Received a demand from a PPC and they know I was the driver ('cos I told them...)

give_them_FA

Yes. I will.

I am that confident Parking Eye will not want to lose another £4,400 on a futile court case in which their claim for an amount in excess of the actual parking charge was thrown out by the Judge.

That is the ONLY case they have ever taken to Court. Never had one before and certainly never since.

Squirestan, in case it is not obvious, the poster using the name lawabidingcitizen actually runs a parking company himself and is therefore not here to give anyone helpful advice.

Take no notice of him, please.

You will see he has made nearly 50 posts and no-one has ever thanked him at all, so no-one has found anything he posts helpful. Just follow the majority. What do we do with parking companies, ignore anything they say.

malkyh

give_them_FA wrote: »

Yes. I will.

I'll second this.

Stephen_Leak

I'm sure and it's no problem for me.

For reasons best known to themselves, some PPCs have taken people to court. Here are the latest ones I know of ...

UK Combined Parking Solutions vs. Murphy, Burnley, 2012, 1QZ30035. The judge told the PPC that their demands were unreasonable, were therefore an unlawful contractual penalty and found in favour of the driver.

Parking Eye vs. Smith, Manchester, 2011, 1XJ81016. The judge told the PPC that their demands were unreasonable, were therefore an unlawful contractual penalty and found in favour of the driver. As they were unpaid, he awarded the PPC the parking charges of £15.00, not the £260.00 penalty. He also awarded them costs of just £95.00, not their claimed £4,457.20.

Some PPCs have won court cases, but under exceptional circumstances. When their letters are returned undelivered, they know that they can take the person to court, safe in the knowledge that the court’s letters will probably also be returned and the person won’t be in court to defend themselves. They then win by default. They then claim these as victories.

malkyh

Your post count seems to be steadily reducing my friend. I wonder why that may be?

give_them_FA

Squirestan: Here, read about the Parking Eye court humiliation. Long thread but the early posts tell the story.

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/3648411

Now, the one lesson we learned from that court case was that where it involves a payment, it may be better to offer up any shortfall immediately.

So, while I am completely confident that P.E. won't want a repeat performance, you could offer the difference between what you paid, and what you SHOULD have paid, and in that way you will totally cover yourself.

As I have said Mr. L.A.C. isn't actually connected with reality. 500,000 non-payers can't be wrong!

give_them_FA

malkyh wrote: »

Your post count seems to be steadily reducing my friend. I wonder why that may be?

It does indeed. He's still had no thanks though! I am surprised he hasn't opened up a second identity so he can thank himself!

malkyh

It's also interesting that I get a PM from admin kind of making out I was using the report/spam function wrong for reporting his nonsense, but he still appears to be filling the threads with his rubbish.

ManxRed

lawabidingcitizen1 wrote: »

If I were them...

:whistle:

...........

give_them_FA

lawabidingcitizen1 wrote: »

If I were them I would target this individual for court case just to see if you will make good on your promise.

Fortunately for them, they aren't as foolish as you are. The previously referred to case, Parking Eye brought because they were stung by forum comments and thought that making an example of someone was a good idea. Unfortunately the only ones that got made an example of, were themselves; not to mention their massive financial loss. It's an experience they won't want to repeat. Despite your useful advice to them.

You might do better warning your colleagues rather than forum users. I know one who is about to catch a massive cold because he thought court was cool.

Stephen_Leak

I note that our "friend" has not made a matching offer to PE.