Any New laws

welder24

Enclosed with a recent private parking fine for parking on Aldi (Private Eye ) was a slip of paper basically stating that the law had changed now giving private parking companies the right to fine you under new goverment guild lines, is this true ?

neilmcl

No it's not. What exactly did this bit of paper say?

Poppycat

Only the courts can fine you, sounds like its another attempt to scare people to paying up

thenudeone

IIRC The law has recently changed so that the registered keeper can now be held liable for unpaid parking charges.

It's not clear from the legislation.gov.uk website whether it's actually in force yet - it's still shown as "PROSPECTIVE" even though this guidance note: http://assets.dft.gov.uk/publications/guidance-unpaid-parking-charges/guidance-unpaid-parking-charges.pdf states that it comes into force on 1/1/12

No doubt someone more informed will come along soon.

Ironically, it's part of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012:rotfl:
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2012/9/schedule/4/crossheading/right-to-claim-unpaid-parking-charges-from-keeper-of-vehicle

I haven't waded through the detail of the act but the guidance note makes it clear that the charge must not include an element of penalty, but may cover reasonable costs such as the cost of tracing the keeper, postage, administration, etc.

peter_the_piper

I hope you have a copy of the slip, can you put it up here?
Host it on tinypic and copy the url for message boards and paste it in a post. Remove the http bit.

trisontana

Do they actually use the "f" word?

Tobster86

Please upload the image as it would be a very useful contribution.

Let us know if you need any help to do this.

trisontana

As it's Aldi, I imagine that the PPC is Parking Eye. If it is, then we have seen that document before. I bet the OP has just misread it and that it doesn't use the "f" word at all.

Coupon-mad

welder24 wrote: »

Enclosed with a recent private parking fine for parking on Aldi (Private Eye ) was a slip of paper basically stating that the law had changed now giving private parking companies the right to fine you under new goverment guild lines, is this true ?

Parking Eye, not Private Eye! :rotfl:

A search would find you loads of cases. See this:

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/4312425

and this:

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/4284065

and this:

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/4280587

and this:

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/4270363

and the slip of paper already posted here (one of several already shown) and no, it does not use the word fine and doesn't say anything much:

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/4229933



And that was just with one quick look for 'Parking Eye Protection Freedoms'. See the advice repeated on all those threads already.

pogofish

thenudeone wrote: »

IIRC The law has recently changed so that the registered keeper can now be held liable for unpaid parking charges.

It's not clear from the legislation.gov.uk website whether it's actually in force yet - it's still shown as "PROSPECTIVE" even though this guidance note: http://assets.dft.gov.uk/publications/guidance-unpaid-parking-charges/guidance-unpaid-parking-charges.pdf states that it comes into force on 1/1/12

No doubt someone more informed will come along soon.

Ironically, it's part of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012:rotfl:
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2012/9/schedule/4/crossheading/right-to-claim-unpaid-parking-charges-from-keeper-of-vehicle

I haven't waded through the detail of the act but the guidance note makes it clear that the charge must not include an element of penalty, but may cover reasonable costs such as the cost of tracing the keeper, postage, administration, etc.

Utter rubbish!

POFA changes nothng - the sums demanded remain unlawful contract penalties, just like before.

All POFA allows is for the PPC's to address the fake fines to the RK in the absence of anyone else.

And it has been in force since Oct 1st - as the several hundred threads about it in here already attest.

Why on earth didn't you look at any of them to clarify the correct position before spouting cr!p?

Half_way

Law change? as far as i know it just means that the registered keeper can be held liable, so no jmore hiding behind the " i wasnt driving " excuse ( unless you realy werent driving ) but even then technicaly the registered keeper (RK) could be held liable if they dont disclose who was driving.

The real meat of the argument hasnt changed, an un enforcable penalty clause is still unenforcable, a parking charge notice issued in a private car park is still unenforcable, basicly the RK can now be held liable for something that is unenforcable.