Source: http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?s=ebbc8cd429b1405a5706b5397304406d&showtopic=114450&pid=1415681&st=360
Timestamp: 2018-10-22 08:54:10
Document Index: 110588102

Matched Legal Cases: ['UKSC ', 'UKPC ', 'UKPC\n', 'UKPC ', 'UKPC ', 'UKPC ']

Multiple PCNs for parking in flat car park - FightBack Forums
Multiple PCNs for parking in flat car park
Sun, 2 Jul 2017 - 19:58
Member No.: 90,917
At the end of 2016 the block of flats I live in introduced parking permits and PCNs.
I didn't actually get a permit through the post, but most people did in the block. Consequently the car I own which was parked in the car park had 7 PCNs within a 4 week period and the total invoice is £1,160
I ignored the letters that came in the post, but now they have sent me the attached letters for a not insubstantial amount
Does the fact that I didn't get a permit through the post before they enforced the tickets count as a defence? Eventually they sent me one by recorded delivery at which point I had had several tickets.
Quite miffed to be PCNd in my own home.
This post has been edited by HenryHippo: Sun, 2 Jul 2017 - 19:59
Replies (360 - 366)
Thu, 12 Jul 2018 - 22:58
QUOTE (Eljayjay @ Thu, 12 Jul 2018 - 21:56)
OK, in an effort to settle this matter peacefully, I would add the following comments.
In Virgin Atlantic Airways Ltd v Zodiac Seats UK Limited [2013] UKSC 46, the Supreme Court revisited the doctrine of Res Judicata and identified the six principles which make up the doctrine to be as follows:-
1. A party is prevented from bringing subsequent proceedings to challenge an outcome that has already been decided (cause of action estoppel)
2. If a claimant succeeds in the first action and does not appeal the outcome, he may not bring a subsequent action on the same cause of action (i.e. to recover further damages)
3. The doctrine of merger treats a cause of action as having been extinguished once judgment has been provided and accordingly the Claimant’s only right is the judgment itself
4. A party may not bring subsequent proceedings on an issue that has already been determined (issue estoppel)
5. A party may not bring subsequent proceedings which should and could have been dealt with in earlier proceedings (the ‘Henderson v Henderson’ principle)
6. There is a general procedural rule against abusive proceedings
Literally, the term “res judicata” means “a matter judged”. Once, a matter has been judged, i.e. the issues have been settled, the doctrine of Res Judicata applies forever unless and until, for example, there is a change in the law or a change in the positions of the parties.
What henrik777 said was “Res Judicata would potentially cover any similar events that they should have been aware of at the time of filing a claim. Anything afterwards would not be covered.”.
So, henrik777’s second sentence does not accord with the six principles identified by the Supreme Court.
So, in your view, after a company has issued a claim and been through the system, a company would be barred by way of Res Judicata from going back to court for an incident which occurred afterwards ?
Can you explain which of the 6 points covers this please ?
Thu, 12 Jul 2018 - 23:03
There has not been a claim, just a threat of court action.
Try reading and understanding the principles for yourself. They are fairly self-explanatory. The wording is not mine.
This post has been edited by Eljayjay: Thu, 12 Jul 2018 - 23:20
Fri, 13 Jul 2018 - 08:45
Not a helpful response there Eli...however I suggest flamepit for further discussion.
No counterclaim here, just a threat of further cction which has now ended. Possibility of a claim for misuse of data etc is in the offing though?
I would now require them to confrm they have ceased processing your data, as they no longer have any cause to continue.
Fri, 13 Jul 2018 - 11:21
QUOTE (ostell @ Thu, 12 Jul 2018 - 22:38)
I lost track of what was happening. Is there a counterclaim active on this?
I will write this post for the casual reader
Dec 2016: UKPC stick multiple tickets on Car A)
Jan 2017: A few tickets on Car B)
Summer 2017: Claim issued against me for Car A). Counterclaim issued against UKPC
Summer 2017: A few tickets on Car C). Car A) parked outside a bay once and gets PCN
Nov 2017: Original case date, last minute postponment to March 2018
March 2018: Judge dismisses UKPC case and awards me £500 damages
June 2018: UKPC go after Car B). I send them an email which makes them back off
July 2018: UKPC go after Car A) for being outside a bay once. I send them an email which makes them back off
Presumably they will go after Car C) next
This post has been edited by HenryHippo: Fri, 13 Jul 2018 - 11:21
Fri, 13 Jul 2018 - 11:54
Thanks Henry, all is clear now.
Tue, 11 Sep 2018 - 11:47
6 months after the case and I have not had any luck getting the transcript. The court sent the wrong audio to the transcript company and after a lot of back and forth for a few months it seems they can't get it to me
I want to close this chapter, so I cancelled the request and got a refund.
I have donated the net proceeds from the parking debacle evenly between the Pepipoo forum and Cancer Research UK (see the below links for proof)
Thanks to everyone on here for the help, especially SRM
https://www.dropbox.com/s/290qbllru71caan/c...seatch.PNG?dl=0
https://www.dropbox.com/s/68gnq3g5ou8x92v/p...ayment.PNG?dl=0
Tue, 11 Sep 2018 - 16:29
Lo-Fi Version Time is now: Monday, 22nd October 2018 - 08:54