Update on the college excel case!

Stephen_Leak

cona674 wrote: »

Just wondering about the legal side of things, for all private parking companies I mean.... Can they only claim back what they lost out on through your parking? So in my case it would be nothing lol

As with all things legal, the answer is yes and no.

For example, I lend you £10 and you agree to pay it back by a certain date. You don't. I ring you to remind you. I could add the cost of the call to the debt. I can't rack the debt up to £100.

If you don't pay in a pay and display car park (which we don't condone, of course), you still owe the car park owner the money. The PPC could, quite legally, charge for the cost of sending you each letter. However, by being greedy and asking for more, they waive their right to the lower amount.

However, if you sue them for harrassment, paying just the parking fee as a gesture of goodwill and in "full and final settlement" ought to earn you Brownie points with the judge.

If you overstay in a free car park, the owner hasn't lost any money, so there is no debt for the PPC to add their costs to. A blackmailer can't charge you for the cost of blackmailing you.

Coupon-mad

cona674 wrote: »

Hello everyone who have since contributed to the thread lol, here is a link to my previous thread which outlines my full story incase your interested: https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/3842311 they already know I was the driver but I'm still assured that I'm right not to pay by the other members of the forum! Any further advice?

Can't give any advice to one who seems to me to already know too much.

You have told them you were the driver. !!!!!! why?

You say there were signs in the car park.

You keep banging on about the fact your permit couldn't be seen.

You post within minutes of ppeterson. On more than one occasion.

You are painting a picture for us of a set up case.

Smell...a...rat...:p

give_them_FA

Not in this case, I think, Coupon. Whilst we certainly have to be on the watchout for plants, Cona is knowledgeable since they have had a considerable exchange of messages with myself. :rotfl:

Coupon-mad

give_them_FA wrote: »

Not in this case, I think, Coupon. Whilst we certainly have to be on the watchout for plants, Cona is knowledgeable since they have had a considerable exchange of messages with myself. :rotfl:

I still smell a rat with these posts - reiterating all the facts that a PPC need to take a case to Small Claims, almost too easy.

Do you not at all?

give_them_FA

Not in this one. I have offered- and the OP has agreed- that any small claim that results I would defend for them. If a small claim WERE to result (unwinnable for the PPC on these facts) but the OP chose not to take me up and then came back and said they had lost, then I would agree with you, set-up. But from my contact I really don't think so, despite the signals on the open forum.

Stephen_Leak

Talk of the devil ...

It's playtime!

Stephen_Leak

You're not paranoid, if they really are out to get you.

Coupon-mad

ppeterson1750 wrote: »

WOW, talk about being paranoid .. Even when the almighty FA tells you its not a setup you still question it.
Or, are you thinking that FA might have been caught by the bait .. surely not

Yes, exactly, you know where I am coming from with this and you do seem to be on this thread a lot. Nowt better to do, clearly.

This possible plant poster seems far too obvious - after all you lot don't have much imagination when scamming people.

But we shall see won't we, if the OP ends up with a Small Claims case and suddenly throws it and loses. Quelle surprise.

ppc_guy

One things for sure its nothing to do with me ...

give_them_FA

ppeterson1750 wrote: »

:rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:

To coin a phrase:

Why are you still here?