friend went through a no entry

Coupon-mad

tacpot12 wrote: »

your friend should carefully read the signage in the car park to see whether they have agreed to be fined if they contravene any traffic signs in the car park. If there have not agreed to be fined, they cannot be fined.

IF they have agreed to be fined, and they are fined, the best option is to pay as quickly as possible.

Sorry but that is not true. Please don't mislead posters about having to pay scam PCNs, and ALL private PCNs are a scam, and beatable.

NO-ONE WOULD PAY THESE IF THEY KNEW WHAT THIS FORUM KNOWS.

PPCs can't issue PCNs for going past a no entry sign, either.

enter3enter wrote: »

i really do appreciate your help! i have informed him of the information so just to make sure he understands there is should be no issue and if there is a fine thrown his way he should just cough it up!

NONONONO.

See what happens when we get ONE WRONG POST of horribly wrong advice from one poster who is not a regular on this forum and doesn't know what they are talking about (for whatever reason, maybe oblivious to the PPC scam)?

For some reason you believed tacpot12's wrong advice (a poster who never posts on this board) and ignored the correct advice from those who do?

:eek:

The Slithy Tove told you the right thing and you went for tacpot12's wrong answer?!

The_Slithy_Tove wrote: »

Tell your friend to calm down, for goodness sake. What does he think's going to happen?

How is an ANPR camera going to know what direction he was driving in?

In any case, a No Entry sign on private land has no legal significance whatsoever.

The above is correct.

AND even if he parked and got a fake PCN (rather than a no entry sign imaginary one!) you still do not PAY it! These scams are easy to beat but you really need to screen out the wrong advice on a forum.

Umkomaas

IF they have agreed to be fined, and they are fined, the best option is to pay as quickly as possible.

What happens if someone doesn't agree 'to be fined'? Could I not agree to be fined by the Police. Sounds like a great get-out - don't agree to be fined.

I'm going to ton it up down the motorway, next opportunity, now I know I have complete impunity. Thank you @tacpot12.

Grimble

NPE when it was Norfolk and not national tried this and got his !!!! kicked in local paper.

Umkomaas

Grimble wrote: »

NPE when it was Norfolk and not national tried this and got his !!!! kicked in local paper.

...... and by the DVLA if memory serves me well.

Castle

fisherjim wrote: »

There was a similar case on here some years ago, it wasn't ANPR but the PPC tried to enforce a no entry sign on a bus lane in a private car park, they gave up as they couldn't!

Minster Baywatch and York University from memory.

Half_way

In a private car park, no entry signs, one way arrows and so on are little more than guidnce, or a request.
Private parking companies can not issue parking charges for going thrugh a no entry sign/wrong way on a one way lane and so on.
and if they do try, then they culd be ina whole heap of trouble.


having said all of that its generaly a good idea to follow the guidance where possible ( ie one way)

tacpot12

The point I was making, which is valid, is that by parking on Private Land you are trespassing, unless you accept the terms of a contract offered to you by the land owner. The case law on parking on private land has set the expectation that contract is set out in the signage in the Car Park and that charges are reasonable. Remember that a contract is only formed if some consideration has pass from the driver to the land owner.

So, IF the OP's friend had paid to park in the car park [or undertaken some other action at the request of the landowner (or their assignee) such as placing a ticket inside their car], a contract has been formed and if that contract stays that the driver will pay a 'fine' or charge in certain situations, then this is a contractual term and the landowner can sue the driver in court if they can prove that the situation occurred and the driver has not paid the charge when asked to do so. Perhaps my choice of the word 'fine' was injudicious; 'charge' would have been more correct. The charge is not a fine or a penalty, but a charge that the driver has agreed to pay.

The charge can be ignored (and possibly appealed), but the driver can be sued in court for breach of contract and will likely lose if they have accepted a contract and not honoured it.

Certain members hide this fact behind their fury at a practice that they see as scamming people, and yet the courts regularly decide cases in favour of the 'scammer'. Is it the case the loser always had a bad lawyer, or perhaps they just had a bad case in law?

If you have any grounds to appeal a charge resulting from parking on private land, and the operator is a member of the BPA or IPC, you should appeal because the appeal decision is binding on the operator and not the driver; it's a case of Heads - you win, Tails - you haven't lost yet (they still have to take you to court and your defence has to fail before you actually lose).

The advice to pay the charge quickly could be the money saving option here. If the operator is offering a discount for prompt payment, as many do, then paying promptly reduces the change AND avoids having to go to court to ultimately lose and have to pay the full charge anyway.

Based on the updated description of the situation provided by the OP, it seems to me unlikely that a contract was formed. The driver may have had the opportunity to read the contract terms as they entered the car park, but because they entered via the Exit they will not have see the contract and can argue that no contract was formed because they were not aware of the offer made and did not accept it, as evidenced by them leaving the car park immediately. This is the defence I would use if I received a Parking Charge Notice.

It is also the case that a land owner can enforce traffic rules on their land with charges if the driver has agreed to this. The "No Entry" sign has EXACTLY the same weight in law as the bay markings painted on the ground - some will say that neither have any weight, but in a contract, if the parties have agreed to it, then they can both have weight.

None of the above increases the likelihood that the OP's friend will hear from the parking operator, I just wanted to address the criticisms made of my post and to provide the OP with a valid defence if one is needed.

Umkomaas

Grimble wrote: »

NPE when it was Norfolk and not national tried this and got his !!!! kicked in local paper.

Umkomaas wrote: »

...... and by the DVLA if memory serves me well.

Memory still functioning (phew!)

https://www.eveningnews24.co.uk/news/motorists-stung-for-using-wrong-entrance-to-norwich-car-park-but-complaints-spark-u-turn-1-3911665

Coupon-mad

tacpot12 wrote: »

The point I was making, which is valid, is that by parking on Private Land you are trespassing, unless you accept the terms of a contract offered to you by the land owner.

Sort of, but I would not agree you are always (or at all) 'trespassing' the minute you drive to Tesco.

The case law on parking on private land has set the expectation that contract is set out in the signage in the Car Park and that charges are reasonable.

That expectation is not the reality, in most private car parks. Signs are hidden, sparse, non prominent, and with non-transparent, complicated, ambiguous or plain 'hidden in small print' terms. And it is entirely deliberate and breaches consumer law.

Remember that a contract is only formed if some consideration has pass from the driver to the land owner.

Agreed.

So, IF the OP's friend had paid to park in the car park [or undertaken some other action at the request of the landowner (or their assignee) such as placing a ticket inside their car], a contract has been formed

More than that - there is no need for such action. As long as the signs are clear, prominent and transparent with large font (but they are often not) a contract is deemed formed by the mere conduct of parking. But this case is not about parking.

and if that contract stays that the driver will pay a 'fine' or charge in certain situations, then this is a contractual term and the landowner can sue the driver in court if they can prove that the situation occurred and the driver has not paid the charge when asked to do so. Perhaps my choice of the word 'fine' was injudicious; 'charge' would have been more correct. The charge is not a fine or a penalty, but a charge that the driver has agreed to pay.

Yes, but only for parking events. Not driving past an arrow or no entry.

The charge can be ignored (and possibly appealed),

A charge for a parking event is certainly worth appealing, if it's a BPA AOS member.

but the driver can be sued in court for breach of contract

They can be..but we win 99% of defended cases on this forum.

and will likely lose if they have accepted a contract and not honoured it.

Nope, highly unlikely, as shown by the 99% win rate here since 2017.

Certain members hide this fact behind their fury at a practice that they see as scamming people,

It is scamming people. Parliament called it out as well.

and yet the courts regularly decide cases in favour of the 'scammer'.

Not 'regularly' on this forum, but we know that scammer PPCs do win badly defended ones, or default judgments, because that's easy. Anyone can do that.

Is it the case the loser always had a bad lawyer, or perhaps they just had a bad case in law?

Nope, the losers normally were just ordinary people who were too scared to turn up to a hearing, or fielded a bad defence and/or didn't realise there was a WS and evidence stage, or who were walked over by the rep in the court room due to bad preparation - i.e. people who are not here on MSE.

If you have any grounds to appeal a charge resulting from parking on private land, and the operator is a member of the BPA or IPC, you should appeal

Nope. The IPC offers no independent appeal. Kangaroo courts are not worth engaging in and Parliament also called the Trade Bodies out, when debating the new Act.

because the appeal decision is binding on the operator and not the driver; it's a case of Heads - you win, Tails - you haven't lost yet (they still have to take you to court and your defence has to fail before you actually lose).

No point tying the IAS as it is reported to be biased and a PPC was even caught emailing that they were 'futilely going through the motions' of appeal, to fool a victim.

The advice to pay the charge quickly could be the money saving option here.

No it isn't. Please stop trying to hide comments like that in a long reply.

If the operator is offering a discount for prompt payment, as many do, then paying promptly reduces the change AND avoids having to go to court to ultimately lose and have to pay the full charge anyway.

Almost no poster here ultimately loses and NONE have to pay the typical £160 claimed, even if they did lose, because the parking charge is not £160 and cannot be that high, due to one binding case law (Beavis) and two statute laws.

Based on the updated description of the situation provided by the OP, it seems to me unlikely that a contract was formed.

Agreed.

The driver may have had the opportunity to read the contract terms as they entered the car park, but because they entered via the Exit they will not have see the contract and can argue that no contract was formed because they were not aware of the offer made and did not accept it, as evidenced by them leaving the car park immediately.

Agreed, to a point.

This is the defence I would use if I received a Parking Charge Notice.

It's not what we would use on its own, there is far more that is objectionable and in any case a PPC cannot even get DVLA data for a 'moving traffic' event. Only parking/stopping events.

It is also the case that a land owner can enforce traffic rules on their land with charges if the driver has agreed to this.

No they can't - not ''traffic rules'' as in moving traffic offences like going through a no entry sign. Next you will be saying that they can set a 10mph speed limit and try to enforce that, too.

The "No Entry" sign has EXACTLY the same weight in law as the bay markings painted on the ground - some will say that neither have any weight, but in a contract, if the parties have agreed to it, then they can both have weight.

No, it has no weight at all and the PPC cannot get DVLA date for a non-parking event anyway, so this is a pointless discussion.

None of the above increases the likelihood that the OP's friend will hear from the parking operator, I just wanted to address the criticisms made of my post and to provide the OP with a valid defence if one is needed.

Please don't suggest that a one-point defence is advisable or valid. That is not how such a matter would be defended on this forum.

But again, the PPC can't get DVLA data for this event anyway.