Parking Eye Parking Charge Notice

Stephen_Leak

trisontana wrote: »

Hot off the press - decision of the Upper Tax Tribunal in the case of VCS v HMRC:-

The appeal tribunal held:

1. VCS did not have any right to occupy land or to pursue any action in trespass (which is what VCS had claimed they were doing).
2. Such payments they received by way of "Parking Charge Notices" were not therefore a payment by way of damages and were not therefore exempt from VAT.
3. That on the basis of their standard agreement with landowners there could have been no contract formed between VCS and the motorist because its limited rights to access to the land did not extend to being able to offer the right to park.
4. The signs used by VCS cannot have effect because they have no right in law to make any offer to park in the first instance.
5. Any contract to park could only be formed between the landowner and the motorist
6. Any parking charges collected by VCS would therefore be, in effective, damages in breach of contract or trespass but because they were retained by VCS they constituted a standard-rated consideration and VAT was therefore payable against them.

This forum should now be the least of our "friend's" worries.

All of a sudden, maybe HMRC aren't that bad after all.

lawabidingcitizen1

Fair point Half_way. I assume that you agree with the rest of it then?

give_them_FA

Dynamite. If upheld that will put the skids under the whole operation. I too have queried under what right a PPC can sue for a trespass/contract on someone else's property. Now I have the answer just in time for a defence I am writing.

Forum users, please continue to ignore the Parking Company boss posting under the name of lawabidingcitizen. He is doing his best to mislead you. You could get taken to court by a PPC- but the odds against it happening are of the order of 10,000 - 1 against; after which the odds of their winning are of the order of 5 - 1 against.

And some of the "wins" are against stooge defendants as a put-up job.

Let's face it, he wouldn't be here if what he was saying were true. He would be too busy preparing Court cases.

Just parking company lies, please ignore.

notts_phil

Why dont you just do yourself a favour and unveil yourself

Its obvious you work for /own a PPC.

Or are you not man enough to do so?

notts_phil

give_them_FA wrote: »

Dynamite. If upheld that will put the skids under the whole operation. I too have queried under what right a PPC can sue for a trespass/contract on someone else's property. Now I have the answer just in time for a defence I am writing.

Forum users, please continue to ignore the Parking Company boss posting under the name of lawabidingcitizen. He is doing his best to mislead you. You could get taken to court by a PPC- but the odds against it happening are of the order of 10,000 - 1 against; after which the odds of their winning are of the order of 5 - 1 against.

And some of the "wins" are against stooge defendants as a put-up job.

Let's face it, he wouldn't be here if what he was saying were true. He would be too busy preparing Court cases.

Just parking company lies, please ignore.

So now this is from a Court of Record , you can quote it when compiling a defence cant you?, depending on what grounds a PPC is claiming against you in a small claims court

give_them_FA

Half_way wrote: »

Lawabidingcitizen, Re point 4, how can it be a fine if issued by a private company? im sure that you know that private companys can not issue fines, and can only sue for legitamate losses.

Half_way, please don't speak to him. He is trying to pretend that he isn't a parking company; just a concerned citizen who thinks we should all support our local parking company. Yeah, right!

give_them_FA

notts_phil wrote: »

So now this is from a Court of Record , you can quote it when compiling a defence cant you?, depending on what grounds a PPC is claiming against you in a small claims court

I will look at it more carefully, but what it appears to say is that there is no power vested in a parking company to make a charge to their own benefit, or to seek recovery through the Courts in their own name. The contract has to be between the car park owner and the driver; not between the car park manager and the driver.

It will doubtless be appealed but, if upheld, they will have very real problems; indeed, despite the "advice" given by Mr lawabidingcitizen, it will effectively prevent parking companies taking ANYONE to court.

Coupon-mad

give_them_FA wrote: »

I will look at it more carefully, but what it appears to say is that there is no power vested in a parking company to make a charge to their own benefit, or to seek recovery through the Courts in their own name. The contract has to be between the car park owner and the driver; not between the car park manager and the driver.

It will doubtless be appealed but, if upheld, they will have very real problems; indeed, despite the "advice" given by Mr lawabidingcitizen, it will effectively prevent parking companies taking ANYONE to court.

Looks that way to me as well. :T

Was the decision made by a circuit judge?

malkyh

lawabidingcitizen1 wrote: »

It is important that forum users know the facts.

1. Parking companies do take non-payers to court.
2. When the parking companies have been operating within the guidelines of the industry, they win their cases.
3. Defendants have been asked to pay, not just the fine, but also court costs on top, which can run into the thousands
4. People on this forum saying don't pay are fact not helping anyone as this puts those that take the advice at risk of having to pay far more than the original fine.
5. If you really want to help someone, tell them the truth and let them make up their own minds with the correct information.

You Sir, are a waffling idiot. Tens of thousands of people ignore these letters and guess what happens??????

That's correct. SWEET F A. NOTHING, ZERO, ZILCH, ZIPPO

If these companies were issuing 'fines' that they could actually take to court and win, then EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THEM would be chased and taken to court. But they are not. What does this tell you?

ripped_off_driver

Do not feed the troll. As he is clearly a halfwit there is nothing to be gained from engaging him anyway.

The VAT ruling is incredibly serious for PPCs. Naturally publicly spirited readers will wish to investigate the VAT status of PPCs and report any that are not paying their fair share of tax. Should you uncover such an evader the form is here:

https://online.hmrc.gov.uk/shortforms/form/TEH_IRF?dept-name=TEH&sub-dept-name=&location=39&origin=http://www.hmrc.gov.uk