Your browser isn't supported
It looks like you're using an old web browser. To get the most out of the site and to ensure guides display correctly, we suggest upgrading your browser now. Download the latest:

Welcome to the MSE Forums

We're home to a fantastic community of MoneySavers but anyone can post. Please exercise caution & report spam, illegal, offensive or libellous posts/messages: click "report" or email forumteam@.

Search
  • FIRST POST
    • QualitySign
    • By QualitySign 9th Apr 18, 12:49 PM
    • 2Posts
    • 0Thanks
    QualitySign
    Contract Acceptance v eyesight
    • #1
    • 9th Apr 18, 12:49 PM
    Contract Acceptance v eyesight 9th Apr 18 at 12:49 PM
    I received a ticket (using ANPR) after my vehicle was parked in an almost empty car park one evening from a PPC but they seem to think I entered into a contract with them. In order to do this the driver would have needed to read, understand and agree with their alleged conditions but without their reading glasses with them (not needed for driving) the sign could not have been physically read and hence no contract was formed.

    They of course ignored this, and letters from DRP are now being received and ignored which do raise the old blood pressure a bit. So my question really is, without naming the driver, would this be a valid defence should they actually take me to court?

    I have read all the newbie threads when this all started but seen nothing like this mentioned, so apologies if it has.
Page 1
    • Johno100
    • By Johno100 9th Apr 18, 1:01 PM
    • 3,940 Posts
    • 4,649 Thanks
    Johno100
    • #2
    • 9th Apr 18, 1:01 PM
    • #2
    • 9th Apr 18, 1:01 PM
    Well it is new and novel idea to try
    • Quentin
    • By Quentin 9th Apr 18, 1:03 PM
    • 37,308 Posts
    • 21,470 Thanks
    Quentin
    • #3
    • 9th Apr 18, 1:03 PM
    • #3
    • 9th Apr 18, 1:03 PM
    Debt collectors letters are covered in #4 of the newbies FAQ thread.

    If you do get a claim in future come back for advice on how to deal with this.

    Simply saying you cannot read without glasses won't win!

    They have 6 years to start legal action
    Last edited by Quentin; 09-04-2018 at 1:07 PM.
    • Amberpunter
    • By Amberpunter 9th Apr 18, 2:37 PM
    • 105 Posts
    • 36 Thanks
    Amberpunter
    • #4
    • 9th Apr 18, 2:37 PM
    • #4
    • 9th Apr 18, 2:37 PM

    Simply saying you cannot read without glasses won't win!
    Originally posted by Quentin
    On that basis does that mean the defence of a lack of lighting after sunset is not something that can be won on too? That was one of the key reasons in my appeal against a PPC, as again a contract could not be formed if the terms offered were not readable.
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 9th Apr 18, 2:43 PM
    • 61,606 Posts
    • 74,508 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    • #5
    • 9th Apr 18, 2:43 PM
    • #5
    • 9th Apr 18, 2:43 PM
    Lack of lit signs, yes that has legs.

    Signs must be readable in darkness or dusk, and lit if necessary, and that (lighting & clarity) remains in the control of the PPC. Therefore the PPC fails, if signs are too dark for an average driver to read.

    Needing reading glasses for a sign, no. Because the court would consider whether the contract was prominent and readable for the average man on the Clapham Omnibus (Google it!).
    PRIVATE PCN? DON'T PAY BUT DO NOT IGNORE IT TWO Clicks needed for advice:
    Top of the page: Home>>Forums>Household & Travel>Motoring>Parking Tickets, Fines & Parking - read the 'NEWBIES' FAQS thread!
    Advice to ignore is WRONG, unless in Scotland/NI.

    • The Deep
    • By The Deep 9th Apr 18, 2:45 PM
    • 10,005 Posts
    • 9,834 Thanks
    The Deep
    • #6
    • 9th Apr 18, 2:45 PM
    • #6
    • 9th Apr 18, 2:45 PM
    This is an entirely unregulated industry which is scamming the public with inflated claims for minor breaches of contracts for alleged parking offences, aided and abetted by a handful of low-rent solicitors.

    Parking Eye, CPM, Smart, and another company have already been named and shamed, as has Gladstones Solicitors, and BW Legal, (these two law firms take hundreds of these cases to court each year). They lose most of them, and have been reported to the regulatory authority by an M.P. for unprofessional conduct

    Hospital car parks and residential complex tickets have been especially mentioned.

    The problem has become so rampant that MPs have agreed to enact a Bill to regulate these scammers. Watch the video of the Second Reading in the HofC recently.

    http://parliamentlive.tv/event/index/2f0384f2-eba5-4fff-ab07-cf24b6a22918?in=12:49:41

    and complain in the most robust terms to your MP. With a fair wind they will be out of business by Christmas.
    You never know how far you can go until you go too far.
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 9th Apr 18, 2:47 PM
    • 61,606 Posts
    • 74,508 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    • #7
    • 9th Apr 18, 2:47 PM
    • #7
    • 9th Apr 18, 2:47 PM
    They of course ignored this
    That was silly, unless this was in Scotland, or an IPC firm. The Deep has assumed it was UKPC, in which case if it was them, the keeper threw away POPLA as an option to kill it off.
    PRIVATE PCN? DON'T PAY BUT DO NOT IGNORE IT TWO Clicks needed for advice:
    Top of the page: Home>>Forums>Household & Travel>Motoring>Parking Tickets, Fines & Parking - read the 'NEWBIES' FAQS thread!
    Advice to ignore is WRONG, unless in Scotland/NI.

    • Guys Dad
    • By Guys Dad 9th Apr 18, 3:18 PM
    • 10,559 Posts
    • 9,914 Thanks
    Guys Dad
    • #8
    • 9th Apr 18, 3:18 PM
    • #8
    • 9th Apr 18, 3:18 PM
    When parking on private land as well as public land, one needs to assume that there are t&c attached to the parking facility.

    To forget to bring the suitable spectacles to read the signs is 100% down to the driver.

    Next case, please.
    • Quentin
    • By Quentin 9th Apr 18, 3:28 PM
    • 37,308 Posts
    • 21,470 Thanks
    Quentin
    • #9
    • 9th Apr 18, 3:28 PM
    • #9
    • 9th Apr 18, 3:28 PM
    On that basis does that mean the defence of a lack of lighting after sunset is not something that can be won on too? That was one of the key reasons in my appeal against a PPC, as again a contract could not be formed if the terms offered were not readable.
    Originally posted by Amberpunter
    No.

    Your defence is entirely different to the one proposed here (which won't work)

    Your success was based on something completely different!
Welcome to our new Forum!

Our aim is to save you money quickly and easily. We hope you like it!

Forum Team Contact us

Live Stats

8Posts Today

3,664Users online

Martin's Twitter