Private Parking Tickets discussion

Oopsadaisy

zebedee70 wrote: »

Regarding the point about National not wanting to be taken to court due to a risk of losing / negative publicity, would it also be the case that, as a company of their size, they can't afford NOT to show up & defend themselves, even if it does cost more than a settlement. If they're seen to just roll over, isn't that leaving them exposed? Surely they'd want to be seen to turn up and win?

Why would they want to 'defend' their action? If it goes against them then any following cases have something to point to [albeit iirc a win/defeat at this stage doesn't actually establish a legal precedent since it's not a high enough case].

It's a bit like the 'bank charges' ...most banks settled rather than run the risk of a legal precedent being set and opening the floodgates. So National would rather settle for you to go away with no 'official record' that they did so.

Once they realise that the PPC won't be suing them for the money why would they want to pay up to the PPC if the renter is going to sue them for it back. They'll take the sensible way out, and get out of the middle and leave the renter and ppc to slug it out [which the PPC will lose].

zebedee70

The PPC can't really lose at this stage, since National have paid up -
they've got their money & crawled back under their rock.
I doubt National making a claim against them would hold, since National chose to pay in the first place.

The only adds to the impression that rental firms are well aware of how PPCs operate, and know it's likely they can make a £60 admin fee into the bargain.

Re. the earlier point of the definition of "other authority" - in the T&Cs, a small 'a' is used. Maybe there is a distinction to be made that the word 'authority' is used at all - if anyone can be an authority, why not just phrase the T&C as 'You will pay any charge in relation to parking' as opposed to 'court or other authority costs in relation to parking...".
One could assume that the word authority is there to define those precise organisations permitted to issue fines or penalties.

My Small Claims chances probably rely on this definition, if it's me vs National alone, since in my case I can only argue that they shouldn't have paid up.

I'm not sure on what grounds I could make a joint clain against National & the PPC, since the PPC haven't taken money directly from me...?

taffy056

zebedee70 wrote: »

My Small Claims chances probably rely on this definition, if it's me vs National alone, since in my case I can only argue that they shouldn't have paid up.

They won't defend it, because solicitors costs are going to be many times that of the claim, you will win by default, send them a LBA and ensure that your costs for taking them to court will be added to what you are claiming, and make sure you give them say 14 days to settle, otherwise issue them court papers.

And even if they do defend, their T&Cs doesn't state that they will pay any tickets before you've had a chance to defend and refute them, they are basically pleading guilty for you, not sure but that's not legal without your say so!

Oopsadaisy

Gotta disagree with you Z-man.

National has acted as a middle-man, so I would deffo name the PPC in the court papers. Then you've got two chances of someone settling with you before court date!!

As you say, you're down £160 so wit court fees of £30 you only need odds of 6 to 1-ish to come out on top - pretty good considering the opinion on here seems to be you're 50/50....and thats at worst.

Go for it!!

zebedee70

Taffy,

I did defend & refute them, back in March. They wrote back in return, upholding their charges. I ignored this, thinking they'd then start the chain of threat letters to me. Instead, they waited 3 months, then send a charge notice direct to National, as the vehicle owner, which National has now paid.

When I approached National for the refund, they in turn say the contacted the PPC, who say I didn't ever appeal...

taffy056 wrote: »

They won't defend it, because solicitors costs are going to be many times that of the claim, you will win by default, send them a LBA and ensure that your costs for taking them to court will be added to what you are claiming, and make sure you give them say 14 days to settle, otherwise issue them court papers.

And even if they do defend, their T&Cs doesn't state that they will pay any tickets before you've had a chance to defend and refute them, they are basically pleading guilty for you, not sure but that's not legal without your say so!

zebedee70

Sorry if I'm being a pain in re-checking - how would I name the PPC in the court papers, when I have nothing to claim back from them. National have paid them, not me...I thought I could only name them if they owe me?

Admittedly they've started all of this - but my case is really against National for halting the whole deny/ignore process when they coughed up...

Oopsadaisy wrote: »

Gotta disagree with you Z-man.

National has acted as a middle-man, so I would deffo name the PPC in the court papers. Then you've got two chances of someone settling with you before court date!!

As you say, you're down £160 so wit court fees of £30 you only need odds of 6 to 1-ish to come out on top - pretty good considering the opinion on here seems to be you're 50/50....and thats at worst.

Go for it!!

Ountz

FAO Quanto

Did you get your first letter from Graham White today? I did and it's exactly the same as the one printed in the letters thread and no doubt the same as yours.

Coupon-mad

zebedee70 wrote: »

Sorry if I'm being a pain in re-checking - how would I name the PPC in the court papers, when I have nothing to claim back from them. National have paid them, not me...I thought I could only name them if they owe me?

Admittedly they've started all of this - but my case is really against National for halting the whole deny/ignore process when they coughed up...

As I said on the previous page, I also think you should name both as 'jointly and severally liable'. It's one Court case, just one lot of £30 but with two defendants (don't do it via moneyclaimonline, instead fill out a more detailed N1 form from your local County Court)..

If one defendant doesn't show up then you could win by default for a start. Gives you two chances as well for the judge to find against one or the other.

It's a bit like when people who are clamped are advised to sue the clamper and the landowner. The clamper is the only one who's taken money, but the landowner is also liable.

For a start, because you did appeal (can you prove it, do you have a copy?) you had already told the PPC who was driving I presume? So they KNEW that any alleged contract could only be with you and should have only corresponded with you from then on (as per the BPA code of practice).

To then threaten the registered keeper with a fake NTO (probably because they know lease companies are an easy touch) directly caused you to have the money taken, a fact which the parking company would be well aware of. So I would say their action caused your loss (indirectly), as did the action of the hire company (directly).

I am not a legal expert though and may be talking out of my @ss, so maybe you should ask on pepipoo.com forums for advice on whether they think both can be named and held liable?

http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showforum=30

One more thought - there was that Small Claim earlier this year which may be good to refer to as well as the Hetherington-Jakeman decision. A female trainee Solicitor got a private parking ticket refunded to her brother BY THE PARKING COMPANY after it was paid by a hire company I think.

She convinced the judge that there was insufficient signage so the 'fine' was unenforceable, but in your case you'd be convincing the judge that the penalty was an unlawful/unfair penalty, there was no 'contract' anyway, no loss from any trespass, no proper contract for the parking company to act as agents for the landowner anyway (usually the case I believe, Excel lost a Small Claims case in May 2009 where the judge mentioned this).

But as for you, just show that you had acted reasonably & honestly in appealing and saying you were the driver, up front, but stating clearly why you always felt there was no case to answer so should not have been caused this loss by the actions of both defendants.

HTH

tonycarew

First of all apologies if I've posted this in the wrong place.Its a really long thread 50+ pages so if this has been covered allready again apologies.
I'ts approaching 3 weeks now since the event when I was silly enough to stop on double yellow lines on a road well inside the boundries of Newcastle Airport (I dont think it is covered by the RTA) in order to drop someone off.I must admit there was a sign saying strictly no parking at the side of the road which I stupidly ignored.
I was approached by a guy who informed me that I had been recorded on camera and that I would receive a £60 fine through the post.His vehicle had airport insignia on its doors.
Luckily or not as yet I have not received the said ticket.
Has anyone had a similar experiance.Is it likely that they may have forgotten about me.Is this the sort of ticket (PPC) covered in this section.
Any advice would be appreciated.
Thanks in advance.
Tony

Oopsadaisy

Unless it is police or council, it is safe to ignore every other sort of muppet wearing a dayglo yellow jacket and telling you you're getting a ticket.

I've seen me get back to find said muppet in middle of writing ticket; I have said I own the car and he said 'you're too late, I'm not stopping the ticket' in a bolshy tone, which has rankled me. I replied 'No probs, I'll just wait''. 15 seconds later he has finished and hands me the ticket, which I proceed to take out of plastic sleeve, tear in half in front of him and throw over my shoulder [pls don't bother telling me I'm a litter lout].

Such satisfaction is very pleasant..