parking ticket from excel parking services limited

give_them_FA

I don't know what you are technical at, but see if you can get your head around this. The other half of the Excel empire (VCS) have recently been told by two courts (one a Superior Court of Record) that they cannot sue anyone. And that applies with equal force to Excel and just about every other parking company.

Even had that not happened, if you do not offer any sort of reply to the paperwork, then Excel will be short of a vital piece of information- the identity of the driver- without which they cannot do anything anyway.

As you say, the penalty they are trying to impose is totally disproportionate to what is actually owed, and even if the above two reasons did not apply would result in any case being kicked out of court.

So- bottom line- they won't do anything because they can't, and will just try to frighten you into paying with threats they know full well they cannot carry out.

Now that you know that too, the tactics are simple; totally ignore them and any deadbeat friends they call upon to send you asinine letters; and after they decide they've wasted enough time flogging a dead horse they will disappear for ever.

Hope that wasn't too technical, lol!

Coupon-mad

Technical wrote: »

I got a parking Charge Notice from Excel ...

... I'm wondering whether to pay the £40 because I don't want to go to court and end up in more serious bother.

Do not even think about paying them 4p let alone £40!

Seconding what Give them FA already said. Excel wouldn't dare go near a Court again in a hurry and would LOSE if they did; their rich owner Simon Renshaw-Smith is not popular with judges it seems after putting his foot in it! :rotfl:

Technical

Thanks alot, well one thing is car park design believe it or not lol. I just couldn't understand how they couldn't sue someone, I mean what stops people from just purposely not paying and coming up with an excuse?
I guess I'm just paranoid I'm in the wrong, I did know about the charge (I have been using the car park for along time) and I was aware I didn't put the full money in but I just feel it's unfair to pay £40+ for a 10p mistake.

I'm going to ignore it just on principle, they have had lots of my money already (including some which didn't count) and it's disgusted they did this.

give_them_FA

The reason they cannot sue anyone, in a nutshell, is because they are car park managers, not car park owners. They are merely the agent of the owner and have no right to form contracts with drivers because the car park does not belong to them, nor are they tenants of it.

This was held in a recent court case. It puts the skids under them completely. They can ask for the money (though even that borders on dishonesty) but certainly cannot enforce the request with any form of legal action.

Even were it not for that, the only person they could have any claim against would be the driver of the car. They can get details of the keeper from DVLA; but have no way of knowing who was driving as the keeper doesn't have to reply to them at all, let alone tell them.

Stephen_Leak

Technical wrote: »

Thanks alot, well one thing is car park design believe it or not lol. I just couldn't understand how they couldn't sue someone, I mean what stops people from just purposely not paying and coming up with an excuse?
I guess I'm just paranoid I'm in the wrong, I did know about the charge (I have been using the car park for along time) and I was aware I didn't put the full money in but I just feel it's unfair to pay £40+ for a 10p mistake.

I'm going to ignore it just on principle, they have had lots of my money already (including some which didn't count) and it's disgusted they did this.

We don’t condone not paying or overstaying in a pay car park. Even 10p.

However, back in the real world, all the car park owner (CPO) can claim from a driver in damages for any breach of contract is what they’ve lost as a result. 10p.

If they wrote a couple of letters (one asking nicely for the 10p, one asking again and threatening court) and you still didn't pay, they could quite legally add each postage cost to the 10p. They would also have every right to take you to court. They could then also quite legally add the "small claims" court costs of £25 to the postage and the 10p.

OK, this scenario stops being cost effective for the CPO before the first letter. Most real scenarios probably wouldn't get much further.

But doing this wouldn't ... how can I put this kindly ... buy you a yacht.

Demanding more has been judged to be unreasonable and therefore an unfair contract penalty under the terms of The Unfair Contract Terms Act 1997, which is not legally enforceable. See Dunlop Pneumatic Tyre Co. Ltd. vs. New Garage & Motor Co. Ltd., House of Lords, 1914 and countless cases since.

Only councils, the police, train operators and Transport for London can impose legally enforceable fines or penalties. A private parking company (PPC) or an individual can't. Even PPCs call their tickets “Parking Charge Notices”, not “Penalty Charge Notices”. In law, they’re called “speculative invoices”.

So, they can't actually do anything, for the same reason that a Nigerian e-mail scammer couldn't sue anyone who didn’t pay them.

Unfortunately, they will threaten you with every kind of financial and legal unpleasantness imaginable, to intimidate you into paying.

Technical

Well knowing who was driving may not be too difficult when they have CCTV and you are a regular lol

Well if you think about it they are trying to claim £60+ so it might still be worth it to them if they could be bothered lol

That makes sense, I just don't want them to take the pee with me, I'm always honest and have never got involved with something like this before, hence the paranoia (I can imagine alot of other people are the same, thats what they rely on).

Presumably because the money isn't a debt EVEN if you were the first person to be beat in court it wouldn't affect you other than financially (eg. credit ratings etc.)?

give_them_FA

I understand your trepidation, Tech, I was a little uncertain when I decided my first ticket was grossly unfair and I wasn't going to pay... now, over 80 of them later, and never having paid a penny to any of them, I don't give it a second thought. Unless it is their car park (which it isn't going to be) they won't have access to the CCTV; and they are REALLY not going to defy any courts' rulings and try and take it further.

Over half a million drivers ignore this nonsense each year. Join them. You will be glad you did.

And how have you done anything "wrong"? You tried to pay but THEIR machine wouldn't let you. Don't have a conscience over a few pence. This company are scammers who have no conscience at all about the fact that a high proportion of the people they con are disabled and elderly and who also did nothing wrong. Read around on the forum!

benham3160

Technical wrote: »

Well knowing who was driving may not be too difficult when they have CCTV and you are a regular lol

Well if you think about it they are trying to claim £60+ so it might still be worth it to them if they could be bothered lol

That makes sense, I just don't want them to take the pee with me, I'm always honest and have never got involved with something like this before, hence the paranoia (I can imagine alot of other people are the same, thats what they rely on).

Presumably because the money isn't a debt EVEN if you were the first person to be beat in court it wouldn't affect you other than financially (eg. credit ratings etc.)?

Essentially you'd have to loose in court, be ordered to pay, refuse to pay, then wait for a CCJ, then you have 28 days to pay it off and make it void anyway.

I wouldn't fret though......

Stephen_Leak

Well, demanding £60 when all they're owed is 10p does make it "worth a punt". Enough people still fall for the con' trick and pay up to make it profitable. Again, like the Nigerian e-mail scammer.

CCTV pictures don't identify the driver. They don't know you from Adam.

I would never understimate the courage it takes to stand up to people like these.

They are good at doing the evil that they do. It's almost blackmail. What they do meets two out of the three criteria for this (demanding money that they have no right to, making threats that they couldn't or shouldn't carry out). It's the third one, intent, mens rea or "guilty mind" that would be the tricky one to prove.

esmerobbo

10p under payment you could not make it up could you. I bet the machines don't give change if you over pay?