Need Help. Over £12,500!

wooderson

@Coupon-mad Sorry, the issue date on all the claims is 8th September

@patient_dream Yes they are all from autosec.

I've only got a few pics of the damage to the cars. I don't have evidence of every single time it happened. Although I have kept most of the physical yellow parking tickets.

This is what it looks like when peeling the tickets off:



And this is what it would look like after 5 minutes of violently trying to clean them off with washing up liquid and alcohol (still doesn't come off properly, and this was my dad's car; I had to drive all the way to France to export the car and didn't have time to clean it properly otherwise i would have missed the ferry. I definitely felt very unsafe during that long drive from the North of England because it's directly in front of my eyes) :

D_P_Dance

With that amount of money involved I would be seeking legal advice,  

Redx

I doubt that any of that will help , although you can add it to the WS in several months time

All of you should complete the online AOS separately , each person doing their own on MCOL next week , maybe Wednesday onwards , definitely not before the 5 days have elapsed from the 8th , so after the 13th

Then you all crack on with your Defence drafts , even if it's ll the same draft

All of you should email a SAR to the parking company autosec for your data , especially all paperwork and pictures , although you may want to do the same to Dcb legal too because I doubt that you will get anything back from del grosso

wooderson

D_P_Dance said:

With that amount of money involved I would be seeking legal advice,  

Can anyone recommend any firms?

D_P_Dance

That surely depends on where you live.   

Redx

Try the SRA for a list or suggestions

Umkomaas

Particularly if you're in the South East, check out David Carrod who knows the private parking ropes better than most solicitor firms. David is a top contributor to the forum - @bargepole. 

Given that everything is done electronically and remotely, perhaps your physical address is less important these days. 

patient_dream

As Redx says above

Those pictures show criminal damage. Suggest you find a law firm who can offer you a no win no fee service.

bargepole

Umkomaas said:

Particularly if you're in the South East, check out David Carrod who knows the private parking ropes better than most solicitor firms. David is a top contributor to the forum - @bargepole. 

Given that everything is done electronically and remotely, perhaps your physical address is less important these days. 

I'm afraid this is not a case that I would wish to be involved in.

The OP, and members of his family, knew from day 1 that the land belonged to someone else, and they had no right to park there, yet they continued to rack up tickets, and stupidly ignored the letters with head in sand attitude.

All the stuff about glue on the windscreen, and following the ticket issuer, are completely irrelevant, and I can't see anything in the OP's first post that provides a shred of argument that could possibly succeed as a Defence.

It's this kind of ignorant behaviour that lends credence to the BPA when they talk about 'selfish motorists'.

As they say on Dragons' Den - I won't be investing any more time in this, I'm out.

95Rollers

wooderson 

This is what it looks like when peeling the tickets off:



And this is what it would look like after 5 minutes of violently trying to clean them off with washing up liquid and alcohol (still doesn't come off properly, and this was my dad's car; I had to drive all the way to France to export the car and didn't have time to clean it properly otherwise i would have missed the ferry. I definitely felt very unsafe during that long drive from the North of England because it's directly in front of my eyes) :

I would look at pursuing them for Criminal Damage.   Basically if every PCN has caused that damage to your window then it costs you time, cleaning materials or professionals to restore your property back to its original form!  The Criminal damage act states the damage does not have to be permanent. But it can be argued that they were reckless - why couldn't they just place the PCN in a packet under the wiper? They will argue the defence of "lawful authority" - but why not report it to police and log it anyway and pursue a private prosecution. It no more spurious than their cases against you. I would probably report it.

Here is the law regarding to Criminal Damage. How about sending him a bill!

Destroying or damaging property

Section 1(1) Criminal Damage Act 1971 - A person who without lawful excuse destroys or damages any property belonging to another, intending to destroy or damage any such property, or being reckless as to whether any such property would be destroyed or damaged, shall be guilty of an offence.

This offence is triable either way – para. 29, Schedule 1 Magistrates’ Court Act (MCA) 1980.The maximum penalty is 10 years imprisonment - Section 4 Criminal Damage Act 1971.

Meaning of Property

“Property” in the Act means property of a tangible nature, whether real or personal – s.10. The Act requires proof that tangible property has been damaged, not necessarily that the damage itself should be tangible. Property includes land. Thus land can be damaged; for example, by dumping chemicals on it. Property does not however include intangibles or things in action.

Meaning of Damage

Damage is not defined by the Act. It should be widely interpreted to include not only permanent or temporary physical harm, but also permanent or temporary impairment of value or usefulness - Morphitis v. Salmon [1990] Crim.L.R 48.

Any alteration to the physical nature of the property concerned may amount to damage within the meaning of the section. The courts have construed the term liberally and included damage that is not permanent such as smearing mud on the walls of a police cell. Where the interference amounts to an impairment of the value or usefulness of the property to the owner, then the necessary damage is established - R v Whiteley [1991] 93 CAR 25.

A modification of the contents of a computer shall not be regarded as damaging any computer or computer storage medium unless its effect on that computer or computer storage medium impairs its physical condition – s.10(5) Criminal Damage Act 1971. Simply modifying the contents of a computer is not criminal damage within the meaning of Section 10 of the Criminal Damage Act 1971 – see the Computer Misuse Legal Guidance.

Mens Rea

"Recklessness" for the purposes of the Criminal Damage Act is defined within the House of Lords decision in R v G [2004] 1 A.C. 1034. "A person acts recklessly within the meaning of s.1 Criminal Damage Act 1971 with respect to:

• A circumstance when he is aware of a risk that it exists or will exist;
• A result when he/she is aware of a risk that it will occur; and
• It is, in the circumstances known to him, unreasonable to take the risk."