Received a parking charge because the parking permit slipped and was not fully visible

nosferatu1001

"- To park a private vehicle only at the Property."
there you go
thats your licence to park.  You have no need to get another one

D_P_Dance

I am puzzled why this has not been wrapped up, surely OP has been given all the facts.

Le_Kirk

ritwolf said:

This is the only mention to parking in my tenancy agreement:

Cars and Parking:

 - To park a private vehicle only at the Property.

That is awful grammar; it leads one to assume that you cannot park your private vehicle anywhere else!

D_P_Dance

Exactly.  Dogs must be carried. 

ritwolf

Hi, after reading all the replies, I have decided to follow a recommendation I read elsewhere of paying now before the amount goes up and clearly stating that I'm paying under protest.

Please respect this decision, some of use don't have enough time to dedicate but I still don't want to fully give up.

I have contacted Citizens Advice and they told me that I can't do much other than taking them to court, and I'm considering this after what you guys have mentioned about my tenancy agreement giving me right to park. For now, they will take my complaint to the Trading Standards.

Any advice of what can I do from here are welcome. I will update progress so it may help anyone else who feels being taken advantage of.

nosferatu1001

Paying under protest means very little. 
You will now be hounded, as they will see you as an easy target

D_P_Dance

Paying under protest means very little. 

It means less than that.  

ritwolf

D_P_Dance said:

Paying under protest means very little. 

It means less than that.  

Sorry, I respect your opinion but I disagree with this after speaking with Citizens Advice earlier today (there are implications as losing the possibility of going though ADR - Alternative Dispute Resolution). However, they mentioned that they can argue that making payment is admission of guilt. But then, what is the purpose of stating "paying under protest anyway"?

From what I'm reading (still learning), maybe Primacy of Contract or Quite Enjoyment of premises could apply.

As per my tenancy agreement (relevant bits posted previously), there is no specific requirement to display a permit and it allows me to park. I believe this should superceed any contract with them as I already had right to park.

This is if I'm not missing something, which I'm not sure about. I have contacted a lawyer already and waiting for his reply.

nosferatu1001

Paying under protest has very littler practical effect, and they absolutely will see you as a cash cow.
Unless you are going to quickly pursue the principal through the courts, looking at an injunction for example, you're going to struggle to do anything with a payment under protest
Any claim on the small claims track, which any claim by you is likely to be, will mean you are NOT going to get ANY legal costs back. 

ritwolf

nosferatu1001 said:

Paying under protest has very littler practical effect, and they absolutely will see you as a cash cow.
Unless you are going to quickly pursue the principal through the courts, looking at an injunction for example, you're going to struggle to do anything with a payment under protest
Any claim on the small claims track, which any claim by you is likely to be, will mean you are NOT going to get ANY legal costs back. 

It's a parking space... I don't see what else will they do to cash in targeting me. Other than not displaying a valid permit (which I've now taped into the windscreen), what else do you think they can charge me for?