Private car park fine £148

davejack711

hi all, most prob this subject has already been covered, but would thought i would post again hoping for some advice

Today I recieved a letter from a company saying I owe a private car park £158 for non payment of a car park charge in April.

I did stop at the car park on a jetty in Exmouth to do some fishing, and was waiting for the person to come around as often does collecting money as no payment machine, but there is a fish shop where you can pay.

On my way back to my car, a man approached me saying he has my number and will be getting a ticket for £75 thru the post, or pay £50 now.
Then he walked away.
No ticket on the day was given to me or any cameras was used to say my car was there.

Now the letter says i have 7 days to pay up the money or bailiffs will be informed.
On examination of the letter they have the wrong car reg on it?

do I have to pay this fine as no letter was given to me or any pics was used to say who was driving, and the wrong reg on the letter.
Have had a look at the signs at the car park, and only says non payment cars will be wheel clamped with a release fee of £75.

Thanks in hoping you can shed some light on this.

Quentin

Just ignore it.

The bailiffs don't get involved until ordered by the courts, and this has no chance of success.

It's just a frightener that many people would cave in and pay - you can't be "fined" by a private company.

It's a civil matter between them and the driver and as you are not going to tell them who the driver was, they cannot take it further.

Casey1709

What was wrong with the advice given yesterday to the same post here (#415)?

http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.html?t=269814&page=21

Quentin

I haven't read it.

What is wrong with my advice?

davejack711

Casey1709 wrote: »

What was wrong with the advice given yesterday to the same post here (#415)?

http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.html?t=269814&page=21

sorry for reposting, but am a paramedic on duty, as was posting article, was called out and shut comp down, did not trealise it went thru, did a quick search trhis morn and could not find my post so re posted, sorry if causes upset, not meant to.
Just looking for good advice
thanks

Casey1709

Quentin, sorry, my question was to davejack.

Davejack, apolgies if I was curt, just wondered whether you didn't believe the advice offered yesterday. As far as I now, Quentin is correct (assuming they are a private car park). They are relying on contract law and cannot impose fines, just charges, and even then they can't impose them unless you let them.

Have a look at www.pepipoo.co.uk and then either ignore the letter, or tell them to send their correspondence to the driver, not owner, of the vehicle.

BTW, welcome to MSE, we're normally a very friendly bunch on here. You'll save loads of money if you stay & have a look around the other boards.

vaio

Casey1709 wrote: »

………….welcome to MSE, we're normally a very friendly bunch on here. You'll save loads of money if you stay & have a look around the other boards.

And have need of your professional skills if you venture into the Arms and particularly DT

punkstoner

davejack711 wrote: »

On examination of the letter they have the wrong car reg on it?

Simple, dont pay.

davejack711

vaio wrote: »

And have need of your professional skills if you venture into the Arms and particularly DT

slightly confused by this post, just come off nights and not woken up yet

davejack711

Found this leeter on another site/thread, and have adjusted it to suit my case/needs.
Should i send this and have done with it or just continue to ignore?

Dear Sir/Madam

I am in receipt of your letter dated the 14.07.08, alleging that a vehicle registered to me overstayed an arbitrary duration in a vehicle park.

As I am sure you will be aware, it is the driver of the vehicle with whom any contract to park was made, not the registered keeper, You will also be aware that the terms of any such contract must be set out in such a manner as to be obvious to anyone with whom you wished to make the contract. These terms must comply with all applicable contract law, such as the Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977.

Should you wish to pursue this claim, please supply evidence that the person parking the vehicle you allege to have overstayed the set duration would have had the opportunity to read the contract terms. Such evidence must be, as a minimum:

• A detailed route and timings of the vehicle’s travel into and through the vehicle park.
• A detailed route of the driver’s passage out of the vehicle – this and the evidence listed immediately above are to show that the driver had reasonable opportunity to see and read the contract terms.
• Photographs of all relevant signage in situ in locus in quo at the time of the alleged overstaying so as to show that the signs were actually readable.
• An accurately – drawn, scaled, map showing the location of each sign and indicating which you believe the driver would have had the easy opportunity to read (the routes of the vehicle and driver should be superimposed upon the map).
• Details of the weather conditions at the time, in particular the visibility (all to be confirmed by the Meteorological office).
• Sufficient details of the driver with whom you claim to have made a contract to enable their unique identification.
• A detailed description of the processes followed to record and analyse the evidence of the alleged overstaying, and
• A notorised statement from a senior manager to the effect that your recording and analytical systems were working normally at the time of the alleged overstaying.

Without the above, I cannot entertain your claim and any further demands for payment will be considered harassment and will be reported to the police with a view to your criminal prosecution under Section 1 of the Malicious Communications Act 1998,Section 85 of the Postal Services Act 2000, Section 127 of the Communications Act 2003, and / or section 2 of the Protection from Harassment Act 1997 – this last with a view to the court issuing a Restraining Order against you. Additionally, civil action will be taken against you personally and your employer to cease and desist and for the recovery of all costs, together with a substantial payment in compensation for the mental pain and suffering caused.

I expect your reply by return, either providing the evidence requested above or indicating simply your termination of this correspondence.

Any further correspondence from yourselves or your client will be charged to yourselves at a costing of £50 per item received, and £75 per item requested by yourselves. This will include time, and administration costings.

Should you choose to send further correspondence, you will have deemed to enter in to this contract, and yourselves will incur the above costings.

Yours faithfully

anewman

davejack711 wrote: »

Such evidence must be, as a minimum:

• A detailed route and timings of the vehicle’s travel into and through the vehicle park.
• A detailed route of the driver’s passage out of the vehicle – this and the evidence listed immediately above are to show that the driver had reasonable opportunity to see and read the contract terms.
• Photographs of all relevant signage in situ in locus in quo at the time of the alleged overstaying so as to show that the signs were actually readable.
• An accurately – drawn, scaled, map showing the location of each sign and indicating which you believe the driver would have had the easy opportunity to read (the routes of the vehicle and driver should be superimposed upon the map).
• Details of the weather conditions at the time, in particular the visibility (all to be confirmed by the Meteorological office).
• Sufficient details of the driver with whom you claim to have made a contract to enable their unique identification.
• A detailed description of the processes followed to record and analyse the evidence of the alleged overstaying, and
• A notorised statement from a senior manager to the effect that your recording and analytical systems were working normally at the time of the alleged overstaying.

I wouldn't send anything. But only a w@nker would write requesting the above evidence. Then again I guess it can be argued only a w@nker would try make someone pay £148.