RAC legal report slams private parking companies

DignifiedWheat

I just found a report written by QC John de Waal last month called "Private Parking, Public Concern". Very interesting reading. I can't post links as a newbie, so you'll need to google it I'm afraid. If you only want the conclusions from page 44, here you go:

In conclusion, it seems to me that we can draw the correct legal position is as follows:
(1) Drivers who enter and park on private land with the permission of the owner do so under the terms of a contractual licence.
(2) To be enforceable, the terms imposed by the operators have to be clearly brought to the attention of the drivers.
(3) A term that imposes a charge for overstaying is in those circumstances probably not unfair within the meaning of the 1999 Regulations.
(4) But a ‘discount’ for early payment probably is unfair because it is properly understood as a price escalation clause.
(5) When operators erect signs that state expressly that there is a maximum period for parking and provide for a payment to be made upon failure to comply they are in fact imposing a sanction for breach of contract.
(6) Payments at the level that operators presently demand as sanctions are unlikely to count as a genuine pre-estimate of loss; they should be seen by the Courts as penalties which means they are unenforceable.

Apologies if you've seen all this before, it was new to me.

bod1467

I think this was mentioned in and around the Beavis court of appeal hearing.

arabesque_101

http://www.racfoundation.org/assets/rac_foundation/content/downloadables/RACF_Private_Parking_Public_Concern_John_de_Waal_Jo_Abbott_February_2015.pdf

enfield_freddy

yup the rac foundation , not the one joe punter gets breakdown cover from