We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
IMPORTANT: Please make sure your posts do not contain any personally identifiable information (both your own and that of others). When uploading images, please take care that you have redacted all personal information including number plates, reference numbers and QR codes (which may reveal vehicle information when scanned).
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
Out of a marked bay
Comments
-
jumbowiffy wrote: »the car is registered t my othe half ans she is worried (as am I) about receiving futher correspondence regaridng this parking fine.
Do you think i should write to the private car parking asking for proof etc?
No, no, no don't write to them, just ignore them, that's always the best plan. Finally, it's not a FINE, it's an unenforceable invoice.
Just treat their silly letters as you would any other junk mail.What part of "A whop bop-a-lu a whop bam boo" don't you understand?0 -
He is clearly a complete and utter w*nker with no clue about the law. He obviously thinks he only has to ask and it will be given.
Er, that only happens when you have sued a severely disabled person who is too ill to attend, Peter!
Read on Pepidoo he reacted by issuing the claim against the guys wife instead. Like, hearsay evidence isn't allowed? So what is he going to use as evidence?
Lets see how he manages when the claims for harassment start kicking off....0 -
give_them_FA wrote: »He is clearly a complete and utter w*nker with no clue about the law. He obviously thinks he only has to ask and it will be given.
Er, that only happens when you have sued a severely disabled person who is too ill to attend, Peter!
Read on Pepidoo he reacted by issuing the claim against the guys wife instead. Like, hearsay evidence isn't allowed? So what is he going to use as evidence?
Lets see how he manages when the claims for harassment start kicking off....PPCs say its carpark management, BPA say its raising standards..... we all know its just about raking in the revenue. :eek:0 -
By parking outside the marked bay did you cause the landowner to suffer any damages?
Most likely no, so the most the landowner can sue for you is zero.0 -
Hi Forum,
I just wanted to double check withall you helpful people.
We have received second letter demanding more money.
I assume just to ignore and do nothing.
Regards,
J0 -
Yes, keep ignoring. You legally owe them the actual losses they suffered as a result of your parking, which is zero.
However they will tell you ANYTHING to try and scare you into paying them a nice sum of money, which you don't legally owe. This includes threats of court action, CCJs, credit rating damage, and all sorts. Its all hot air. Continue to ignore them.Je Suis Cecil.0 -
Continue to ignore is one option, the other would bee to them to stop, otherwise it's harrasment,.From the Plain Language Commission:
"The BPA has surely become one of the most socially dangerous organisations in the UK"0 -
Probably good for your OH- who presumably is receiving the letters- to write and state that she requires them to cease and desist forthwith from sending her threatening and harassing correspondence. Since they know (or ought to know) that they have no claim at all against her. Either they will desist (job done) or they will carry on- in which case sue. It really is simple!0
-
By parking outside the marked bay did you cause the landowner to suffer any damages?
Most likely no, so the most the landowner can sue for you is zero.
In a pay & display car park, it could be argued that you prevented another car using the adjacent bay. But even then all you would owe is a second parking fee.
In a free car park, obviously no.
In both cases, the car park owner could say that you prevented another car parking, who would have shopped in the store. But that is speculative, so end of story.The acquisition of wealth is no longer the driving force in my life.0 -
Stephen_Leak wrote: »
In both cases, the car park owner could say that you prevented another car parking, who would have shopped in the store. But that is speculative, so end of story.
Exactly. There is no way of quantifying that loss. for a start the car-park would have to full, with no spare bays, and there is no way of assessing what that supposed lost customer would have spent. 40p on a chocolate bar, or £400 on a case of vintage champagne?What part of "A whop bop-a-lu a whop bam boo" don't you understand?0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply

Categories
- All Categories
- 352.1K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.5K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 454.2K Spending & Discounts
- 245.1K Work, Benefits & Business
- 600.7K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.5K Life & Family
- 258.9K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.2K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.6K Read-Only Boards