YOU DO need to pay for private parking?

I-LOV-MONEY

trisontana wrote: »

It is not a "fine", and it's not enforceable because it is illegal to demand a penalty that bears no relation to the actual loss suffered by the land-owner

Okay, it may not be a fine. However they have put a notice up saying that the land is for permit holders only. If I park there without a permit, can they extract money from me by any means?

I will come clean! I live on a private estate and they have just put up such a notice to stop people other than residents and their guests parking there (and going to the shopping centre nearby).

bargepole

I-LOV-MONEY wrote: »

... If I park there without a permit, can they extract money from me by any means?....

Only by proving their case in a County Court. They have two hopes - Bob and none.

I-LOV-MONEY

bargepole wrote: »

Only by proving their case in a County Court. They have two hopes - Bob and none.

Sorry, I don't understand. What do they have to prove - you parked in their area? What is "Bob" ?

(Nurse: more dozy pills for me please!).

vivamartin

Spartacus_Mills wrote: »

Ignore.

They can no more fine you than I can.

You will get letters from them, debt collectors and solicitors (all probably from the same office) with increasingly absurd claims and lots of red ink threatening you with court action, credit rating damage etc etc. They won't do court in spite of what the numpty who started this thread claims.

If you are concerned I suggest you start your own thread on the issue in the meantime !!!! em and get on with your life.

You are right,
my friend had two penaltys from EuroparK, two years ago,sending him very bitter letters, menacing him .
nothing happens.

BFG_2

[QUOTE=I-LOV-MONEY;25111761_What_is_"Bob"_?_.[/QUOTE]

As in two hopes....BOB Hope and No Hope.

ginnersinner

I-LOV-MONEY wrote: »

Sorry, I don't understand. What do they have to prove - you parked in their area? What is "Bob" ?

(Nurse: more dozy pills for me please!).

They have to prove:-

1) That there was a contract (which involves them offering a service for a price, and a person accepting to pay that price in return for the service)
http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.html?p=25102259#post25102259 Click here for an example of what is NOT an offer of services.

2) Who that contract was between (and in this case it is the driver and the parking company - as the R/K you DON'T have to assist PPCs in identifying the driver)

3) That a party to the contract breached it.

4) That the breach caused an ACTUAL loss to a party to the contract. (And most would say that the only possible parties to any contract in this case - if one actually existed - would be the landowner and the driver - not the PPC itself)

5) How much that loss was.

They can only claim for the ACTUAL loss, not penalties (which they call 'fines' but are not)

RobertoMoir

kevinglancy wrote: »

I ran a parking company for 2 years, my job was simple, find land where people parked without permission and issue them penalty notices, once we had a client we then erected signs and then started patrolling.

Now allow me to explain in more detail the process.

We would see a car and then issue a ticket if that vehicle parked there, as long as we provided a photograph of that vehicle parked there, had a letter from the landowner stating we had permission from them to issue tickets then the DVLA were indeed obliged to provide that owners name and address in exchange for a fee of £2.50

Once we had their name and address we would then write to that owner advising them they had ignored the ticket we issued (see the evidence of the photo that we enclosed with our letter) and as such the penalty had increased now by this time to £105 we allowed them 14 days to reply, if they did not a further letter would be issued recorded delivery advising that a further £40 admin fee had been added for the need to send that letter and informed them as they had failed to provide the drivers name and address it could only be assumed they were the driver and that they had ample opportunity to respond but failed to do so.

If they failed again in responding then a further £30 would be added to the now outstanding £145 debt owed and we would proceed to the small claims, so much so we used to take approx 50 people to court each month.

When we did go to court, as long as we had a letter from the land owner, had kept to the DVLA rules in obtaining their address and sent sufficient letters to the owner of that vehicle that they had ignored and of course had photos to prove they were indeed parked on the land we were issuing tickets WE NEVER LOST A COURT CASE ONCE, therefore your advice to encourage people to ignore these tickets is damaging and can be costly to that owner of the vehicle, infact in one case the judge said the owner was “stupid” to ignore the letters we sent when it was clear we had evidence their vehicle was there.

As far as taking photos of road markings and parking bays, private land owners are have NO OBLIGATION to ensure proper bays are marked out, why? Because its private land that’s why, as long as there are clear visible signs on the land then it is up to the drivers on that land to adhere to the rules. End of, no excuses and certainly I would not be suggesting that drivers ignore tickets for the simple reason, you are indeed wrong with your advice and I wouldn’t like to see you get inundated with letters asking for money as you advised them to IGNORE letters issued by private car parking enforces.

I am no longer in that job as I didn’t like the amount of people that were forced to pay, your campaign should be focused on stopping the DVLA providing names and addresses of car owners to these companies, until that happens, this issue will never go away.

I hope this helps and hope that you see sense to publish this information to your readers and on your websites.

Yeah. Right.
Get me the tank!

Fork86

He's probably losing his revenue from people realising they don't have to indulge these ridiculous "penalties". Only scum try to extort money from people and trick those oblivious to the truth on these forums.

Get a real job and earn your own bread.

pin1onu

The OP is spouting utter drivel.

Under contract law the remedy for a breach of contract is damages. Damages must put the damaged party in the position they were in had the breach not occurred. Any amount above that is a penalty.

His adding on of charges would be tossed out by any court. I suspect that his cases were victories by default rather than in the face of a competently argued defense.

Private Parking Companies usually fall foul of may thing. These may include any of the below:

1. Establishing Privitiy of Contract
2. Penalty Charges in Contracts (dunlop)
3. The Unfair terms in consumer contracts act 1977
4. Consumer Protection Regulations 2008
5. Having sufficient rights to the land to be able to offer and "enforce" parking
6. OFT guidelines on Debt Collection

Coblcris

The Companies (Trading Disclosures) Regulations 2008
Fraud Act 2006 in many cases.

re Consumer Protection Regulations 2008, I it seems that every Private Parking Company breaches them, often the criminal offenses defined therein.