Does the Cargius case still stand

Heres a thought ... how about you accept responsibility for your own actions. You entered the car park and accepted the terms and conditions of parking. You breached the terms and conditions that you freely accepted and must now deal with the consequences of your breach. Whatever your reasons might be for overstaying, the fact still remains that you entered into a contract and you broke that contract by overstaying when you were not entitled to do so. I have read the threads referring to the parking companies as being 'parking cowboys' but there seems to be a lack of threads relating to peoples inability to accept responsibility for their own actions. You all share a very one sided view which is that its always somebody else's fault.

There is a lot written about the Beavis v Parking Eye Ltd case and it also seems that most of you have missed the message entirely which is that as long as there is commercial justification for imposing the charge then it cannot be unlawful. The ruling didn't focus on the amount of the charge or whether the parking was free but more whether or not the parking company (Parking Eye) could justify the charge. If you are overstaying in a pay and display car park beyond what you have paid for then you are depriving that parking company of a revenue generating opportunity. This will likely be their commercial interest argument !