Parking Letter of Claim...from 2020.

Ceresdigion

Scrub that - she has received an e-mail from Alliance Parking with pictures of the car not displaying a ticket. As she was moving between several short-term lets at that time any letters went to the wrong address. She has no recollection of parking there, but it was years ago.

So, that's £160 to Moorside then? Or is it the case that even when the fine is real, the extras they add on are worth challenging?

Coupon-mad

Obviously you aren't paying! Read the forum. I don't know where you've seen or read an option that says 'pay up' because there isn't one. Where have you heard us call this a fine? We haven't.

Why do you think this changes anything, and that any other case is different than this one? All parking firms have some sort of photo evidence (of course they do) so literally EVERY case is exactly like this.

Read the NEWBIES thread second post.

  

Ceresdigion

I have tried the threads for some time, but to be honest the excessive formatting variation, wide paragraph spacing and random capitalisation makes teasing out the hierarchy of information from the wall of text very difficult when scrolling back and forth on a screen. No doubt it's very clear to those who have years of experience with the process, but for someone new to it the whole thing who's never had a parking ticket, it is completely overwhelming with the word salad acronyms, references to court cases, debt agencies... It would be easier for newbies if it were structured as bullet points or an introductory flowchart as the Byzantine procedures are terribly confusing.

The search function on here is also intermittent, and I get a 504 error every time which usually clears with a refresh, but it makes getting the right keywords difficult.

As her car was there without a ticket, surely that's a fine, fair and square? She has no trouble with a 'mea culpa' since that's the arrangement one makes. She doesn't recall the circumstances as to why she wouldn't have paid and displayed since she can't remember going there at all, but it's not something she makes a habit of.

Are you suggesting it's still worth contesting in totality despite the evidence, with the letter referring to the 'hugely exaggerated amount which the Government called "extorting money from motorists"'?

*Edit - I see that the spacing is partly the poor forum software. A paragraph break in the composition box becomes a double break in the post. Leaving paragraphs immediately beneath one another results in a single break when posted. It's not WYSIWYG...

Coupon-mad

I hate flowcharts, personally, and will never create one for private parking charges.

It won't work anyway because there are too many stages and options. And the law is changing in a year to curb the rogue industry, so we are having to cover lots of bases and changes.

The forum is a bit glitchy but the search function always works well for me and when posting, it doesn't become a double space unless you add a space after your sentence then return. Don't add a space.

I don't really understand the difficulty in knowing what to do. You just read the right post about your stage. There are not double paragraph spaces in the main messages in the NEWBIES thread. Capital letters are used to make sure people read the important stuff.

Post 4 of the NEWBIES thread is about ignoring DRA threatograms and then post 2 is about LBC and/or court defences. The slightly annoying thing for us and you, is that the forum no longer shows post numbers in each reply (it used to) but it's still easy to see which post is second and the one with the daft 'debt demand' pictures is the fourth post.

Of course nobody pays £160 or £170 ... and why are you just assuming from a (biased, non-impartial) photo angle that she didn't pay?

Maybe she did and it was a 'fluttering ticket' (slipped off the dash) or maybe she was paying whilst the photo was taken. Maybe the machine or app wasn't working.

The burden is theirs to prove.

Parking firms struggle with that and judges generally disallow the added fake fee because it's a pile of steaming you-know-what and disproportionate. Even the PCN itself is disproportionate in a pay & display car park and might well be deemed unfair if the photo evidence is taken in two minutes flat (no grace period) or if the signs are not considered prominent.

Bottom line?

Those who pay are supporting a scam industry and funding the next fake PCNs. Don't let the keeper or driver be that person. You don't pay/sponsor or support an industry that is in such 'market failure' that the Government is now stamping on them.

Why not watch this debate (all of it):
https://parliamentlive.tv/Event/Index/8f99a416-40a5-4c75-b9b6-d3234774a25c

Hopefully a lightbulb moment? MPs from all parties are unanimously up in arms about it.

There is no CCJ risk nor huge costs at stake by defending a poorly pleaded claim that a judge might even (should) strike out without a hearing.