We'd like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum... Read More »
IMPORTANT: Please make sure your posts do not contain any personally identifiable information (both your own and that of others). When uploading images, please take care that you have redacted all personal information including number plates, reference numbers and QR codes (which may reveal vehicle information when scanned).
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
Premier Park
Options
stephenrp
Posts: 2 Newbie
I dropped off a colleague at a Premier Park car park (not a retail park) at 10pm, chatted before he got out, then (from NPR cameras) got a PCN for staying 2 minutes longer than the 10 minutes "free" time.
Premier Park rejected my appeal, so has POPLA. Both cite Beavis but I argued that was very different circumstances. In Beavis there was an interest in keeping the car park free for other shoppers. In a virtually empty car park at 10pm when I could have parked all night for nothing in the adjacent street, what is their genuine loss (other than possibly the £2 charge for an hour's parking)? I also denied there was a contract - obviously I did not intend to enter a contract (if I thought I might be entering a contract I wouldn't have entered the car park). I also argued inadequate signage (at night) - I didn't see the large signs with details as I never left my car, and didn't imagine it operated 24 hours.
Main issue now is whether there are court precedents where the particular circumstances of Beavis (i.e. Beavis plainly had a contract and overstayed and the business model required a turnover of vehicles) have been held not to apply in circumstances very different. Only at stage where PP refer the case to a solicitor with a recommendation of court action, and I intend to ignore everything until a court letter (any solicitor can see my case), but any thoughts? I thought POPLA might be "reasonable" but apparently not.
Premier Park rejected my appeal, so has POPLA. Both cite Beavis but I argued that was very different circumstances. In Beavis there was an interest in keeping the car park free for other shoppers. In a virtually empty car park at 10pm when I could have parked all night for nothing in the adjacent street, what is their genuine loss (other than possibly the £2 charge for an hour's parking)? I also denied there was a contract - obviously I did not intend to enter a contract (if I thought I might be entering a contract I wouldn't have entered the car park). I also argued inadequate signage (at night) - I didn't see the large signs with details as I never left my car, and didn't imagine it operated 24 hours.
Main issue now is whether there are court precedents where the particular circumstances of Beavis (i.e. Beavis plainly had a contract and overstayed and the business model required a turnover of vehicles) have been held not to apply in circumstances very different. Only at stage where PP refer the case to a solicitor with a recommendation of court action, and I intend to ignore everything until a court letter (any solicitor can see my case), but any thoughts? I thought POPLA might be "reasonable" but apparently not.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 351.2K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.2K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 453.7K Spending & Discounts
- 244.2K Work, Benefits & Business
- 599.2K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177K Life & Family
- 257.6K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.1K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.6K Read-Only Boards