Class action against parking companies?

Bantex_2

enfield_freddy wrote: »

this is the basis of the court claim , NO private company can fine you. they can only charge you for causing inconvenience, ie: whilst you were parked , they could not get the parking fee off a new customer. therefore you owe for there loss , which is the money they did not get from the new customer]




NOT £60 -£100 !!!

So if I show the car park was not full, I get to park free?

enfield_freddy

Bantex wrote: »

So if I show the car park was not full, I get to park free?

no , because it would show a price to be paid per hour/day


my brain is beginning to hurt , are you really so thick , or is alcohol helping

nobbysn*ts

bazster wrote: »

The cheapskate companies engaging these scum will just have to spend a bit of their own money doing the job properly then, like they should've done in the first place. I've never seen anyone get out of a car park without paying when there's an exit barrier.

And/or reduce their charges to something that covers their costs instead of inviting pond life to make a fast buck out the misery of pensioners, the disabled and the sick.

Absolutely brilliant! So, if there isn't a fence, or a wall, and a barrier, it's fair game for all? Even pay and display will have to start erecting barriers, as all they can do is chase the few pence or pounds that I should have paid in the first place? No penalty, no comeback on using disabled or parent and children spaces? I pay enough for the car anyway, it's about time we had some sort of freebie if the shops want our business, or if I need to use the car simply to get to work, without the hassle of paying for the carpark, or if the works car park is full. If he can get away with making any space we're not physically locked out of, a usable space for me, he is a truly great man and he'll teach the cheapskates a lesson or two.

nobbysn*ts

enfield_freddy wrote: »

no , because it would show a price to be paid per hour/day


my brain is beginning to hurt , are you really so thick , or is alcohol helping

Bazster said they need a barrier, or they can't enforce it. Why do we need to pay? I'd rather not if they can't make me.

Bantex_2

enfield_freddy wrote: »

no , because it would show a price to be paid per hour/day


my brain is beginning to hurt , are you really so thick , or is alcohol helping

You just said they can only sue for their loss. Unless the car park was full, surely there is no loss if I would not have parked there unless I believed i did not have to pay?

matttye

Bantex wrote: »

You just said they can only sue for their loss. Unless the car park was full, surely there is no loss if I would not have parked there unless I believed i did not have to pay?

Wouldn't the fee you should have paid but didn't count as a loss as well?

enfield_freddy

Bantex wrote: »

You just said they can only sue for their loss. Unless the car park was full, surely there is no loss if I would not have parked there unless I believed i did not have to pay?

I did not say that! I said *if you were depriving them of revenue"




there charges are £x per hour , and you should pay this.


a person that pays rates etc , plus the cost of the land should receive payments for offering there services , if you accept the costs , pay , if not look elsewere.


what is being discussed here is the fact that PPCs are asking a sum much greater than there loses


IE , if parking is £1 an hour and you overstay by 40 mins you owe for 40 mins or to round it up , 1 hour max.


if you have a hotel room and check out late , they "might" charge you for an extra night (or in the case of parking , an extra hour) but not a £100 supposed "fine"

Umkomaas

mikerobertgreen wrote: »

its challengetheFINE

thanks mate

Oops! Not sure whether that was fat finger syndrome or predictive text. Don't think I'm to blame but amendment now made!

HTH

Bantex_2

matttye wrote: »

Wouldn't the fee you should have paid but didn't count as a loss as well?

Not if I only parked there on a basis that it was free to me.

matttye

Bantex wrote: »

Not if I only parked there on a basis that it was free to me.

You can't park there on the basis that it's free if signage is adequate and indicates there is a fee.