Scotland: Court orders woman to pay £24,500 in private parking charges (VCS)

Half_way

200 odd parking charge notices should have got some alarm bells ringing at some point.

again for the unpteenth time these are not fines, however you appear to be revelling in that.

As has been previously mentioned there have been stooges in the past, so theres no need to get your knickers in a twist, at the end of the day most people, apart from the stooges, and ppc employees/associates are here to help, those form PPc land tend to take a topic and degenerate it into ranting and name calling tying people up

If Carly wants to fight, then i refer you to post #67 from beamerguy, and post #67 from myself
but he ho, lets wave the victim card and shout "LOOK AT ME!!!! I FOLLOWED FORUM ADVICE AND GOT A HUGE FINE POOR POOR ME " maybe that will get results? or more likely no where. constructive, unless the aim is to try and get a Scottish Barry Beavis head on a stick for all the parking companies to use in order to scare more people into paying up.

henrik777

Ryandavis1959 wrote: »

GOOGLE IT CARLY MACKIE 2015 NEWSPAPER ARTICLES

DOES THAT LOOK LIKE A DISHONEST PERSON?

DO YOU THINK SCOTTISH LEGAL SYSTEM GIVES LEGAL AID TO A PLANT?


THIS DEBT IS VERY REAL AND HAS RUINED A YOUNG WOMANS LIFE AND ALL YOU PEOPLE CAN SAY IS THAT SHE IS A PLANT?

YOU DONT EVEN BELIEVE SHE IS A REAL PERSON.

THIS IS A REAL PERSON AND ALL YOU CAN DO IS PUT HER DOWN AND DEHUMANISE HER WHEN WHAT SHE NEEDS IS RESPECT AND FINANCIAL AID

This case could have gone either way and all people want to do is snipe a young person who had the courage to stand up for what she believes in!

:mad::mad::mad::money::mad::mad:

Be interesting to read the record (pleadings for the people on the wrong side of the wall) if you could get a sanitised copy since you sound like you know her.

Half_way

I am not sayign she is a plant/stooge/whatever however you need to look at why and how She could be mistaken for one, and instead of getting all excited you should be trying to help her, as mentioned there are lots of reasons why some people will post miss information on here.
As mentioned people are willing to help but you seem to prefer to shout get angry and wave the victim card


Another point: As she had legal aid, and a Barrister i would assume that this case would be familiar: http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/pay-dismay-warning-over-private-7527025

beamerguy

Ryandavis1959 ...... the info to ignore in Scotland still stands.

If the parking company in Scotland wants to take you to court, they can if they know who was driving ??

Maybe those who told her to ignore and the newspaper did not actually know why you ignore them

I assume Carly never came to this site first with her first couple of tickets. Had she done so, she would probably be £24,500 better off

For your interest, lamilad recently won two cases against Excel who are the main honcho of VCS and helped a third to win This was in England which is much harder than scotland

Lamilad knows what he is talking about

There was never any libel from coupon-mad, she is one of the members who constantly gets people off these fake claims.

This site is a winner but there is nothing we can do when someone collects some 200 tickets
We all feel sorry for her but research is the key word and that clearly was not done.

She lost because she revealed she was the driver and that was all VCS needed.

I am totally unsure why you would expect anyone here to contribute

henrik777

Half_way wrote: »

I am not sayign she is a plant/stooge/whatever however you need to look at why and how She could be mistaken for one, and instead of getting all excited you should be trying to help her, as mentioned there are lots of reasons why some people will post miss information on here.
As mentioned people are willing to help but you seem to prefer to shout get angry and wave the victim card


Another point: As she had legal aid, and a Barrister i would assume that this case would be familiar: http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/pay-dismay-warning-over-private-7527025

A barrister wouldn't have rights of audience

Legal training or even a career in law does not guarantee you'll get someone good at a specific subject, or indeed just good for anything. Probably at least 95% of them would be moderate at best in motoring matters. Contract law will be more widespread than that but it's not a matter for them all. A specific low level case could easily pass them by.

Ryandavis1959

I'm sorry for not knowing what a fine is, who cares on the official name! Penalty ticket parking ticket whatever you want to call it. It sounds to me like you want to baffle with jargon.

All I ask is that people get their facts right about this case as there is a LOT that has happened over the past two years. Carly is a real person and does not deserve the bullying from people here.

Carly should to helped by people here because you all say that she should have ignored it so put your money where your mouth is and HELP OUT.

Also at least one person and maybe three here have currently libelled Carly about this debt and have still not retracted their statement, tick tock is all i will say..........

For the people who say she shouldn't have said who was driving ... what do you think the Sheriff asked in court?!??? What's your fool proof advice for dealing with that question in court when asked???

Half_way

I am totally unsure why you would expect anyone here to contribute

maybe because the victim card is easier to play than investigating to see if there are any ways to work things out, has there been a breach, or muliple breaches of the data protection act? dont know - it may take a while to find out and a bit of work but if there has then the £24500 could be wiped out by some margin

henrik777

beamerguy wrote: »

Ryandavis1959 ...... the info to ignore in Scotland still stands.

If the parking company in Scotland wants to take you to court, they can if they know who was driving ??

Maybe those who told her to ignore and the newspaper did not actually know why you ignore them

I assume Carly never came to this site first with her first couple of tickets. Had she done so, she would probably be £24,500 better off

For your interest, lamilad recently won two cases against Excel who are the main honcho of VCS and helped a third to win This was in England which is much harder than scotland

Lamilad knows what he is talking about

There was never any libel from coupon-mad, she is one of the members who constantly gets people off these fake claims.

This site is a winner but there is nothing we can do when someone collects some 200 tickets
We all feel sorry for her but research is the key word and that clearly was not done.

She lost because she revealed she was the driver and that was all VCS needed.

I am totally unsure why you would expect anyone here to contribute

I'm not sure that such a high number of tickets would create enough doubt as to the identity of the driver. They probably had eyes on the vehicle and i wouldn't be surprised if they had photographic or video evidence of her coming and going anyway.

Ryandavis1959

Half_way wrote: »

A qiick one on plants:
After being on here for a few years, ive seen a few antics from private parking companies, with parking companies possibly even taking relatives and friends to court to use as plants, and winning against them. the reality being that the friends/relatives/associates do not lose out anything, and the parking company can point and say we took so and so to court, complete with a convoluted forum posting. While this may costs the PPc in time/effort and court fees they gain a valuable piece of PR which will encourage others to pay up.
So when odd/unusual cases crop up, and the question are you a plant/related to the parking companies crops up, or is hinted at don't be offended, parking companies will stoop lower than you would think.

Next:
With residential cases its usually pretty clear cut, however those at the receiving end of things need to be pro active before things get out of hand
I have said in the past why not play a game of PPC ticket collecting? however this is only and only after checking that everything is clear, that:
The driver has permission to park there which is either from the landholder ( ie flat owner) or via a lease/freehold/tenancy etc, this is often referred to as primacy of contract
Then other things need to be looked at, such as signage, although the signs are junk/worthless if the main contract overrides things.
As ever when faced with residential issues you need to be pro active and tell the management company( factor in Scotland?) right from the start that you dont agree to the permit scheme/are opting out and have only been displaying a permit, as well as the fact that there is a contract in place which overrides any additional rubbish placed by a third party contractor.

As beamnerguy stated:
going forwards the amount being demanded is absurd, and needs appealing if possible.
It would also be worth looking at point 2 made by beamerguy, with regards to the 200 plus tickets which would require a separate request from the DVLA, as there could be a data protection act breach issue at play here.
If and if there has been a data protection act breach, say 199 times and if this has been checked then the victim could in theory put a separate claim in for each DPA breach this could net £250-£750 per DPA breach which would more than off set the amount being demanded.
Or as an alternative the whole thing could be appealed, the PPC doesn't contest the appeal on the basis that Carly wont claim for any DPA breach ( or other breach)
Not too sure if the above would be possible, but it would offer a way out for both the PPc with theDPA breaches ( if they have occured) and Carly, who despite her ordeal shouldn't be any worse ( or better) off, re-setting everything back to zero.

Lynzer on pepipoo produced two guides with regards to residential parking here

Again - you really need to be pro active in dealing with PPCs especially on residential sites
Hopefully Carly ( if thats her name) will want to fight this, however i fear that she may want to use the whole experience and play the poor victim card ( as has happened with others in the past)

waamo wrote: »

Nobody has said parking tickets in Scotland are unenforceable. I linked to an article from 2008 that shows they clearly are. They are best ignored so that the registered keeper cannot mistakenly identify the driver.

Without the drivers name the PPC has a mountain to climb in Scotland.

Carly clearly, at some point, engaged with the company else how did they know she was the driver? That was a mistake.

This site has never advocated wanton parking. 200 tickets is bound to attract attention and the law will show little sympathy for flagrant abuse.

As for fighting to the end my advice is give up now. She will be throwing good money after bad.

I wish your simplistic viewpoint was the reality, however the Sheriffs in Scotland will ALWAYS ask who was driving.

Maybe the softies down south will not ask that question in court for a parking ticket but up here it's a different matter altogether!

The not the driver advice is very well known! If you say you don't know then they'll tear you to shreds. Unless you are prepared to LIE which Carly did not do because she is a person of honour not a snake!

Ryandavis1959

beamerguy wrote: »

Ryandavis1959 ...... the info to ignore in Scotland still stands.

If the parking company in Scotland wants to take you to court, they can if they know who was driving ??

Maybe those who told her to ignore and the newspaper did not actually know why you ignore them

I assume Carly never came to this site first with her first couple of tickets. Had she done so, she would probably be £24,500 better off

For your interest, lamilad recently won two cases against Excel who are the main honcho of VCS and helped a third to win This was in England which is much harder than scotland

Lamilad knows what he is talking about

There was never any libel from coupon-mad, she is one of the members who constantly gets people off these fake claims.

This site is a winner but there is nothing we can do when someone collects some 200 tickets
We all feel sorry for her but research is the key word and that clearly was not done.

She lost because she revealed she was the driver and that was all VCS needed.

I am totally unsure why you would expect anyone here to contribute

Thank you, you seem to be the only person who GETS IT.

The driver was revelaed because the only alternative was to LIE, which is obviously not an option!