today, deadline ,Shall I waiting the appeal or pay Parking fine £60 or wait for appeal result ?

Coupon-mad

But ParkingEye are not your defendant.

Terry1931

Coupon-mad said:

But ParkingEye are not your defendant.

No, in this case CPM is the claimant.

There are lots of instances in this forum where people have appealed and lost and then still not paid the charge and ignored it.

The tactic is then for the Parking companies to come back at you, up to several years later when your circumstances have changed, possibly moved, ....whatever. Things may have got more complicated.

If your grounds not to pay are sound then there is no problems, but that is not always the case. The matter needs to be resolved as soon as possible to the original parking charge. But the PArking companies dont push for this early resolution deliberately.

The answer is to pay the charge then turn the tables immediately and issue a claim against the parking company.

If every charge that is issued in the next few months was turned around into a claim against the parking company they would get swamped by legal battles. As it is at present they do the pursuit of a claim on their terms and timescales.

bargepole

I cannot see any legal basis here for a claim against the parking operator or landowner, whether in contract or tort.

Your argument seems to be that, as there was no means of paying the £15, you ended up paying them £100, and now want to sue them for the return of the excess £85.

But you didn't have to pay the £100,you could have defended any action from them, and if successful, paid them nothing, and probably got some costs back as well.

There's always a lottery element with small claims cases, but with most Judges, this one is likely to fly like a concrete glider.

D_P_Dance

I agree with the above.  As I have said earlier. I see no merit in your argument at all.  By paying, some judges may/will take the view that you acceped liability.  Others may think that you are using the law to obtain revenge.   

Terry1931

D_P_Dance said:

I agree with the above.  As I have said earlier. I see no merit in your argument at all.  By paying, some judges may/will take the view that you acceped liability.  Others may think that you are using the law to obtain revenge.   

Nonsense, all you have to do is state that the Parking Companies are a menace of uncertainty that hangs over people. You pay under duress and without prejudice and if you claim is valid you will win as either a defendant or a claimant ...its immaterial.

The advantage is that you seek judicial resolution on your timescale not the Parking companies.

Lastly you use the "Law" to obtain Justice

Terry1931

bargepole said:

I cannot see any legal basis here for a claim against the parking operator or landowner, whether in contract or tort.

Your argument seems to be that, as there was no means of paying the £15, you ended up paying them £100, and now want to sue them for the return of the excess £85.

But you didn't have to pay the £100,you could have defended any action from them, and if successful, paid them nothing, and probably got some costs back as well.

There's always a lottery element with small claims cases, but with most Judges, this one is likely to fly like a concrete glider.

I don't think any of the above is relevant to this post, the poster never mentioned £15 as a parking fee.

bargepole

Terry1931 said:

I don't think any of the above is relevant to this post, the poster never mentioned £15 as a parking fee.

No, sorry, I was referring to your proposed action against Parking Eye / Welcome Break on another thread.

But I still think you are going about things the wrong way. As for timescales, once an action has started, the deadlines are set by the Court, not by the Claimant or Defendant. 

Fruitcake

This discussion is not helping the OP, who has only made the one post asking for advice. It is being dragged off topic.

The regulars on this forum have been giving advice for years; advice that is based on a tried and tested process. Some of the advice is given by legally qualified posters, and/or by posters who have acted as lay reps in court.
One of the most experienced non-legally qualified regular posters on this forum beat a barrister in court.

A new, as yet untried process has been suggested. Before I would consider advising someone else to use that new process, I would want to see it tested in court first to see that it actually works.

Terry1931

Fruitcake said:

This discussion is not helping the OP, who has only made the one post asking for advice. It is being dragged off topic.

The regulars on this forum have been giving advice for years; advice that is based on a tried and tested process. Some of the advice is given by legally qualified posters, and/or by posters who have acted as lay reps in court.
One of the most experienced non-legally qualified regular posters on this forum beat a barrister in court.

A new, as yet untried process has been suggested. Before I would consider advising someone else to use that new process, I would want to see it tested in court first to see that it actually works.

No problems

I have also beaten My local Councils Barrister in Court over Breach of the Party Wall Act, so I'm not exactly a newbie either.

I have won MCOL claims against my Council for damages due to Faulty Highways drains.

My comments are entirely appropriate to the original posters question, about what may give the best peace of mind as well as financial response to a parking charge.

It is statistically highly probable that the Poster will lose his appeal in the Kangaroo Court and the Charge will increase by £40, then the same question arises, do you pay or do you wait and see.

Take a look over this forum , its littered with cases that crop up 3, 4 5 or more years after the parking charge is issued.

Some people have busy lives and may even be out of the country or away from home for many months and you wont know when that AOS will be required. 

Some people would rather pay and forget about it, rather  than have this hang over them for some unknown period, my suggestion is that there is indeed a third way to get a satisfactory outcome and beat the \parking operators.

cherry2017

Terry1931 said:

Fruitcake said:

This discussion is not helping the OP, who has only made the one post asking for advice. It is being dragged off topic.

The regulars on this forum have been giving advice for years; advice that is based on a tried and tested process. Some of the advice is given by legally qualified posters, and/or by posters who have acted as lay reps in court.
One of the most experienced non-legally qualified regular posters on this forum beat a barrister in court.

A new, as yet untried process has been suggested. Before I would consider advising someone else to use that new process, I would want to see it tested in court first to see that it actually works.

No problems

I have also beaten My local Councils Barrister in Court over Breach of the Party Wall Act, so I'm not exactly a newbie either.

I have won MCOL claims against my Council for damages due to Faulty Highways drains.

My comments are entirely appropriate to the original posters question, about what may give the best peace of mind as well as financial response to a parking charge.

It is statistically highly probable that the Poster will lose his appeal in the Kangaroo Court and the Charge will increase by £40, then the same question arises, do you pay or do you wait and see.

Take a look over this forum , its littered with cases that crop up 3, 4 5 or more years after the parking charge is issued.

Some people have busy lives and may even be out of the country or away from home for many months and you wont know when that AOS will be required. 

Some people would rather pay and forget about it, rather  than have this hang over them for some unknown period, my suggestion is that there is indeed a third way to get a satisfactory outcome and beat the \parking operators.

Thanks for your reply, you mentioned 3rd solutions?
to avoid the further problem, how can I offer them like £30 instead of £60 or £100? 
As we have the parking permit, it was just not fully displayed, it is not fair to pay so much like £60.