Does the Cargius case still stand

Josh1976

Heres a thought ... how about you accept responsibility for your own actions. You entered the car park and accepted the terms and conditions of parking. You breached the terms and conditions that you freely accepted and must now deal with the consequences of your breach. Whatever your reasons might be for overstaying, the fact still remains that you entered into a contract and you broke that contract by overstaying when you were not entitled to do so. I have read the threads referring to the parking companies as being 'parking cowboys' but there seems to be a lack of threads relating to peoples inability to accept responsibility for their own actions. You all share a very one sided view which is that its always somebody else's fault.

There is a lot written about the Beavis v Parking Eye Ltd case and it also seems that most of you have missed the message entirely which is that as long as there is commercial justification for imposing the charge then it cannot be unlawful. The ruling didn't focus on the amount of the charge or whether the parking was free but more whether or not the parking company (Parking Eye) could justify the charge. If you are overstaying in a pay and display car park beyond what you have paid for then you are depriving that parking company of a revenue generating opportunity. This will likely be their commercial interest argument !

Coupon-mad

Is the record stuck?

This appears to be PPC spam in support of the scam.

Ralph-y

I know he / she will not read and watch .... but its here for everyone else


https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2018-02-02/debates/CC84AF5E-AC6E-4E14-81B1-066E6A892807/Parking(CodeOfPractice)Bill

and slightly longer, the committee stage

https://www.parliamentlive.tv/Event/Index/d5550515-cce9-4185-83ec-754dadb7524a

''Rip-offs from car park Cowboys must stop''; unfair treatment; signage deliberately confusing to ensure a PCN is issued; ''years of abuse by rogue parking companies''; bloodsuckers; ''the current system of regulation is hopeless, like putting Dracula in charge of the blood-bank''; extortionate fines; rogue operators; ''sense of injustice''; unfair charges and notices; wilfully misleading; signage is a deliberate act to deceive or mislead; ''confusing signs are often deliberate, to trap innocent drivers''; unreasonable; a curse; harassing; operating in a disgusting way; appeals service is no guarantee of a fair hearing; loathed; outrageous scam; dodgy practice; outrageous abuse; unscrupulous practices; ''the British Parking Association is as much use as a multi-storey car park in the Gobi desert''; and finally, by way of unanimous conclusion: ''we need to crack down on these rogue companies. They are an absolute disgrace to this country. Ordinary motorists and ordinary residents should not have to put up with this''.

These are the exact words used, so you should quote them to your MP in a complaint and ask him/her to contact Sir Greg Knight MP if he wants further information about this scam.

and some quotes from the committe stage

"The other area is hospital parking, and I want to single out one company for some pretty shady practices. That is ParkingEye"
" is very clear to me that there is collusion between parking companies and solicitors’ firms—so-called roboclaims companies. "
"They are often set up adjacently and involve the same directors and personnel. Incidentally, the same personnel get involved in the so-called appeals bodies."
"Essentially, it is a money-making enterprise that takes advantage of motorists up and down the country. They operate in a very business-like fashion, which is why I call them roboclaims companies."
"The companies are jamming up parts of our legal system."
“I now pretty much know exactly how the parking companies and in particular the IPC have been running this scam for the past 5 years. Basically both of the appeals processes are a complete and utter sham, (and part of that sham is Gladstones Solicitors itself)”
"The appeals process at Excel/VCS is run by a team of minimum wage office workers with no legal knowledge or experience whatsoever,"
" It is claimed by the head of the appeals service (retired Judge Bryn Holloway) that this is a completely independent fair process, it is not”
"The letter mentions two individuals—Will Hurley and Bryn Holloway—and concludes this is a typical example of the clear collusion between the IPC, their members and the IAS"
"what we can do about roboclaims companies and solicitors firms that profit, often in shady ways"
" the very large amounts of money that can be involved in such scams—a company called Smart Parking was involved in one such scam on my patch"
"tightening up the rules regarding the unfair use of automatic number plate recognition" "BW Legal, regularly issues 10,000 county court judgments a month, and is known to have issued 28,000 in one month"
"They are jamming up our court system, and are often totally unjustified."
" because the lifeblood of trying to extort money from people is having access to their details."

All from Parking (Code of Practice) Bill (First sitting) Hansard





Ralph:cool:

Le_Kirk

Coupon-mad wrote: »

Is the record stuck?

This appears to be PPC spam in support of the scam.

Not only that, they have picked on a post from June 2017, last updated November 2017 and unlikely to be read by the OP, whose last activity was 23/11/2017.

Snakes_Belly

Perhaps he/she would be better occupied updating their CV.

waamo

As part of the sign up agreement you agree not to hijack old threads. Does that mean they are happy to be penalised? After all they broke the rules.

Le_Kirk

Perhaps we should issue a HOT notice - Hijacking Old Threads!

Umkomaas

Le_Kirk wrote: »

Perhaps we should issue a HOT notice - Hijacking Old Threads!

Or Hook Off Troll

ShropshireL4d

Hi all,
Thanks for your positive replies, with the one exception!
I have had no reason to repost on here since last year as the harassment seemed to have stopped.
However a letter has just arrived from DCBL increasing demand to £160, could this be related to the negative August post?
Any comments appreciated.

Coupon-mad

No it's a standard letter and is just a debt letter, not DCBL as bailiffs.

Some PPCs appear to have sent a batch of cases to DCBL recently, to frighten people into assuming they are going to knock on doors, when they cannot:

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/5896853/notice-of-debt-recovery-dcbl

Ignore it. You have not been singled out. It has not genuinely increased to £160.