Update on the college excel case!

cona674

Coupon-mad wrote: »

LOL...:cool:

What's wrong? I meant even if I'm a worrier, I'm just gonna have to get on with it

give_them_FA

Cona:

Let's get to basics. You parked somewhere you were actually entitled to park because you had the necessary permissions. Therefore you did nothing wrong or objectionable. It appears there may have been an issue in that, inadvertently, the certificate which confirmed those permissions slipped off the dash. However you still had the permission.

The parking company could argue that as they did not see the confirmation, they were entitled to treat you as an unauthorised parker and issue a charge. We don't have to take issue with whether or not the charge is fair, legal, or enforceable, or dispute the correctness or otherwise of their initial action, because what happens next is this.

By way of appeal, you demonstrate to the landowner's agent (the PPC) that in fact you were entitled to park where you did.

It is from there on that the parking company break the law. They should, upon being shown proof that your parking was regular, have dropped the matter forthwith. Instead, they have continued to pursue you for monies which now, they are undoubtedly not entitled to; even leaving aside the issue of whether they were ever entitled to any monies.

This not only infringes the criminal law, but of course makes them liable to pay you damages under the Protection from Harassment Act. You have given them the necessary warning. They appear to have chosen to ignore it, if I read your latest post correctly about an increased sum being demanded.

Am I right so far?

cona674

give_them_FA wrote: »

Cona:

Let's get to basics. You parked somewhere you were actually entitled to park because you had the necessary permissions. Therefore you did nothing wrong or objectionable. It appears there may have been an issue in that, inadvertently, the certificate which confirmed those permissions slipped off the dash. However you still had the permission.

The parking company could argue that as they did not see the confirmation, they were entitled to treat you as an unauthorised parker and issue a charge. We don't have to take issue with whether or not the charge is fair, legal, or enforceable, or dispute the correctness or otherwise of their initial action, because what happens next is this.

By way of appeal, you demonstrate to the landowner's agent (the PPC) that in fact you were entitled to park where you did.

It is from there on that the parking company break the law. They should, upon being shown proof that your parking was regular, have dropped the matter forthwith. Instead, they have continued to pursue you for monies which now, they are undoubtedly not entitled to; even leaving aside the issue of whether they were ever entitled to any monies.

This not only infringes the criminal law, but of course makes them liable to pay you damages under the Protection from Harassment Act. You have given them the necessary warning. They appear to have chosen to ignore it, if I read your latest post correctly about an increased sum being demanded.

Am I right so far?

Thanks for the great response! The reason I was seeking further advice was because I had people giving me great advice to ignore the company but I wasn't sure about why they had no case, but you have just explained so thank you... Honestly, I am no longer worried in the slightest! :rotfl::T but the letter I received after my appeal (before I found the forum) said that if I did not pay the £30 before march 21st I would need to pay them £100... Then I sent away the letter, and I'm yet to receive anything back! My post was referring to the fact that the £30 deadline had passed! (meaning I 'owed' them £100) I will post when and if I receive any further contact from excel

give_them_FA

Thank you Cona, fully understood, we now have to see what response you get and deal with it from there. I see you are joining in on other discussions, nice one!