Norfolk Parking Enforcement — Parking Charge Notice... What Do I Do?!

Coupon-mad

He can probably work it out - but don't worry as long as you follow advice.

Hyperspeed

Coupon-mad wrote: »

He can probably work it out - but don't worry as long as you follow advice.

I'm not worried about that. It'd require absolute proof, not just a hunch.

The_Slithy_Tove

My opinion is that the signs do not offer a contract to park. The first sentence is "permit holders only." Anyone else parking is surely a trespasser.

Further, do they scupper themselves with POFA (apart from their paperwork almost certainly being non-conformant) by saying explicitly that the driver agrees to pay their stupid charge? Just a thought.

Incidentally, if I were a permit holder with a permit in my car, and I drove someone else's car and parked there, I would still be conforming to the condition of clearly displaying a permit in the "windscreen of your vehicle". Bet they'd still ticket it, though.

There will be plenty of far more robust appeal points.

HO87

Hyperspeed wrote: »

I'm not worried about that. It'd require absolute proof, not just a hunch.

Not disagreeing with the overall sentiment but keep in mind the fact that, ultimately, we are talking civil courts here not criminal. In a county court the proof required is the balance of probabilities not beyond reasonable doubt. A judge need only have 51% to be persuaded.

Remaining silent and thereby obliging your opponent to prove that you were the driver/registered keeper involved is one thing but how many people, when asked the direct question from a judge in court, would be prepared to lie?

Hyperspeed

The_Slithy_Tove wrote: »

My opinion is that the signs do not offer a contract to park. The first sentence is "permit holders only." Anyone else parking is surely a trespasser.

Further, do they scupper themselves with POFA (apart from their paperwork almost certainly being non-conformant) by saying explicitly that the driver agrees to pay their stupid charge? Just a thought.

Incidentally, if I were a permit holder with a permit in my car, and I drove someone else's car and parked there, I would still be conforming to the condition of clearly displaying a permit in the "windscreen of your vehicle". Bet they'd still ticket it, though.

There will be plenty of far more robust appeal points.

That's a good point, but doesn't POFA supersede whatever the signage says anyway?

HO87 wrote: »

Not disagreeing with the overall sentiment but keep in mind the fact that, ultimately, we are talking civil courts here not criminal. In a county court the proof required is the balance of probabilities not beyond reasonable doubt. A judge need only have 51% to be persuaded.

Remaining silent and thereby obliging your opponent to prove that you were the driver/registered keeper involved is one thing but how many people, when asked the direct question from a judge in court, would be prepared to lie?

Oh well, I've said nothing out of line!

zzzLazyDaisy

Hyperspeed wrote: »

The fine is £100, with a £40 discount if paid within 14 days (+£4 processing fee).

Question for the regulars:

BPA CoP Para 19 stipulates that the reduction for prompt repayment must be at least 40%.....

If the processing fee is included, the discount in this case is not 40%.

If the processing fee is not included, what's to stop them charging, say £10 'processing fee', or more?

Umkomaas

Yet another money-squeezing [STRIKE]scam[/STRIKE] wheeze!

Hyperspeed

zzzLazyDaisy wrote: »

Question for the regulars:

BPA CoP Para 19 stipulates that the reduction for prompt repayment must be at least 40%.....

If the processing fee is included, the discount in this case is not 40%.

If the processing fee is not included, what's to stop them charging, say £10 'processing fee', or more?

It's only for card payments it seems, but maybe it has to be the same as other payment methods? Not sure.

zzzLazyDaisy

Hyperspeed wrote: »

It's only for card payments it seems, but maybe it has to be the same as other payment methods? Not sure.

£4 card processing fee on a £60 charge? (assuming the victim pays the reduced amount) That's almost 7% :eek:

That's got to be a profit making penalty - there is no way card issuers charge that much for processing a payment. According to this article

http://www.retail-week.com/in-business/policy/european-commission-confirms-landmark-cap-on-credit-card-processing-fees/5051419.article

Card issuers charge between 0.1% and 2.5% for processing a payment, and there are moves afoot to limit this to 0.9%

nigelbb

Recent consumer legislation has banned excessive card processing charges so now you can only be charged what it actually costs.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-22042309