Parking Eye lose

trisontana

arcon5 wrote: »

I wonder if the 'ignore the letters, they will not go to court' type responses will now think twice..

Why should they? Nothing has changed.

Kite2010

arcon5 wrote: »

I wonder if the 'ignore the letters, they will not go to court' type responses will now think twice..

Before thinking that the one case they actually took somebody to court and followed though (actually showed up) they lost.

Ignoring is the best option unless in the very very unlikely event of receiving genuine court papers from the courts.

esmerobbo

arcon5 wrote: »

I wonder if the 'ignore the letters, they will not go to court' type responses will now think twice..

Every case that goes near a court has had a little something extra, it's either an unpaid P&D or a disabled bay, or the driver has written something that could be used against them.

Try and find a case were someone has been taken to court for overstaying in a free supermarket car park.

AlexisV

PPC's won't take people to court if they've had a ticket on Sainsbury's/Tesco etc. - too much bad publicity for them.

About 30 people are taken to court each year out of hundreds of thousands of speculative invoices issued.

Julia12_2

I've just read something else about CCJs and affects on credit rating saying this:
'Your credit rating will already be affected by the fact you have not paid the contractual payments, which has resulted in you receiving a CCJ. Your CCJ won't show on your credit file if you pay it in full within 30 days.'

Whilst confirming that the CCJ won't show on your file if you pay within 30 days, this is also saying that your credit rating will be affected by the very fact that the company has applied to the court to recover the amount they consider you owe them.

Would someone in the know please clarify if this is the case.

Also, if they do go as far as to take you to court, which from the above means you receive a CCJ, even if you pay within 30 days and the CCJ doesn't go on record, would you in eg, any future credit application have to answer 'yes', if asked if you have ever had a judgement taken against you by a creditor?

esmerobbo

Julia12 wrote: »

I've just read something else about CCJs and affects on credit rating saying this:
'Your credit rating will already be affected by the fact you have not paid the contractual payments, which has resulted in you receiving a CCJ. Your CCJ won't show on your credit file if you pay it in full within 30 days.'

Whilst confirming that the CCJ won't show on your file if you pay within 30 days, this is also saying that your credit rating will be affected by the very fact that the company has applied to the court to recover the amount they consider you owe them.

Would someone in the know please clarify if this is the case.

Also, if they do go as far as to take you to court, which from the above means you receive a CCJ, even if you pay within 30 days and the CCJ doesn't go on record, would you in eg, any future credit application have to answer 'yes', if asked if you have ever had a judgement taken against you by a creditor?

You have it all wrong the section you are quoting is if you have a contractual agreement with someone, like a credit agreement, overdraft facility, Mortgage, gym or phone contract. Something you have actually signed up for and have a written agreement or contract.
If I lent you £50 and you never paid me I can sue you but I cant make an entry on your CRF that you owe me £50.
A PPC chasing a charge is and never has been a creditor as they have never lent you anything.
If I or a PPC took you to court and won and you had to pay me £50 then if you did within 28 days you would not have a judgement against you. Nor would you have any entry on your CRF!

AlexisV

Also bear in mind that a PPC rarely has any idea who potentially hold a contractual arrangement with because their whole business is based on mere signage.

All they can do is buy the keeper's address, but they have no idea if they were driving or not.

Julia12_2

Thanks very much for the clarification esmerobbo. That's very reassuring. I hadn't appreciated the difference, as they are indeed saying you are entering into a contract with them. So it's the fact it isn't in writing that makes the difference?

Re my last query- so that means as a PPC isn't a creditor- if that worse case scenario did happen and they took you to court, you could with a clear conscience answer 'no' in any future credit application if they asked if you'd ever had a judgement of any sort taken against you by a creditor?

Many thanks again. Much appreciated.

vax2002

With respect of paying the ACTUAL parking charge first due:
By all means, if they ask for what they are owed pay it.
Example, the car park is £2 per hour and you pay for an hour and stay 2 then if they ask you for £2, send them it in stamps with no admittance of any liability.
But they never do ask for what you owe, they ask for a penalty charge say £150, which they have no legal right to as you only owe them £2.
The judge in the smithy case made an enormous error in awarding what they never claimed, IMO : the appeal would last all the best of 30 seconds, you can not sue for what you have never asked for!
They were not entitled to the penalty : this judgement was correct
However the judge awarded them what they never claimed, very incorrect indeed.

AlexisV

Julia12 wrote: »

Re my last query- so that means as a PPC isn't a creditor- if that worse case scenario did happen and they took you to court, you could with a clear conscience answer 'no' in any future credit application if they asked if you'd ever had a judgement of any sort taken against you by a creditor?

Many thanks again. Much appreciated.

A CCJ is a public record, so telling the truth doesn't really come into it. Even if you were taken to court *and* you lost *and* you didn't appeal *and* you paid 28 days later, you would have a clear credit record.

Even if you paid 29 days later your file would be marked as 'CCJ - satisfied' and it would be unlikely to affect your ability to obtain credit.

People only really run into difficulties when they obtain large judgements and just can't pay them. In the grand scheme of things, a £150 judgement is very minor and few people would not settle it.