Ignorance a defence?

[Deleted User]

Are courts using Vine in PPC contract cases? The case was in relation to a Council wheel clamp, so although signage was involved, the case is not obviously relevant to a contract entered into on the basis of terms and conditions displayed prominently (or not) on a sign on private property.

The owner of the land is essentially irrelevant to the issues considered by the Court of Appeal, which were much wider principles of trespass on land, trespass on property and positioning and content of warning signs.

Vine v Waltham remains very relevant, although it has to be said, not always in the way that the PPCs seem to deploy it. It's worth reading in full - http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2000/106.html

The last few sentences of para 40 although not strictly part of the core judgment itself are not unhelpful for those cases when one is pouring over site plans as to the positioning and number of signs produced by the PPC.

The PPCs often rely on this part of the judgment:
Once it is established that sufficient and adequate warning notices were in place, a car driver cannot be heard to say that he or she did not see the notice. Were that to be the law, it would be too easy for car drivers who trespass with their cars to evade the only method land owners have of stopping the unauthorised parking of cars in parking spaces or parking areas on their property.

That, as I read it, is in fact the Respondent's case as set out at paragraph 11 of the Judgment. The correct part of the judgment is this one, which is slightly different:
To show that the car owner consented or willingly assumed the risk of his car being clamped [or as will now be the case, ticketed], it has to be established that the car owner was aware of the consequences of his parking his car so that it trespassed on the land of another. That will be done by establishing that the car owner saw and understood the significance of a warning notice or notices that cars in that place without permission were liable to be clamped [ticketed]. Normally the presence of notices which are posted where they are bound to be seen, for example at the entrance to a private car park, which are of a type which the car driver would be bound to have read, will lead to a finding that the car driver had knowledge of and appreciated the warning (at para 19)

In short, signage can be adequate to form a warning such that it cannot have been overlooked - that much is clear from the case. However it is also authority that if the signage is no good, there cannot have been adequate warning (and it follows in a contract claim) that there cannot have been a contract.

Moi?

Thank you all SO much.

Well, research and persistence pays off (hopefully). I came across the idea to contact the pub via Facebook. They have responded saying they don't have anything to do with parking but they asked for my reg no and said they would email ParkingEye on my behalf to get it 'sorted'. If I spent more than £2 at the pub (I can't prove it) I am entitled to four free hours.

If this fails I will go down the signage route.

Re identifying the driver, what if you're both the owner and sole driver of the car?

Thanks again.

Quentin

Moi? wrote: »

Re identifying the driver, what if you're both the owner and sole driver of the car?

Why do you ask?


Highly unlikely scenario - anyone with driving other cars cover on their insurance can legally drive a car belonging to someone else with the owner's permission

Bestyboo334

I need advice, I had a judgement against me for unpaid wedding photographer fees. Basically we never have got to see our photos we was refused access to see them, which we didnt feel we used pay. We then received a court letter to say we owe £324 with a daily rate of £24 . We asked to pay installments which the photographer refused at this point. I went to citizens advice and was told I am in all my right to ask to look at my photos before paying, I sent off a installment letter to the court and rang up to pay the court fee they said to pay the photographer I did which then she accepted our installment plan? Jump ahead a month as she has now said she hasn't received money on the date she wanted she has no option but to go to debt agency. She told us she set aside the judgement. Can you re open a judgement?

bergkamp

Bestyboo334 wrote: »

I need advice, I had a judgement against me for unpaid wedding photographer fees. Basically we never have got to see our photos we was refused access to see them, which we didnt feel we used pay. We then received a court letter to say we owe £324 with a daily rate of £24 . We asked to pay installments which the photographer refused at this point. I went to citizens advice and was told I am in all my right to ask to look at my photos before paying, I sent off a installment letter to the court and rang up to pay the court fee they said to pay the photographer I did which then she accepted our installment plan? Jump ahead a month as she has now said she hasn't received money on the date she wanted she has no option but to go to debt agency. She told us she set aside the judgement. Can you re open a judgement?

Did the photographer give you a Parking Charge Notice?

Le_Kirk

Bestyboo334 wrote: »

I need advice, I had a judgement against me for unpaid wedding photographer fees. Basically we never have got to see our photos we was refused access to see them, which we didnt feel we used pay. We then received a court letter to say we owe £324 with a daily rate of £24 . We asked to pay installments which the photographer refused at this point. I went to citizens advice and was told I am in all my right to ask to look at my photos before paying, I sent off a installment letter to the court and rang up to pay the court fee they said to pay the photographer I did which then she accepted our installment plan? Jump ahead a month as she has now said she hasn't received money on the date she wanted she has no option but to go to debt agency. She told us she set aside the judgement. Can you re open a judgement?

You have inadvertently posted in the parking tickets, fines and parking sub-forum. I would suggest you would be better off asking a board guide to move this to the Consumer Rights section. Board guides are Crabman, savvy, soolin. Just send them a PM.

Moi?

Quentin wrote: »

Why do you ask?


Highly unlikely scenario - anyone with driving other cars cover on their insurance can legally drive a car belonging to someone else with the owner's permission

Yes I realised this after asking. But what if no one else actually does drive the car?

Thanks Quentin.

Umkomaas

Moi? wrote: »

Yes I realised this after asking. But what if no one else actually does drive the car?

Thanks Quentin.

Where are you trying to go with this?

Umkomaas

Le_Kirk wrote: »

You have inadvertently posted in the parking tickets, fines and parking sub-forum. I would suggest you would be better off asking a board guide to move this to the Consumer Rights section. Board guides are Crabman, savvy, soolin. Just send them a PM.

If this sub-forum is now coming up in Google searches on the basis of non-specific small court claim searches, we’ll be swamped!

Moi?

Umkomaas wrote: »

Where are you trying to go with this?

This thing about don't admit you're the driver. If you can't name anyone else, doesn't that mean you're liable for the invoice?