Private Parking Tickets discussion

peter_the_piper

seanyfinn wrote: »

I recieved a parking ticket in May of this year to which I appealed. I was requestedto do so by sending my appeal via recorded delivery within 28 days. I did this and subsequently I had no reply until this week when I recieved a letter telling me "as I had lost the appeal and not paid the amount that I now had to pay the full amount. Surely they must reply to my appeal within a certain timescale and not just hit me with this 3 months later? Can anyone help?

Repeat after me:- Ppc's make up their own rules. Ppc's make up their own rules.
There is no effective legislation regarding ppc's, there are even companies which buy up old and forgotten invoices and chase for them up to 6 years later.

peter_the_piper

irrelevant wrote: »

In light of the theme of this thread, and the headline on this weeks email "don't pay private parking fines" I'd like to know what the people here would consider to be the best way, other than threatening fines, for supermarkets to deal with the inconsiderates whom park in disabled and parent & child spaces when they have no need to, causing people like me, who need to use both these from time to time, considerably more inconvenience than we have already.

Why not start your own thread about this contentious subject. I suggest a high charge to park there initially, rising bollards etc., recoverable at the till on production of blue badge or baby or both.

MacBoy

Why not start your own thread about this contentious subject. I suggest a high charge to park there initially, rising bollards etc., recoverable at the till on production of blue badge or baby or both.

Last time I looked, this thread was entitled 'Private Parking Tickets Discussion'. It didn't say anything about only one viewpoint being allowed.

peter_the_piper

MacBoy wrote: »

Last time I looked, this thread was entitled 'Private Parking Tickets Discussion'. It didn't say anything about only one viewpoint being allowed.

I just thought that a separate discussion on this would be advantageous as it might be lost in the other aspects. If you don't agree, fine by me.

MacBoy

Fair point, but there are genuinely several aspects to this. For some people, the private schemes have proved to be a real help in deterring persistent (and in some cases extremely nasty) abusers from walking all over their property enjoyment rights.

My guess is that there are also a number of people who have ended up on the wrong side of a scheme and been treated unjustly - again fair enough to discuss ways of fighting this.

However, I'm also sure there are a number of people who think they can park where the hell they like and b*gger the consequences. For them, this thread can read like a 'how to' manual on evading the consequences of their unthinking actions.

Surely it's a good thing to have a full range of opinions, as opposed to an 'Agree-O-Thon'?

Vanessa33

Hi wonder if anyone can advise me on what to do ?
I took my son to a play area called playtowers, there are two shops opposite and a macdonalds. i often use this playu area and parked in macdonalds as i usually do.
1 week later i recived a fine through the door for £95 pound saying i was parked illegally, i had nothing at all on my car at the time warning me of a ticket and saw no sign posts displaying this information.
I have since investigated and it seems alot of ppl have had the same fine in the past two weeks and were also unaware it was illegal to park there. i have also found out they have now put signs up but these were done a week after i parked there, the only proof i have of this is word of mouth. The fine states if i pay by the 23rd i can reduce the fine to £75. I do not have this sort of money and have never heard of the company PARKING UK LTD. They on the letter they have video evidence of me parking there which im not disputing but i also did use the maconalds.
Can anyone give me any advice ?.
Thanks
Vanessa.

foxglacier

I have noticed a recent growth in private ANPR systems (automatic number plate recognition) being installed at retail parks and in DIY/builders supply car parks. There are notices displayed with a maximum stay time allowed. Has anyone been captured this way ? Does the advice of ignoring the the PPC still apply.

bargepole

Vanessa33 wrote: »

... 1 week later i recived a fine through the door for £95 pound saying i was parked illegally, i had nothing at all on my car at the time warning me of a ticket and saw no sign posts displaying this information.
I have since investigated and it seems alot of ppl have had the same fine in the past two weeks and were also unaware it was illegal to park there. ...

You haven't been fined, it's a private company. And it isn't illegal to park there, as parking laws don't apply to private property.

Have a read of other threads on here, and you'll soon realise it's a scam. Don't pay the shysters a penny, and ignore all their rubbish threatening letters.

veryskint_3

Hi all. We had a parking fine for being outside blockbusters/kfc from the civil enforcement ltd. We asked the above shops how long the signs for parking had been ther and neither shop knew!!! The signs were unclear as they said you can park for 1 hour, now does this mean 1 hour in both shops or each shop??. As we all know at busy times you can be waiting an hour in kfc to get served. Anyway we rang the police and they said just ignore the letter and any threatening of court action as only the police and traffic wardens can issue parking tickets and if in extreme situation if bailiffs are sent DO NOT open the door or let them in. After quite a few letters from them and so called solicitors letters and threatening of court/bailiffs etc they gave up and we havent heard anything since. Actually we only received about 6 or 7 letters but in fact if you keep the letters you can sue them for harrassment. Thats why they give up. The numbers on the letters are useless as you can only speak to a robot and no one actually from the company. So my advice is to ignore everything as they must send hundreds out a week and if even a few respond and pay they are getting something. SO IGNORE THEM it actually works. Good luck.:T

Belplasca

MacBoy wrote: »

Fair point, but there are genuinely several aspects to this. For some people, the private schemes have proved to be a real help in deterring persistent (and in some cases extremely nasty) abusers from walking all over their property enjoyment rights.

My guess is that there are also a number of people who have ended up on the wrong side of a scheme and been treated unjustly - again fair enough to discuss ways of fighting this.

However, I'm also sure there are a number of people who think they can park where the hell they like and b*gger the consequences. For them, this thread can read like a 'how to' manual on evading the consequences of their unthinking actions.

Surely it's a good thing to have a full range of opinions, as opposed to an 'Agree-O-Thon'?

I am on the other side of the fence as well - I have three garages with hard standing in front which are on the other side of a park road from some tennis courts. The road belongs to the Parks department, it is not "adopted".

Obviously, I get inconsiderate people parking on my forecourt, blocking the garages for extended periods, and virtually every time when they do return they claim that they "didn't know" (despite a huge sign telling them that it's private and not to park there) and they always say they were only there "for a minute" when it's hours sometimes.

I've now put up hinged bollards, though I knew they wouldn't last, and - sure enough - one was vandalised within hours by a young thug deliberately trying to break it, but couldn't quite do it and then destroyed by a van which deliberately pushed it down.

These people are criminals, yet there are never any resources available from the Police "Service". Those that park are trespassing without permission and causing at the very least inconvenience, but often harassment as well. Why, Martin, do you feel that these people have the right to act inconsiderately without suffering the consequences?

Bob