'PCN' from London Parking Solutions

[Minxi]

Re: 'PCN' from London Parking Solutions

Hi Mystery1

Are you there?

Thanks
Minxi

[mystery1]

Re: 'PCN' from London Parking Solutions

Back later.

M1

[mystery1]

Re: 'PCN' from London Parking Solutions

The Ł2000 you paid, do you have any paperwork for that ?

M1

[Minxi]

Re: 'PCN' from London Parking Solutions

Hi M1

They acknowledge that we paid the money in question. I'd probably be able to get something from the bank about that, since the mortgage was taken out with the bank I'm currently with.

FYI I was quoted one price for the flat, and another for the flat plus parking space, and asked which package I required, at the time of sale.

Minxi

[mystery1]

Re: 'PCN' from London Parking Solutions

Firstly we need to be sure what it was for and then we need proof of that.

M1

[Minxi]

Re: 'PCN' from London Parking Solutions

Okay I'll get on to them.

Thanks
Minxi

[mystery1]

Re: 'PCN' from London Parking Solutions

What is the final appeal date ?

M1

[Minxi]

Re: 'PCN' from London Parking Solutions

In #16 above they're saying that without full name and correspondence address they can't lodge my appeal, and that I need to furnish them with same by 12 May (tomorrow, end of play). It doesn't say what will happen if I don't, but you can see that in the above.

Re purchase price info, I suspect I don't have any formal docs. I can ring the bank, but the only way to get anything out of Packamist (the landlord) would seem to be an FOI request, since, if they know what I'm up to, they may not release the info.

What do you think?

Thx
Minxi

[mystery1]

Re: 'PCN' from London Parking Solutions

Any mention of quiet enjoyment in your lease ?

M1

[Minxi]

Re: 'PCN' from London Parking Solutions

We have, re the leasehold, 'THE Tenant paying the rent hereby reserved and performing and observing the covenants with the Landlord on the part of the Tenant herein contained shall peaceably hold and enjoy the Demised Premises for the Term hereby created without any interruption by the Landlord or any person lawfully claiming title under or in trust for the Landlord'.

But there is a lot of other stuff entitling the Landlord to do WTF he likes :tinysmile_cry_t:

[mystery1]

Re: 'PCN' from London Parking Solutions

Ok, well as i suspected it appears they are screwed.

"7.If the expression "the Parking Spaces" is defined in clause1 of this Lease (but only if it is so defined)

(a)the exclusive right to park one private motor vehicle in each suchparking space BUT nothing in this Lease shall imply the right to usesuch parking spaces unless and until the Landlord shall give noticeto the Tenant that it is or they are ready for use by the Tenant andthe Landlord covenants with the Tenant to serve the notice referredto in this clause as soon as the Parking Space is ready for use

(b)to pass and repass with such private motor vehicles (insofar as maybe applicable) or on foot over the accessways forming part of theEstate and the Parking Area and the approaches and ramps leadingthereto."

Your lease doesn't require a permit and you have the right to "quiet enjoyment" (essentially to live without undue interference from the landlord or agents)

I'll write an appeal tomorrow. You will need your lease in PDF for the appeal if possible.

If the appeal is unsuccessful they'll have a very difficult time winning in court.




I would have 1 last crack at management before you go to bed.




I note from my lease that there is no requirement to display a permit.

7.If the expression "the Parking Spaces" is defined in clause1 of this Lease (but only if it is so defined)

(a)the exclusive right to park one private motor vehicle in each suchparking space BUT nothing in this Lease shall imply the right to usesuch parking spaces unless and until the Landlord shall give noticeto the Tenant that it is or they are ready for use by the Tenant andthe Landlord covenants with the Tenant to serve the notice referredto in this clause as soon as the Parking Space is ready for use

(b)to pass and repass with such private motor vehicles (insofar as maybe applicable) or on foot over the accessways forming part of theEstate and the Parking Area and the approaches and ramps leadingthereto.

I further ask that you sort this out in order that i do not have to obtain an injunction to restore my quiet enjoyment of the land i have on lease.


M1

[Minxi]

Re: 'PCN' from London Parking Solutions

That's brill, many thanks.

I assume I'll have to disclose my ID for real on this occasion (i.e. when I send the appeal)? Will bang this one off to Management right away.

Minxi

[mystery1]

Re: 'PCN' from London Parking Solutions

Well you should have done it originally. I take it for granted everyone knows that

M1

[Minxi]

Re: 'PCN' from London Parking Solutions

Hah! I'd be tempted to sign thus: aw:

I've sent one, as advised, off to Management.

Huge thanks once again, let's be in touch tomorrow.

Minxi.

[mystery1]

Re: 'PCN' from London Parking Solutions

PCN Number: XXXX
Date PCN Issued: XXXX


Dear Independent Parking Committee,


I am the registered keeper of vehicle reg: XXXX and I contend that I am not liable for the parking charge and the vehicle was not improperly parked. I wish to appeal against the notice issued by London Parking Solutions. (LPS) on the following grounds:


1) Failure to Comply with Statutory Requirements under Paragraph 8 of POFA 2012, Schedule 4(see file attachments NTK 1 & 2)


There are omissions of the statutory wording required under paragraph 8 of POFA 2012, Schedule 4. LPS has failed to comply with the statutory requirements under Schedule 4 in the NTK. The NTK does not inform the keeper that the driver is required to pay parking charges in respect of the specified period of parking and that the parking charges have not been paid in full as required on para. 8(2)(b). The NTK does not invite the keeper to pass the Notice on to the driver, as required in para. 8(2)(e). Moreover, the NTK does not state that the keeper would become liable for the charge only if the applicable conditions under this Schedule are met which is not in accordance with para. 8(2)(f). Furthermore, paragraph 8(2)(h) states that the NTK must identify the creditor and specify how and whom the payment or notification to the creditor may be made. The NTK in this matter does not identify the creditor and does not comply with this requirement. In addition, the NTK failed to inform the keeper of the arrangements and contact details for resolution of disputes or complaints to the Information Commissioner (see attached NTK copies).


The NTK from LPS indicates that they are a member of the IPC and abide by the committees’ CoP. The failings identified above of the NTK also breach the IPC CoP page 14, Part C para. 2. Where an Act states that such a Notice ‘must’ include certain prescribed words, any omission renders a document a nullity.


Due to being non-compliant with the IPC CoP and Schedule 4 of the POFA 2012, LPS are not able to establish keeper liability of the vehicle for the alleged parking charge. Therefore, any action against the keeper should be withdrawn.










2) Contract with Landoccupier


LPS does not own the land and as i am the legal occupier by way of leasehold (see attached lease) and my lease mentions nothing about using a permit i have a legal right to quiet enjoyment of said land. In their NTK and in the rejection letter, LPS has not provided me with any evidence that it is lawfully entitled to demand money from a driver or keeper, since they do not own nor have any interest or assignment for the title of the land in question. Within the IPC CoP Part B, paragraph 2.1 states the requirement of such an agreement. I have not asked them or agreed to a change of lease to allow them to operate on the land of which i am a legal occupier.


I request that the IPC check whether LPS have provided a full copy of the actual contemporaneous, signed and dated contract with the landowner/occupier (not just a signed slip of paper saying it exists or someone has witnessed it) and check that it specifically enables this operator to pursue parking charges in their own name as creditor and through the court system.‘Witness statements’ instead of relevant contract show no proof that the alleged signatory has ever seen the contract or that they are employed by the landowner. Such a statement would not show whether any payment has been made to the operator which would obviously affect ‘loss’ calculations.


Furthermore, it would not serve to provide proof that the contract includes the necessary authority required by the IPC CoP to allow the operator to pursue charges in their own name as creditor and to enter into contracts with drivers. I say that any contract is not compliant with the requirements set out in the IPC Code of Practice.


I do not believe that the operator has the necessary legal capacity to enter into a contract with a driver of the vehicle parked in the space or indeed the legal standing to allege a breach of contract.






I believe my appeal should be upheld because LPS have no right to operate on the land that i occupy and even if they did they have not fulfilled the keeper liability requirements of the protection of freedoms act 2012 schedule 4 which are required to hold a keeper liable.




Yours Faithfully,


Xxxx


Do not forget to include the lease and Notice to keeper with the appeal and do everything at the same time.

M1