Private Parking Tickets discussion

lakesguy

Problem is they have my name and I stupidly said I was driving when I appealed it with genuine reasons. Does this mean I have a problem?

lakesguy

Problem is they have my name and I stupidly said I was driving when I appealed it with genuine reasons. Does this mean I have a problem?

dacouch

Dewleigh wrote: »

Hi,
I wonder if you can help.

I have just received my first parking ticket from a shopping centre carpark. I have parked there loads and until recently no problms, its now getting busy for xmas and they have decided to now enforce their 4 hour rule.

They have employed a private ticket firm called UK Parlking Patrol Office and I have been issued a Parking Charge Notice which was on my windcscreen.

Is this legal? I know several other people in the office I work also got one of these tickets.

If it helps I am in Scotland so not sure if Scottish law is different!

Any help gratefully appreciated.

Yes apply normal Scottish logic and don't part with any money :beer:

dacouch

This is an interesting articale from the CAB, there are similarities between Private Parking Tickets and the civil recovery the company they refer to are doing eg esculating demands for perceived damages and the civil courts not consistantly supporting the PPCs...

http://www.citizensadvice.org.uk/index/campaigns/policy_campaign_publications/evidence_reports/er_employment/unreasonable_demands_.htm

Summary

Citizens Advice Bureaux report dealing with a growing number of cases of threatened civil recovery against those accused of shoplifting or employee theft. The vast majority of these reported cases involve “dedicated civil litigators” Retail Loss Prevention (RLP), who claim to have recovered millions of pounds on behalf of many high street retailers such as Boots, Tesco and TK Maxx. The remainder all involve the retailer Asda, which conducts its own claims through law firm Drydens Lawyers.
In the vast majority of these CAB-reported cases, the value of the goods or cash allegedly stolen is relatively small – often just a few pounds. But letters from RLP and Drydens demand substantial sums as compensation for “the loss and damage caused by your wrongful actions” (RLP) or “the security costs incurred as a result of your actions” (Drydens), and threaten county court proceedings if prompt payment is not made. Some letters from RLP have also stated that “the personal information we hold [on you]” will “now be held on a national database of incidents of dishonesty”.
Most of the CAB clients concerned are young – one in six of those who received a letter from RLP were under 17 at the time – and many are sufficiently ashamed and/or intimidated by the threat of court action and escalating costs to pay up without challenge. However, both RLP and Drydens have failed to provide clear evidence that the civil courts have consistently and explicitly supported, at contested trials, the recoverability of the sort of sums they routinely demand in cases involving a relatively minor, low-value and one-off alleged offence. In the absence of such evidence, Citizens Advice considers such claims letters, and their threat of escalating costs, to constitute ‘deceitful’, ‘unfair’ and ‘improper’ business practice, as defined by the Office of Fair Trading.
Citizens Advice does not condone crime of any kind or level, and does not underestimate the monetary and other costs of retail crime. However, the ends of deterring crime or recovering its cost do not justify any means. If retailers, dissatisfied with the level of governmental action against retail crime, are to seek civil redress, they must do so using means that are transparently fair and proper. Unreasonable demands?sets out recommendations to the Ministry of Justice, the Home Office, the British Retail Consortium and others that civil recovery be limited to cases involving serious, determined or persistent offences for which there has been a criminal conviction

BFG_2

removed,,,,,,,,,,,

oldone_2

I have reported the latest post from BFG as spam. Suggest others who think he is a juvenile idiot that contributes very little to this forum also report as spam..

Coupon-mad

lakesguy wrote: »

Problem is they have my name and I stupidly said I was driving when I appealed it with genuine reasons. Does this mean I have a problem?

Others may say continue to ignore, it's your call. Nothing to be gained by paying the scammers anyway, that's for sure!

I think if I had already told them you were driving and they've rejected your 'appeal' (I use that term loosely because there never was any chance of appeal!) then personally, I would consider sending the 'put up or shut up' response I mentioned on another thread.

That means you're telling them that the alleged debt is in dispute/denied. I understand that this stops them from legally being able to farm the case out to a Debt Collector and add other spurious charges on top.

They will probably STILL send you Debt Collector letters but you can then happily completely ignore them, knowing that you've clearly said the debt is denied/disputed and that any further contact is harassment (a real offence by them!). I believe they can't do anything else in law except then take you to Court for the original amount - and they won't do that.

They cannot instruct bailiffs. They cannot legally clamp your car. They cannot affect your credit record as it's not a credit agreement/loan situation.

BFG_2

oldone wrote: »

I have reported the latest post from BFG as spam. Suggest others who think he is a juvenile idiot that contributes very little to this forum also report as spam..

Thank you very much for that, although to be accurate I'm not sure it is actually spam per se.

I'm going to report you for being illiterate.

The word "Spam" as applied means Unsolicited Bulk Email ("UBE").

Unsolicited means that the Recipient has not granted verifiable permission for the message to be sent. Bulk means that the message is sent as part of a larger collection of messages, all having substantively identical content.
A message is Spam only if it is both Unsolicited and Bulk.

-Unsolicited Email is normal email
(examples: first contact enquiries, job enquiries, sales enquiries)

-Bulk Email is normal email
(examples: subscriber newsletters, customer communications, discussion lists)


Technical Definition of Spam

An electronic message is "spam" IF:

(1)the recipient's personal identity and context are irrelevant because the message is equally applicable to many other potential recipients;

AND

(2)the recipient has not verifiably granted deliberate, explicit, and still-revocable permission for it to be sent.

BFG_2

Do you also report people who waste electrons posting questions that have been answered several hundred times??

Why not??

BFG_2

oldone wrote: »

I have reported the latest post from BFG as spam. Suggest others who think he is a juvenile idiot that contributes very little to this forum also report as spam..

You could report if for being annoying???

However it's most definitely a valid point for me to make - this board is littered with posts that are not needed as they have been answered several hundred times already.

!!!!!! we even have people who post the usual 'I got a ticket in Asda, do I have to pay' immediately after a big red post [not one of mine] that says DO NOT POST QUESTIONS HERE THIS THREAD IS FOR DISCUSSION ONLY!!!

So I fail to see how my post can be considered any worse than 'too lazy to read' posts.