17 for parking in a no parking zone, . Came back from holiday last week to a "this remains unpaid" letter dated 12/06/17... Now looks like I have no appeal or low payment window... What can I do about a ticket I wasn't informed about in the first place?


Hope you can help and that the information about them being impossible to contact can help someone else out!

[charitynjw]

Re: Two tickets with "Capital Car Park Control"

Hi & welcome to LB.
Have you ID'd who the driver was at the relevant times? If not, do not do so. Respond (if necessary) as the registered keeper.
Have you checked what your tenancy agreement says about parking rights?
Could you post up that 'remains unpaid' letter? (Obscure personal details).

[chuck990]

Re: Two tickets with "Capital Car Park Control"

Hi & welcome to LB.
Have you ID'd who the driver was at the relevant times? If not, do not do so. Respond (if necessary) as the registered keeper.
Have you checked what your tenancy agreement says about parking rights?
Could you post up that 'remains unpaid' letter? (Obscure personal details).

Hi,
The tenancy agreement makes no mention of parking at all, there is an "exclusions" which doesn't state my use of the car park is excluded, and a term stating I cant store a boat on the premises inc communal car park:




The "remains unpaid" letter, appears to be the initial NTK for the second of the two tickets above, but it makes no mention of a NTD (as one was never given), nor offers a reduced payment within 14 days (which I think potentially makes it invalid?):

[charitynjw]

Re: Two tickets with "Capital Car Park Control"

Imho

Your tenancy agreement takes primacy.
No-one, not even the landlord, can impose new terms/conditions without your express consent, especially when those new T&Cs derogate your right to quiet enjoyment of the demised premises.

[chuck990]

Re: Two tickets with "Capital Car Park Control"

So is it the case that by not mentioning the car parking at all, the tenancy agreement implies there are no rules attached then?
Or does the lack of information about the car park leave it open to the parking enforcements applying?

[charitynjw]

Re: Two tickets with "Capital Car Park Control"

So is it the case that by not mentioning the car parking at all, the tenancy agreement implies there are no rules attached then?
From what you have posted it would seem that you have a contractual right to park a private vehicle.
Or does the lack of information about the car park leave it open to the parking enforcements applying?
On the contrary, your 'quiet enjoyment' would include parking without interference to that right to park.

Btw, from what I can see, this outfit only 'done' court 3 times last year & so far only once this year.

[ostell]

Re: Two tickets with "Capital Car Park Control"

That is a travesty of a notice to keeper. For that one just a simple bogoff letter to Capitol Car park Control.

I'm not sure if it was a windscreen ticket or a guy with a camera. Windscreen ticket then paragraph 8 must be complied with, otherwise paragraph 9. Here are the POFA regulations. The NTK must contain all the details stated. For windscreen the NTK must be received between days 28 and 56 and no windscreen ticket within 14 days. Can't tell from the NTK. Should also have date and time of alleged "offence" and date of issue of the notice.

Tell them that as the Notice to Keeper is not compliant with the requirements of POFA Schedule 4, for many reasons, then there can be no keeper liability. and look to the driver. As the alleged signs are forbidding in nature there can be no contract with the driver and therefore the matter is trespass and only the landholder can take action for that.

As Charity says your tenancy agreement/lease does not require you display a permit or pay if you do not. That section about parking is about what you must NOT do. There must be something about quiet enjoyment in the agreement?

[chuck990]

Re: Two tickets with "Capital Car Park Control"

That is a travesty of a notice to keeper. For that one just a simple bogoff letter to Capitol Car park Control.

I'm not sure if it was a windscreen ticket or a guy with a camera. Windscreen ticket then paragraph 8 must be complied with, otherwise paragraph 9. Here are the POFA regulations. The NTK must contain all the details stated. For windscreen the NTK must be received between days 28 and 56 and no windscreen ticket within 14 days. Can't tell from the NTK. Should also have date and time of alleged "offence" and date of issue of the notice.
No paper ticket was ever left. The photos attached to this NTK were taken by a man with a smartphone (i've seen him doing it to other people before now). Part of the redacted details was a date and time of offence (date, plus a~11 minute window of times from and to).
Date of notice was 39 days after the alleged contravention, (breaching point 5 of paragraph 9?)

Tell them that as the Notice to Keeper is not compliant with the requirements of POFA Schedule 4, for many reasons, then there can be no keeper liability. and look to the driver. As the alleged signs are forbidding in nature there can be no contract with the driver and therefore the matter is trespass and only the landholder can take action for that.

As Charity says your tenancy agreement/lease does not require you display a permit or pay if you do not. That section about parking is about what you must NOT do. There must be something about quiet enjoyment in the agreement?There is a clause stating the landlors agrees to "not interrupt or interfere with the tenant's lawful occupation , enjoyment or use of the pemises other than in an emergency...", but the agreement makes no reference to there being a parking space/any access to communal parking, does the lease therefore not cover communal parking areas?

See above comments in red - the NTK does state ate and time of offence, but was posted 39 days after alleged infraction.
WRT the tennancy agreement, do I need to worry that it doesn't mention the car park at all + therefore potentially doesn't cover it?

[charitynjw]

Re: Two tickets with "Capital Car Park Control"

Imho you've 'got' them (him?) on both arguments (primacy of lease & defective NTK).
'The demised premises' usually covers the car parking area as well.

&, of course, from a common sense pov, any parking management scheme surely should be in place to deter unauthorised (non-resident) parking, not to screw payments from the residents themselves

[ostell]

Re: Two tickets with "Capital Car Park Control"

So more than 14 days you tell them they did comply with POFA, particularly, but not limited to, failing to deliver the Notice to Keeper within 14 days. as you have no liability in this matter you demand that they remove your details from their files with immediate effect and info you that they have done within 14 days, as required under section 10 ofthe DPA