Current state of parking fines - April 2024

Joey122

I am keen to understand what the current forum understanding is of parking charges being levied by privtae operators 

Previousy I thought these were unenforceable and should be ignored (I read the newbies and stickes thread as well) but I keep seeing parking companies as claimants in central london cause lists where listings are putting on small claims trials for cases to be heard 

I would have thought that would mean that claimants are pretty sure of success to get to this point 

Note this is not just a claim form but an actual small claims trial which means the claim and defence and directions have been sent 

Fruitcake

They are not fines.

The advice to ignore a parking charge notice from an unregulated private parking company has not been given on this forum since the law changed in 2012.

These parking companies use the county courts as cheap debt collectors because the vast majority of motorists get scared and pay up.
There are around 90,000 parking court claims issued per year, whereas there were less than 50 per year before 2012.
Properly defended, this forum has an exceptionally high win rate, but we only touch the tip of the iceberg. The majority of motorists either admit things they shouldn't, or don't put in a strong enough well researched defence, which is why so many PPCs win with their conveyer belt robo-claim system.

It's a rip-off business model which is why forum members are here every day fighting for the rights of motorists. Hopefully the parking bill 2019 will become active this year once the DLUHC pull their finger out and introduce the new mandatory parking code of conduct.

Joey122

You can call them fines / charges or penalties 

I am aware that any claims are issued each year 

My question is what the defence is (is it litigated on signs being blurry etc) as the defence of who was driving is no longer permitted 

Coupon-mad

You sound like you work for London courts or might be a solicitor?  Debt advisor? Or a Judge?  We had a county court Judge posting here a few years ago.  He said to me that he learned loads from us!  I'm still in touch with him.

The DLUHC's draft Impact Assessment in 2023 tells you how many parking claims are issued per annum by the main roboclaim culprits:

 https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/64b6666a0ea2cb001315e47b/Draft_IA_-_Private_Parking_Code_of_Practice_.pdf

DCB Legal file about 100k boilerplate claims in the county courts per year and almost never go to hearings.  They discontinue AFTER hearings are listed.

The other main Roboclaim firms tend to let cases go to hearings but we win almost every one we handle here.

The defence re 'who was driving' is CERTAINLY permitted and remains a guaranteed winning point in a good half of cases.  You seem to be assuming all PPCs use the POFA provisions enabling keeper liability under certain circumstances?

Nope. In lots of cases there's no keeper liability.

But unclear signs, 'no landowner authority' and defences where the victim Defendant is a resident with rights/easements to park, are equally common winners.

As is a Consumer Rights Act 'unfair terms' and 'unfair consumer notices' argument, including lack of prominence of the onerous term.

And poorly pleaded Particulars. Look.  (many thanks to @Le_Kirk for this link):

Judgments

There is also now a link available to Chan only which is persuasive on lower courts.  Hence the copycat judgments above.
 

Fruitcake

Joey122 said:

You can call them fines / charges or penalties 

I am aware that any claims are issued each year 

My question is what the defence is (is it litigated on signs being blurry etc) as the defence of who was driving is no longer permitted 

You can call them what you like, but parking charge notices from unregulated private parking companies are not fines.

The defence can be many things, including inadequate signage (blurry, prohibitive, incapable of forming a contract with a motorists), and the defence of not being the driver is still permitted in cases where the keeper cannot be held liable, (Scotland, NI, not relevant land where byelaws or traffic orders apply, failure to comply with the PoFA 2012). 

In addition to the defence points mentioned by C-m, there are also defences based on the PPC not being the landowner and not having a contract to issue charges in their own name, The Equality Act 2010, Landlord and Tenant Act 1987, issuing charges on public roads and/or land owned or leased by the motorist themselves, trade association breaches, double-dips, falsifying evidence, ANPR failures, and worryingly, the wrong vehicle and/or wrong defendant.

Iceweasel

Fruitcake is right - they are neither fines nor penalties.
Only the courts, police, and local councils can issue those.
Ignorance of the legal situation is why so many folks pay up.
Your calling them fines simply helps the PPCs to maintain their air of legitimacy and scare people into compliance with their speculative invoices.
Properly contested the charges fail.