Wheel-clamping on private land banned from today.

gill5blue

Hi
Im curious about wether supermarkets can still charge to park or will this affext them too?
Cheers

HardWorker2010_2

pendulum wrote: »

If the parking fees had no legal basis, there wouldn't be new legislation detailing parking companies rights to enforce the said charges.

Do some more research:

Back in February 2011, a First Tier Tax Tribunal ruled that Vehicle Control Services, a private parking company which did not have an interest in a car park which it was only managing on behalf of a landowner, was not entitled to sue trespassers as principal.

:T

bazster

pendulum wrote: »

If the parking fees had no legal basis, there wouldn't be new legislation detailing parking companies rights to enforce the said charges.

So you've given up arguing specific points and fallen back on the utterly feeble "well the government can't have got this wrong".

pendulum wrote: »

Why can't a landowner delegate the responsibilities of car park management to another company and have that company act as his agent? I can see no problem with this as it's standard practice and I doubt a court will see a problem with it either, to be honest.

If you had such a fantastic understanding of how agent/principal law works, you would understand this: when an agent enters into a contract in his capacity as agent, he doesn't enter himself into the contract, he enters his principal into the contract. That is the very essence of agency.

So when our poor benighted motorist parks at Morrisons, it matters not that the stupid signs are all in the name of CP Plus, because CP Plus is merely Morrisons' agent. The actual contract for parking is between the motorist and Morrisons.

This would be all well-and-good if it were Morrisons who claimed losses for breach-of-contract (leaving aside for a moment all the other reasons why the charges are unenforceable), but that isn't how it works: it is invariably CP Plus or whomever who pursues the alleged debt, never Morrisons, and if it ever reaches a court, the case is invariably brought by the parking company, with the principal nowhere in sight - even though the motorist never even had a contract with the parking company!

trisontana

gill5blue wrote: »

Hi
Im curious about wether supermarkets can still charge to park or will this affext them too?
Cheers

You seem to be confusing the fee that you pay to park and the so-called "parking charge notices" that are issued when you break one of the PPC's rules.

gill5blue

trisontana wrote: »

You seem to be confusing the fee that you pay to park and the so-called "parking charge notices" that are issued when you break one of the PPC's rules.

Oh, I probably am, thankyou.

adouglasmhor

pendulum wrote: »

If the parking fees had no legal basis, there wouldn't be new legislation detailing parking companies rights to enforce the said charges.


Why can't a landowner delegate the responsibilities of car park management to another company and have that company act as his agent? I can see no problem with this as it's standard practice and I doubt a court will see a problem with it either, to be honest.

Time will tell which one of us is right, we'll have to see.

parking charge”—
(a)in the case of a relevant obligation arising under the terms of a relevant contract, means a sum in the nature of a fee or charge, and
(b)in the case of a relevant obligation arising as a result of a trespass or other tort, means a sum in the nature of damages,
however the sum in question is described;

So with no tort or contract no charge, easy the peasy.

peter_the_piper

I see that PCM still have their clamping signs up for staying over the 3 hours at a local shopping centre. Whether they will still clamp is moot but the threat is still there, too late for the bowling alley though.

peter_the_piper

I have just read the government guidance http://assets.dft.gov.uk/publications/guidance-unpaid-parking-charges/guidance-unpaid-parking-charges.pdf and the very first section seems to contradict VCS v HMRC. Or have I read it incorrectly?

bazster

Yes it does. But of course the government guidance is not law, whereas a decision by a Superior Court of Record is law.

peter_the_piper

Would county court take it as guidance or fact is the question.