"Paying under Protest"

King_Drax_I

I see that in the MSE Glovebox Guide and in the Private Parking Tickets guide, it mentions that you should write on the ticked 'Paid under Protest' so that you can contest it later.

But how does this work in practice? Surely all the vultures need to do is to tell you that they won't accept that and you have to fill in a new ticket without the offending words on it?

vax2002

That guide does the parking scammers far more good than the motorists.
It needs to be re written urgently.

notts_phil

King_Drax_I wrote: »

I see that in the MSE Glovebox Guide and in the Private Parking Tickets guide, it mentions that you should write on the ticked 'Paid under Protest' so that you can contest it later.

But how does this work in practice? Surely all the vultures need to do is to tell you that they won't accept that and you have to fill in a new ticket without the offending words on it?

You don't pay it.

Simple.

ManxRed

Isn't that for a clamping receipt?

Surely we don't advise that for a fake PPC ticket?

King_Drax_I

Yes, sorry, I meant the clamping ticket. You sign the ticket to say that it's under protest. Surely though they then just rip up the ticket and make you sign another; they'll still hold your car with the clamp until they are satisfied, I'd have thought! They basically have you by the proverbials.....

Stephen_Leak

Do you think anyone pays willingly? They don't care if it's "Under Protest" or not.

TrickyWicky

I doubt the ticket is even kept by most PPCs. Writing paid under protest probably ends up in the bin so it's rather pointless really. At the end of the day, unless you video yourself writing it, writing the cheque, stuffing the envelope, and putting it in the post box (withou stopping the camera) then its their word against yours.

As for the clampers, avoid their car parks at all costs.

give_them_FA

I don't think this thread's about tickets, T.W., more clamping. The best way to protest a private parking charge is to simply ignore it...

King_Drax_I

Yes, it's about clamping. I was just wondering how the idea on the original 'guide' was supposed to work; it's been around for a number of years (the idea, that is) and I wondered how it's supposed to work in practice.

Originally, people used to say to write 'Paid under Duress' on a cheque; I doubted that would work as the company would simply not accept the cheque and demand you write another, accompanied by the usual threats.

So I wondered if it was any different when a company issues you with a ticket from a carbon-copy pad, and if you write your disclaimer on it, they could not simply rip it up as there would be a carbon-copy record of it on their pad.

Any ideas, anyone?

Stephen_Leak

I respectfully suggest that the guides ought to be updated.

You have to pay them to get your car back. Then you sue them for that and more.

give_them_FA

It would supposedly be based upon the supposition that paying an account without querying it implies an acceptance that it is valid and/or correct. And therefore where one does not accept either there should be an indication of this.

Whilst it cannot be wrong it seems to me to be superfluous in a matter like clamping. I do not think any clamper would take a cheque anyway because of the ease of countermanding it later.

Because clamping is like blackmail- the reason Scotland sensibly banned it years ago- then I think any Court would accept that you paid it under duress if you raise the issue, without your having to record that fact at the time.

Certainly I do not believe it would prejudice a case to sue the clamper and landowner if you failed to state (or weren't permitted to state) that you paid it only because you were given no option.