Parking problems on private land

NeverEnough

We resorted to drop-down bollards which are manually controlled and cost far less than remote controlled ones, to protect our parking up our shared driveway from the neighbours (and their visitors) from hell, who would happily park on our private property, off the shared driveway, for as long as they pleased without a care in the world. The bollards can also be locked to prevent unauthorised use of the parking places. They have worked very well over the years - at least our privately-owned parking spaces are available to us when we return home!!!

bazster

skivenov wrote: »

Park you car up there, stick a ticket on the windwscreen and a clamp on the wheel (available from caravan places). That'll put em off.

That's good, I like it!

cleeside

Thanks for all the suggestions. I think I might go down the route of bollards eventually when cash flow permits and after a go through the local planning people. In the meantime I like the idea of some pretend legal notices and stickers to frighten people off. Not that I'd persue them to the courts, just as a deterent.

I also like the idea of blocking people in for a bit, giving them a bit of a wait then letting them out. The only downside to this is that it might lead to confrontation, not that I'm the nervous type or anything - I'm just not the type of person who wants to start the day off with an argument. Also two of our sub contractors are the type who you would want as far away as possible from a confrontation (decent blokes, but not the calmest!)

cleeside

Stephen_Leak wrote: »

I have every sympathy for a store owner, who pays good money providing car parking for their customers, only to see it being used by others, but a private company cannot impose legally enforceable fines or penalties. All the car park owner, not their agent, could claim from any offenders in damages is what they've lost as a result. If it's a free car park, as most supermarkets are, this is £0.00. If it's a pay and display car park, then it's the original unpaid charge.

I don't agree the loss to the car park owner is just the price of the pay and display charge or nothing if the car park is free. It wouldn't be too hard for a supermarket to prove that they have lost out if one of their spaces was occupied for hours longer than permitted. At the very least nothing is free when it comes to providing car parking spaces for the property owner; and if someone is parked with out consent then there is the loss of use for an authorised parker.

It would be interesting to know if anyone has managed to test it in court.
D

Sir_Roger_deLodger

cleeside wrote: »

It wouldn't be too hard for a supermarket to prove that they have lost out if one of their spaces was occupied for hours longer than permitted.

It would be impossible to prove how much an imaginary person who couldnt park was going to spend.

taffy056

cleeside wrote: »

I don't agree the loss to the car park owner is just the price of the pay and display charge or nothing if the car park is free. It wouldn't be too hard for a supermarket to prove that they have lost out if one of their spaces was occupied for hours longer than permitted. At the very least nothing is free when it comes to providing car parking spaces for the property owner; and if someone is parked with out consent then there is the loss of use for an authorised parker.

It would be interesting to know if anyone has managed to test it in court.
D

How do they quantify the loss then ? If a parking company can't do it, the supermarket can't either. I disagree that they will be able to say that car has cost me £60 for parking say 2 hours over the limit, they will need to prove that loss legally. Also to explain why the loss can be halved for 14 days, how has their loss doubled over day 14 to day 15 ? What is their loss, £60 or £30 ?

And yes it has been tested in court.

cleeside

taffy056 wrote: »

How do they quantify the loss then ? If a parking company can't do it, the supermarket can't either. I disagree that they will be able to say that car has cost me £60 for parking say 2 hours over the limit, they will need to prove that loss legally. Also to explain why the loss can be halved for 14 days, how has their loss doubled over day 14 to day 15 ? What is their loss, £60 or £30 ?

And yes it has been tested in court.

Not sure what you mean about their loss being halved for 14 days or that they want £60 or £30. I was trying to say that a supermarket would have enough data to prove how much a parking space is worth in sales on average, on a given timeframe with the square footage of a given store. And most claims for other sorts of damages / loss are based on previous figures, for example if a shop was flooded the insurance company would pay out on previous figures for business interuption not predicted future takings.

Just my opinion.

taffy056

cleeside wrote: »

Not sure what you mean about their loss being halved for 14 days or that they want £60 or £30. I was trying to say that a supermarket would have enough data to prove how much a parking space is worth in sales on average, on a given timeframe with the square footage of a given store. And most claims for other sorts of damages / loss are based on previous figures, for example if a shop was flooded the insurance company would pay out on previous figures for business interuption not predicted future takings.

Just my opinion.

The halving of parking charge notice issued by a ppc is what I'm basing it on as that is the only thing to base it on. In regards to the supermarket and it's data, that is fine if they do that, but they must prove that the person who parked there have cost them the exact amount they are claiming. It's no good saying that space returns a certain amount of income per year.

What they have to prove is that it cost them that amount at that exact time. It's impossible to do so, as there is no way to confirm that a person in a vehicle turned around and not parked and not spent that amount of money. By the way some NHS trusts who actually own the land try it on and lose more often than not.

And finally supermarkets very often don't own the land so legally they are in the same boat as the ppc meaning they have no legal right to do court

Stephen_Leak

For a lesson on how not to try to argue this in a court, read this ...

VCS Parking Control vs. Ronald Ibbotson, S!!!!horpe, 2012

skivenov

bazster wrote: »

That's good, I like it!

Thanks. It works well.

I had my area manager come flying in the door one day telling me I couldn't go clamping people's cars, how it was illegal and could get us a load of bad press.

I told him of course I can clamp that car, I know it's going to be there all day because it always is.

He asked how I could possibly know that.

"It's mine!"