We'd like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum... Read More »
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).
The entire Private Parking Ticket business model has just fallen apart.
LincolnshireYokel
Posts: 764 Forumite
Simon Renshaw Smith gets stuffed twice in court, loses two landmark cases that undermine the whol PPC business model.
Thousands of people facing parking fines may be let off after a judge ruled that one firm did not have the power to pursue a motorist for an unpaid penalty. Ronald Ibbotson was taken to court by Vehicle Control Services (VCS) after he left his car at a Wickes DIY store for 35 minutes.
On his return, he found a ticket on his windscreen demanding £80, apparently because he had left the car park to go shopping elsewhere during the two-hour free parking period allowed. When Mr Ibbotson refused to pay up, he was taken to court by VCS and ordered to pay £42.50 in costs. But he appealed and last week a judge at Sc*nthorpe County Court dismissed the company’s claim and instructed VCS to give him the money back.
Mr Ibbotson had learned that VCS did not have the legal go-ahead from the landowner of the Wickes store site to pursue parking charges. VCS is one of Britain’s biggest parking control companies. It operates on more than 600 sites at shopping centres, hospitals and universities all over Britain. The firm is owned by Simon Renshaw-Smith, who also runs a vehicle immobilisation operation called Mr Clampit.
The judge ordered Mr Renshaw-Smith to come to court next month to explain why he had pursued Mr Ibbotson when he had ‘no lawful contractual assignment of authority to do so’.
Mr Renshaw-Smith, 45, lives in a £900,000 detached house in the Derbyshire village of Barlow, five miles from the Sheffield headquarters of VCS. Last year he paid himself a salary of £766,353 according to documents lodged at Companies House – and his main company, Excel Parking Services, had a turnover of £10.3 million and an operating profit of nearly £500,000.
The case is embarrassing for the industry-funded British Parking Association (BPA), of which VCS is a member, because Mr Renshaw-Smith holds a senior position in the organisation. A BPA spokesman said: ‘Our code of practice requires members to obtain authority from landowners to pursue parking charges from motorists on their behalf. ‘We audit operators’ contracts every year to ensure that they have that authority in place. In rare cases where contracts do not have this clause, they are found to be in breach of our code and, where appropriate, sanctions are applied.’
A VCS spokesman said: ‘We are taking legal advice in respect of the judgment and a possible appeal.’ Mr Renshaw-Smith was unavailable for comment.
And just to rub salt into the wound, in a separate tax case..........
VCS v HMRC in the Upper Tax Trubunal
In simple terms VCS's appeal was dismissed but the tribunal made decisions on a number of points wholly relevant to the PPC case. The UTT is a superior court of record and its decisions carry the weight of a High Court finding.
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.
Looks like the entire Private Parking Business Model has fallen apart, irrespective of how they try and change the law in the autumn. Most private landowners do not want to get there hands dirty when it comes to private parking tickets, and especially companies like Sainsburys. If you tackle them about the activities of the PPC's on there land, they attempt to wash there hands of the whole thing and say something like "Oh its nothing to do with us". The fact is its ALWAYS been to do with them, since they are vicariously liable for the actions of there agents, and thats why you sue them and the PPC to get your money back in court, but now they will have to give written authorisation to the PPC to pursue tickets (ie unsolicited invoices), which many will baulk at doing.
Thousands of people facing parking fines may be let off after a judge ruled that one firm did not have the power to pursue a motorist for an unpaid penalty. Ronald Ibbotson was taken to court by Vehicle Control Services (VCS) after he left his car at a Wickes DIY store for 35 minutes.
On his return, he found a ticket on his windscreen demanding £80, apparently because he had left the car park to go shopping elsewhere during the two-hour free parking period allowed. When Mr Ibbotson refused to pay up, he was taken to court by VCS and ordered to pay £42.50 in costs. But he appealed and last week a judge at Sc*nthorpe County Court dismissed the company’s claim and instructed VCS to give him the money back.
Mr Ibbotson had learned that VCS did not have the legal go-ahead from the landowner of the Wickes store site to pursue parking charges. VCS is one of Britain’s biggest parking control companies. It operates on more than 600 sites at shopping centres, hospitals and universities all over Britain. The firm is owned by Simon Renshaw-Smith, who also runs a vehicle immobilisation operation called Mr Clampit.
The judge ordered Mr Renshaw-Smith to come to court next month to explain why he had pursued Mr Ibbotson when he had ‘no lawful contractual assignment of authority to do so’.
Mr Renshaw-Smith, 45, lives in a £900,000 detached house in the Derbyshire village of Barlow, five miles from the Sheffield headquarters of VCS. Last year he paid himself a salary of £766,353 according to documents lodged at Companies House – and his main company, Excel Parking Services, had a turnover of £10.3 million and an operating profit of nearly £500,000.
The case is embarrassing for the industry-funded British Parking Association (BPA), of which VCS is a member, because Mr Renshaw-Smith holds a senior position in the organisation. A BPA spokesman said: ‘Our code of practice requires members to obtain authority from landowners to pursue parking charges from motorists on their behalf. ‘We audit operators’ contracts every year to ensure that they have that authority in place. In rare cases where contracts do not have this clause, they are found to be in breach of our code and, where appropriate, sanctions are applied.’
A VCS spokesman said: ‘We are taking legal advice in respect of the judgment and a possible appeal.’ Mr Renshaw-Smith was unavailable for comment.
And just to rub salt into the wound, in a separate tax case..........
VCS v HMRC in the Upper Tax Trubunal
In simple terms VCS's appeal was dismissed but the tribunal made decisions on a number of points wholly relevant to the PPC case. The UTT is a superior court of record and its decisions carry the weight of a High Court finding.
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.
Looks like the entire Private Parking Business Model has fallen apart, irrespective of how they try and change the law in the autumn. Most private landowners do not want to get there hands dirty when it comes to private parking tickets, and especially companies like Sainsburys. If you tackle them about the activities of the PPC's on there land, they attempt to wash there hands of the whole thing and say something like "Oh its nothing to do with us". The fact is its ALWAYS been to do with them, since they are vicariously liable for the actions of there agents, and thats why you sue them and the PPC to get your money back in court, but now they will have to give written authorisation to the PPC to pursue tickets (ie unsolicited invoices), which many will baulk at doing.
**** I hereby relieve MSE of all legal responsibility for my post and assume personal responsible for all posts. If any Parking Pirates have a problem with my post then contact me for my solicitors address.*****
0
Comments
-
Yes it's been widely posted on the forum already, but no harm in having it posted multiple times as it will do wonders in google searches
Excel Parking, MET Parking, Combined Parking Solutions, VP Parking Solutions, ANPR PC Ltd, & Roxburghe Debt Collectors. What do they all have in common?
They are all or have been suspended from accessing the DVLA database for gross misconduct!
Do you really need to ask what kind of people run parking companies?0 -
Yes it's been widely posted on the forum already, but no harm in having it posted multiple times as it will do wonders in google searches
Oh sorry. Did you cover the Tax case as well. VCS will now have to pay Back VAT on all there operations since 04/2005. Watch out for a "Yatch For Sale" sign outside Renshaw Smiths house. :beer:**** I hereby relieve MSE of all legal responsibility for my post and assume personal responsible for all posts. If any Parking Pirates have a problem with my post then contact me for my solicitors address.*****0 -
They won't appeal as they wouldn't want a persuasive judgement going against the whole Industry....Hi, we’ve had to remove your signature. If you’re not sure why please read the forum rules or email the forum team if you’re still unsure - MSE ForumTeam0
-
Yeah we knew that as well, apparantely they have already paid it pending the outcome of the court case, but it's a right spanner in the works for all the scammersLincolnshireYokel wrote: »Oh sorry. Did you cover the Tax case as well. VCS will now have to pay Back VAT on all there operations since 04/2005. Watch out for a "Yatch For Sale" sign outside Renshaw Smiths house. :beer:
Excel Parking, MET Parking, Combined Parking Solutions, VP Parking Solutions, ANPR PC Ltd, & Roxburghe Debt Collectors. What do they all have in common?
They are all or have been suspended from accessing the DVLA database for gross misconduct!
Do you really need to ask what kind of people run parking companies?0 -
YEA! sell his pad and split the dosh between the puplic he has ripped offLincolnshireYokel wrote: »Oh sorry. Did you cover the Tax case as well. VCS will now have to pay Back VAT on all there operations since 04/2005. Watch out for a "Yatch For Sale" sign outside Renshaw Smiths house. :beer:
BYE BY-E simon renshawe conman! maybe soon you could apply for a job as a council parking warden they will give you a nice official uniform and hat:D :rotfl: PPCs say its carpark management, BPA say its raising standards..... we all know its just about raking in the revenue. :eek:0 -
LincolnshireYokel wrote: »Oh sorry. Did you cover the Tax case as well. VCS will now have to pay Back VAT on all there operations since 04/2005. Watch out for a "Yatch For Sale" sign outside Renshaw Smiths house. :beer:
Yes indeed, all of it covered, you will have to visit more often...
With reports in National newspapers now, they won't be operating under the radar any more. That Daily Mail article will end up costing them a LOAD of money now MILLIONS of people realise they don't have to pay... never mind "thousands".
the companies that were too bright to do Court must be cursing the stupidity of those who stirred up this hornet's nest with the greed of trying to get a little tiny bit more by suing someone...0 -
give_them_FA wrote: »Yes indeed, all of it covered, you will have to visit more often...
With reports in National newspapers now, they won't be operating under the radar any more. That Daily Mail article will end up costing them a LOAD of money now MILLIONS of people realise they don't have to pay... never mind "thousands".
the companies that were too bright to do Court must be cursing the stupidity of those who stirred up this hornet's nest with the greed of trying to get a little tiny bit more by suing someone...
But it's great though, we knew it was a matter of time before one of them did something like this, their greed is their downfall, the whole industry has just been given a fatal blow - we hope Excel Parking, MET Parking, Combined Parking Solutions, VP Parking Solutions, ANPR PC Ltd, & Roxburghe Debt Collectors. What do they all have in common?
They are all or have been suspended from accessing the DVLA database for gross misconduct!
Do you really need to ask what kind of people run parking companies?0 -
That Renshaw-Smith lives about two miles from me as the crow flies.
His gravy train just derailed.0 -
That Renshaw-Smith lives about two miles from me as the crow flies.
His gravy train just derailed.
Hopefully it flies right over his house and craps on his car.......many times..............**** I hereby relieve MSE of all legal responsibility for my post and assume personal responsible for all posts. If any Parking Pirates have a problem with my post then contact me for my solicitors address.*****0 -
Out of curiosity, does anyone know why the driver initially lost the case in the first place? I know he was only ordered to pay £42.50, but wondered why he lost at all.0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 349.8K Banking & Borrowing
- 252.6K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 453K Spending & Discounts
- 242.7K Work, Benefits & Business
- 619.5K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 176.3K Life & Family
- 255.6K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.1K Discuss & Feedback
- 15.1K Coronavirus Support Boards