Parking ticket not displayed

Liyah

Hi I am looking for some advice where my appeal has been rejected in a private car park as my ticket had turned over on the dashboard so inspector could not see ticket even though I had paid for a full day.

They rejected my appeal stating there were signs saying DISPLAY and that I had seen them as I went up to the pay station.

I appealed through the IAS - ( kangaroo court as I have now found out) but my reasons for appeal were rejected because I had thought I had paid/ not caused any loss, and slamming the door harshly was just an accident.

If I am taken to court will the judge really rule against me for not double checking my ticket.
The ticket had no sticky tape or anything for me to glue it onto the wind screen so maybe I can say that if it does get taken to court

also I appreciate any links to similar cases I tried searching parking ticket not displayed but I couldn’t find any threads with this issue as they were all permits not being displayed so I’m not sure if its the same thing

& the company is euro parking services in birmingham

Thanks all

Redx

this has certainly been discussed on here, on pepipoo forums, plus blogged about on parking pranksters website

some judges would say the tickets are not up to the job, then find in your favour (but others may not)

court is a lottery , no guarantees on what the outcome may be , so anyone telling you the result beforehand would be a fool

so yes, definitely good info on similar incidents if you search for them

Guys_Dad

Totally down to the judge and how they view parking companies.

If that is your only appeal point, then take a coin out of your pocket, toss it, call heads or tails and that is how it will turn out in court.

Have you anything else apart from mitigation?

The good news is that it is not going to be that much more expensive if you opted for court and lost.

Fruitcake

Bookmark this for future reference.

http://parking-prankster.blogspot.co.uk/2016/11/gladstones-pick-link-parkings-pocket.html

"The judge dismissed the claim. He ruled that it was the responsibility of the parking company to provide sticky backed tickets and that he had already thrown out 6-10 of these type of cases which Link Parking had brought."

You will need to research other points as well if you get real court papers.

Coupon-mad

the inspector

Don't give them that sort of respect, the person was not an 'inspector'. PLEASE.

You may as well fight this as defended Gladstones defences from forums win 99% of the time (can't recall if the odd one lost was a Gladstones case or not).

This is why this industry should not exist, any idiot can see this sort of thing is a penalty for the purpose of emptying consumer's pockets, nothing to do with genuine 'parking management' and not something any court should ever be supporting.

The Supreme Court should be ashamed of their stance in the Beavis case, very ashamed. Utterly a kick in the face for the consumer and allowing penalties by a motley crew of ex-clampers, club bouncers and get rich quick greedy new firms jumping on the bandwagon.

Not that it even applies as such, in a fluttering ticket case but Gladstones will argue it does and some Judges will swallow it. PE v Cargius is quite old but found that PE v Beavis does not have application to a P&D car park.

There have been plenty of fluttering ticket cases but it's up to the Judge and whether the signage is clear and the ticket deemed fit for purpose, or a deliberate cash cow. I searched the Parking Prankster's blog for the word 'sticky' (looking for cases where the Judge decided the parking firm should provide sticky tickets, because we know there were some won) and this was the result of the search:

http://parking-prankster.blogspot.co.uk/search?q=sticky

The second one down shows a case exactly like yours. Euro Parking Services failed to turn up.

Liyah

Thank you for your help I will be using the "sticky" if it ever goes to court hopefully they realise it's not worth pursuing

safarmuk

If it goes to the Small Claims Court (e.g. you get a Letter Before Claim or a Letter Before Action or a MCOL) then you need to come back here and construct a proper defence (which may include your point about the inability to 'stick' the ticket to the windscreen) with the help of forum members.

As you say hopefully it won't come to that but it could happen up to six years after the incident has occurred.

Liyah

how would they even find someone after 6 years surely people move / change cars

safarmuk

They would have your last known address from the correspondence you have had with the PPC and the IAS.

If you move house you must update your V5 documentation with the DVLA and it is advised that you write to the PPC (keeping proof you have done so) telling them your new correspondence address.

The worst case scenario if you don't, is you miss Small Claims Court papers and you don't defend the claim meaning the PPC's solicitors win by default. Then if you don't want to pay you have to get a set aside order.

Fruitcake

Liyah wrote: »

how would they even find someone after 6 years surely people move / change cars

They don't bother. They use the original address from when they got the keeper details from the DVLA and serve all papers there. If you have moved they don't bother to find out your new address but will deliberately go ahead with court hoping you don't find out, can't therefore defend, and they then get a default win. You could then end up with a CCJ which you won't know about until it is too late.

That's why you must tell the scammers if you move, as well as updating your driving licence and V5 details (separately because the two departments don't talk to each other.)

Coupon-mad

Liyah wrote: »

how would they even find someone after 6 years surely people move / change cars

Selling the car is irrelevant but it is a deliberate tactic not to bother to trace people to a new address:

http://parking-prankster.blogspot.co.uk/2016/12/government-announce-ccj-review-due-to.html

So you need to update them if you move house, as well as updating the V5.