Are PPC's suppressing threads when they lose in court?

timwilson

TrickyWicky wrote: »

For a start perky you probably don't offer first class parking with pretty hostessses to drool over do you? I think its common knowledge that when you pay for first class you pay for other 'perks' (lol what a pun eh?!?!?!)

Does your parking offer more comfortable seating?

Does your parking offer more leg room?

The price you charge is not a 'price'. Your 'customers' can't pick or choose between suppliers, they can't claim a refund or exchange and you decide who to pursue and who not to pursue.

While I've defended the use of your daughter in this thread perky, what you've just said above is rubbish.

I can assure you that the 'perks' are not 12x price difference.

But back to the topic - In legal terms there is no difference to an advertised price / the acceptance of the offer by parking etc.....

Of course they can pick and choose a supplier, they can park next door in the NCP .. They are not forced to stop there they make a choice to stay and accept the charge or move on.

Of course our price is a price, the same as parking at an airport in the short stay car park on the day at heathrow can cost approx £145 if you just drive up whereas driving upto the long stay over the road will cost £30.

The price of the short stay is advertised.

If you pre-pay the short stay then you could park for £35 for the same 24hr period .. so the fact it costs £145 on the day is that a penalty for not pre booking ??

As surely their 'losses' if you want to argue that are say £35 as thats the pre pay cost for the same space so how can they justify £145.

The bottom line is they dont have to, thats the price and its clearly advertised and as per Export Credits Guarantee Department v Universal Oil Products Co. and Others - House of Lords, 24 March 1983 [1983] 1 W.L.R. 399 it was clearly stated "But it is not and never has been for the courts to relieve a party from the consequences of what may in the event prove to be an onerous or possibly even a commercially imprudent bargain. "

esmerobbo

esmerobbo wrote: »

Actually I am going to agree with Perky if that sign is on the car park were it would be assumed that anyone parking there would be unable "not to see it", I think a Judge would believe the fee should be paid. The judge might think its a rip off but if you have been told the cost of parking is £85 and you park then you accept the charge. Similar to clamping if everything is in order and you are warned you will be clamped and you are then its tough tittie!

Its a lot different then the usual penalties for overstaying or the like most PPC's issue.

When I had my pubs I charged more then the pub down the road, a business can charge what they like as long as it's advertised and open. I for one would not park in a car park if I saw a sign like that!

Ducks and awaits the flak!:p

Quoting myself but I forgot to add even with your win, its a shallow victory how much profit is in your judgement. Plus you haven't got it yet could be another one of the thousands of unpaid CCJ's. A judgement don't mean your going to get it!

The_Slithy_Tove

Hands up those who think this thread has become (always was?) mind-numbingly tedious?
:wave::wave::wave::wave::wave::wave::wave::wave:

esmerobbo

:wave::wave::wave:

The_Slithy_Tove wrote: »

Hands up those who think this thread has become (always was?) mind-numbingly tedious?
:wave::wave::wave::wave::wave::wave::wave::wave:

I don't think it will be around much longer.

TrickyWicky

I wouldn't say tedious, one thing I have noticed is that if you're at least diplomatic towards Mr Perkins, he is diplomatic back. It's those that go on a personal attack against him that get similar treatment back and that is whats derailing the thread. That said, this is a CONSUMER forum not a BPA/Parking/Business/Scammers forum so it's only natural that if a PPC ventures onto a consumer board that the response will be hostile.

While I don't agree with many of his industries tactics, it is at least interesting to get some insight into one of the smaller PPCs.

ballist1x

reading this thread as a newbie is very strange.

Why would the other thread get deleted? Surely a good site puts on both sucess and not so sucessful stories so that people can make a valid opnion on these things?

TrickyWicky

Because the op in the thread claimed to be getting taken to court, then claimed to win and then changed the thread to say the PPC won and I suspect a flame war then followed.

trisontana

ballist1x wrote: »

reading this thread as a newbie is very strange.

Why would the other thread get deleted? Surely a good site puts on both sucess and not so sucessful stories so that people can make a valid opnion on these things?

It was because of the nature of the original and subsequent posting by the OP. First he said he was a motorist and had won his case. Then he admitted it was a pack of lies, he owned the parking company and that the PPC had won the case.

TrickyWicky

And then timwilson turned up..

funkycoldribena

I couldnt give a toss what he writes on here,he'll never see a penny out of me full stop.Chill everyone.