Town and City Parking yet again...

Sirdan

trisontana wrote: »

I don't think it's used the "length and breadth of the country". T&C Parking are the only ones who seem to use "penalty" on their notices, I haven't seen any other PPC use that word. A couple of years ago T&C Parking also used "penalty" on the paperwork they sent out to motorists, but that has now been changed to "parking".

T & C use it and have the contract with ASDA and we know that APCOA use it and they have contracts at major airports and at railway staions ...not wanting to get into a long drawn out argument here but I think that could easily be seen as falling within the broad description " the length and breadth of the country"

My ASDA has signs identically worded to that of the OP so I guess T&C use a generic sign wherever they operate on private land ..I can't prove it but I bet APCOA do too!

thetriggerhappypwner

Interesting...

NOTE: Contacting Trading Standards in Norfolk now and making a complaint about them.

They say "pay under protest" or let them take me to court.

Coupon-mad

thetriggerhappypwner wrote: »

Interesting...

NOTE: Contacting Trading Standards in Norfolk now and making a complaint about them.

They say "pay under protest" or let them take me to court.

Sorry but that TS Officer is an idiot, no doubt as ill-informed as the CAB are. :mad:

But then maybe that's 'NFN' (sorry, joke ...).

Think I would be complaining about that advice - do they normally make a habit of telling people to pay an extortionate demand sent to a person who may or may not have been party to an unenforceable and unfair contract? Utterly RIDICULOUS to advise you to pay under protest!

thetriggerhappypwner

So sue them anyway?

Coupon-mad

thetriggerhappypwner wrote: »

So sue them anyway?

If you are up for it, sue them for damages/distress using the Protection from Harassment Act. But make sure you name at least two parties to the claim - the other(s) should be the landowner and/or retailer - whoever let them loose on that site.

If you keep the claim under £5,000 I think it might be suitable for the Small Claims track which will only cost you a minimal Court fee (ask at your local Court and pick up a form). But I am not sure if claims for harassment can be made in Small Claims...I would recommend asking for help and advice on CAG or pepipoo. Tell them you know you can ignore but you want to fight back!

If you do take them to Court, please let us know how you get on as others may follow your lead.

thetriggerhappypwner

Just a side note: I am also thinking of filing a lawsuit against DVLA for breaching the Data Protection Act by handing my details out to the goons who intimidate and badger innocent members of the public for parking a vehicle that they own in a car park which does not charge.

HO87

Sirdan wrote: »

Probably ? or probably not as the terms "civil penalty" and "penalty charge" are used the length and breadth of the country and yet as far as I am aware not ONCE has any PPC been prosecuted for any offence(s) relating to the use of such terms !!!(happy to be proven wrong !)

So the qusetion remains if it is indeed illegal why is NO ONE prepared to do anything about it ????????????? :mad:

This essentially comes down to the difference between the terms "unlawful" and "illegal". The principle of a civil penalty has been outlawed as a result of the development of case law. However, it has not been specifically dealt with in statute that had it been so would have made it illegal.

thetriggerhappypwner wrote: »

Just a side note: I am also thinking of filing a lawsuit against DVLA for breaching the Data Protection Act by handing my details out to the goons who intimidate and badger innocent members of the public for parking a vehicle that they own in a car park which does not charge.

Sadly, your complaint/case will fall on deaf ears. The supplying of details is permitted by law and will, arguably, not breach the Data Protection Act by virtue of s.35.

Sirdan

HO87 wrote: »

This essentially comes down to the difference between the terms "unlawful" and "illegal". The principle of a civil penalty has been outlawed as a result of the development of case law. However, it has not been specifically dealt with in statute that had it been so would have made it illegal.


Sadly, your complaint/case will fall on deaf ears. The supplying of details is permitted by law and will, arguably, not breach the Data Protection Act by virtue of s.35.

Whilst the issue of a civil penalty may indeed be unlawful as oppososed to illegal,surely signs and letters implying that it is a statutory penalty and that the PPC has statutory authority is illegal in as much that it is deliberately misleading people in order to gain a pecuniary advantage i.e. secure a payment of an unenforceable penalty and that is FRAUD, and should be prosecuted as such !

Oopsadaisy

Sirdan wrote: »

..., and should be prosecuted as such !

Funny, funny, funny!!!

Yeah, I can really see that happening.

What's your next idea to uccupy our inexpensive police and court resources....prosecute those people who put up signs saying "Trespassers will be prosecuted"???

Sirdan

Oopsadaisy wrote: »

Funny, funny, funny!!!

Yeah, I can really see that happening.

What's your next idea to uccupy our inexpensive police and court resources....prosecute those people who put up signs saying "Trespassers will be prosecuted"???

Hardly comparable ..a sign is just a sign ..a sign followed up by ever increasingly threatening letters from DCAs and Solicitors is something else entirely ..particularly when those sending the letters know fine well they are full of lies and deceptions...

I know it wouldn't happen but that doesn't mean it shouldn't ...I actually think the Police have better things to do than tell off teenage boys for referring to a female Police Constable as "PC Nipples" behind her back but they found the time and resources for just that recently..!!:mad: