10p didnt register now rec'd court papers

yotmon · 14 December 2016 at 2:31PM

rk4406 wrote: »

It is more than likely one of those 'no change given' machines but I will respond to the papers in the best way I can with the evidence.
Thanks

When you go back to get pics of the signs, make sure you check the payment machine to see if it does say 'no change given'. Never assume.

They have taken 9 times more off you than they say you owed them, yet they are the ones taking you to court - robbing bar-stewards !

Umkomaas · 14 December 2016 at 2:44PM

A court case over a missing 10p? Is this what the county court system is set up for?

Have you contacted your local press? I'm sure also that the Daily Mail would be very interested in this. There's a DM journo who's been taking a healthy interest in the private parking industry. His contact details are on this forum somewhere. I've had a quick search, but didn't find them - but I'm sure someone will come along with them shortly.

The_Slithy_Tove · 14 December 2016 at 4:13PM

Things to note in your defence (as well as all the usual points which can be found by searching around):

Excel/BWL cannot use the PE v Beavis Supreme Court result. In fact, YOU can. The Court of Appeal in that case stated that Pay per hour car parks were not covered by the ruling.
As long as you haven't admitted who the driver was, then they cannot use keeper liability under the Protection of Freedoms Act. The Notice to Keeper should state the unpaid part of the parking charge. Considering you already paid £3.60, and that was 90p more that even two hours' worth, then they should have deducted that from the £60/£100 they asked for.

pappa_golf · 14 December 2016 at 4:16PM

The_Slithy_Tove wrote: »

Things to note in your defence (as well as all the usual points which can be found by searching around):
Excel/BWL cannot use the PE v Beavis Supreme Court result. In fact, YOU can. The Court of Appeal in that case stated that Pay per hour car parks were not covered by the ruling.

As long as you haven't admitted who the driver was, then they cannot use keeper liability under the Protection of Freedoms Act. The Notice to Keeper should state the unpaid part of the parking charge. Considering you already paid £3.60, and that was 90p more that even two hours' worth, then they should have deducted that from the £60/£100 they asked for.

nice one , the unpaid charge , is 10p , thats going to look good in court , in fact I would ask for mediation from the court service on this one , and offer there and then to pay the 10p in full!

beamerguy · 14 December 2016 at 4:27PM

pappa_golf wrote: »

nice one , the unpaid charge , is 10p , thats going to look good in court , in fact I would ask for mediation from the court service on this one , and offer there and then to pay the 10p in full!

cute but best let BWL be put in the stocks again, only place for them

pappa_golf · 14 December 2016 at 4:43PM

I think by offering the 10p ,and BW failure to mitigate thier loses would look VERY well in court , after all thats what court mediation is about

"do you owe 10p"
"yes"
will you pay them 10p to stop court action"
"yes"

this case is a glowing example of car park MISmanagement , hell , had an attendant been on site with his little satchel this would have never happened! the PPC wasted £2.50 because of being 10p down!

omagine if your local bus company sought your info every time you accidentally underpaid them 10p , more money would be spent on solisitors than running the busses

embarresment time ,,

sfter the refuse the 10p at mediation , you can mention this to the judge , and state that the £100 (+) is a penalty charge and with solisitors fees bears ni relation to the origional "chrime" , being found guilty , would be the same as being sent to australia for steeling a chunk of bread!

rk4406 · 15 December 2016 at 4:16PM

I have just found this old email from the Independent Appeals Service to me, from Feb 2015.
Would like advice if you believe i still have a chance at defending the claim against me?

"Whilst I understand the appellant's consternation at receiving a £100 parking charge for inadvertently failing to pay 10p of the tariff, the fact remains that it was her responsibility to ensure that she paid the full tariff. Enforcement at this car park is carried out by anpr cameras which detect whether the correct tariff has been paid for the motorists' period of stay in the car park. Since the machine registered an underpayment against the appellant's car, the parking charge was automatically sent. For this reason it is an express term of using this car park that motorists pay the correct amount or agree to pay the higher parking charge. It is well advertised throughout the car park and at the payment machine. The time of expiry would also have been on the front of the ticket. In the circumstances, the operator's claim for its parking charge is in accordance with its terms which the appellant accepted when she parked. The appeal must therefore be dismissed."

Umkomaas · 15 December 2016 at 4:21PM

Let's see if a judge agrees with the IAS barista. Of course you have a defendable case. Stop doubting things and get down to dealing with this.

rk4406 · 15 December 2016 at 4:22PM

Yes sir!!! Was just getting my facts straight and reading back through old emails. Yes i am doubting things, but im on it. Thanks for the kick up the ....

Umkomaas · 15 December 2016 at 4:24PM

Firm but fair. Firm but fair. :rotfl:

10p didnt register now rec'd court papers

Comments

Categories

Get our FREE Weekly email full of deals & guides - and it’s spam-free