New Legislation: layman's terms

NotAMug_3

Hi all,

So could this have potentially serious consequences for those of us who have been ignoring the PCN's from APCOA and the like?

I have one from Roxburgh/Graham White for a supposed bus lane infringement at Luton Airport and having read many many threads on here my wife and I have decided to ignore it as it seems it is unenforceable.

Does this change in legislation (should it be passed) mean we should be worried and get legal advice?

Incidently, they got her first name and middle name the wrong way round and she was not the one driving - it was me. We stopped in the bus lane for 2 mins to drop her off because there was terrible traffic and the short term car park was temporarily closed.

The latest letter was the threat of litigation, with the updated para about anecdotal advice on the internet. We are braced for phone calls and the final warning letter.

I have read all the sticky info and numerous other posts but I still feel a little nervous.

Grateful for reassurance.

trisontana

The change in legislation won't alter anything. Don't forget that this will still be covered by civil law. If you sue anyone you can only claim for actual material loss suffered by the landowner. So these stupid and outrageous sums of money demanded by private parking companies would be considered as unfair penalties.

Jle756

Just to echo trisontana, don't worry. The new legislation in a nut-shell mostly concerns the liability of the registered-keeper, and it proposes to allow a PPC to sue the registered keeper as opposed the driver.
Besides how ludicrous that proposal is (ie. it undermines the basic tenet of contract law that only contracting parties are deemed party to a legally binding relationship and therefore party to its obligations) is still doesn't change the fact, as trisontana says, that their charges are penalties, and still ILLEGAL.

NotAMug_3

thanks both. feel reassured now and we'll stick to our ignore policy. hopefully no more letters after the final warning one!

Coupon-mad

NotAMug wrote: »

thanks both. feel reassured now and we'll stick to our ignore policy. hopefully no more letters after the final warning one!

A change in legislation, if this ridiculous schedule4 isn't kicked out along the way, wouldn't be retrospective anyway. So it wouldn't affect any previous fake PCNs even though I bet the scammer PPCs will devise a letter pretending it did.

HO87

Don't worry. As C_M has said, even if Schedule 4 makes it to the statute book none of its changes will be retrospective. This is an established legal convention and the chances of it being overturned for the benefit of PPC's is slightly less than that of a snowball's in hell.

If you want to improve the chances of it not making it into law write to your MP. Make sure that he/she is aware of the fact that the business model of the average PPC is based on making its money out of charging people for committing some arbitrary wrong that they are the sole judge of. What's more, so convinced of the legal soundness of their own position PPC's dress up their claims for "damages" to look like parking tickets used by councils and the police - and mirror their language.

Your MP's details and the means of sending him/her an email can be found here