Received a fine from a Private Parking Company? MUST READ INFORMATION

[J222JRA]

good thread 180. Will be emailing this to friends.

[stinkycheese]

*awaits Saxbuild*

[goodall3518]

Can we make this a sticky somewhere.?

[Chuffy]

I was going to post saying becareful in believing information you find on the internet but if it works, and judging by the responses it has, then carry on.

I was hit with a £75 penalty when I overstayed in an Asda car park by tem minutes. I wrote to the company asking what the £75 involved. They responded giving crap about the lost time, the attendants time...............

I responded on the basis that the £75 is obviously used to cover liquidated and ascertained damages which are a pre assertained amount the land owner would lose should someone overstay. I reminded them that L&A damagies cannot be labled a penalty clause in a contract. I asked for a futher breakdown of how the £75 was calculated and they stopped sending letters. That was over a year ago.

[danzman1991]

Just got a fine through from Civil Enforcement Ltd for staying 14mins over the 2hour limit in McDonalds car park, they want £75 within 14days or £125 after that.

Lol, as if I have £75, let alone actually paying it.

This should be fun =P

[GirlRacerSianp]

I actually got one of those letters today saying i had stayed only 4 minutes longer than what i was supposed to have been allowed in a pizza hut car park...
Just because i couldn't be bothered to sit in maccy d's with all the chavs.

[Woody91]

By law if anyone has video footage with you in it they have to show it you if you want to see it. So if they claim "its against company policy" they have no proof and you win

[stevie_m]

surely this has to be stickied somewhere. Great post

[furio09]

toss pots

[craig180p]

Originally Posted by Woody91

By law if anyone has video footage with you in it they have to show it you if you want to see it. So if they claim "its against company policy" they have no proof and you win

FYI if any company holds information on you they legally have to release that info on the freedom of information act but they are within their rights to make a charge for the release of that information

[saxokid100]

Interesting post dude........

[Odsy]

Very good read, most helpful.

job well done i say thanks

[akuakabucy]

My girlfriend got one of these a few months back after overstaying in Mcdnalds. After reading up on the net and with the advice of just ignoring the letters we have now received a debt collectors notice and its now about £200+ mark. Once again though we wont be paying it. Just see what happens then will take the route of prove who was driving it.

[CaptainYid]

**BUMP**

i got a private oarking ticket on friday night. but im not exactly sure if i have the right to not pay it!

anyone care to help?

[Peter_D]

You will need to give details on what happened before anyone can help

You could of parked the car in a private area across 3 spaces, and went on holiday for 2 weeks for all we know!

[CaptainYid]

parked it in a bay in watford behind the nightclubs. off for a few hours to the clubs and came back to find the ticket on thw windscreen

[craig180p]

Originally Posted by CaptainYid

parked it in a bay in watford behind the nightclubs. off for a few hours to the clubs and came back to find the ticket on thw windscreen

If it's a council or police traffic penalty notice then 9 tines out of 10 you're screwed. If that's the case it's always worth writing to the issuing party pleading mitigating circumstances.

If it was a penalty charge notice attached to your car or the notice in the post because you were parked on private land then write back asking them for a copy of the signed contractual agreement between them and you - or just ignore all their letters

[craig180p]

Bump for reference. All points still valid

[skids_vts]

Originally Posted by saxo180

Below is something I came across on the Consumer Action Group forum while searching for the legal stance of a fine my missus received for allegedly being parked in a KFC car park several months ago.

The parking company were demanding £150 for overstaying a maximum time allowance, and escalated this to £225 when they, off their own back, got debt collectors involved.

A long read, but invaluable if you have received a fine whilst parked on PRIVATE LAND (Supermarkets, shopping centres, NCP car parks etc) this paper has everything you need to know to sucessfully defend yourself against extortionate fines



Private Parking Companies/Charges - Advice Paper (everything you need to know)


PRIVATE PARKING COMPANIES

A guide to an effective defence.


Firstly the important thing to remember is that Private Parking Companies are not backed by any aspect of criminal law. Tickets from Traffic Wardens working for the police or local authorities or tickets issued by police officers are. There are provisions for them in the Road Traffic Act 1991 and these provisions allow sanctions that the issuing authority can take.

THIS IS NOT THE CASE FOR PRIVATE PARKING COMPANIES.

I'm sure any number of readers will be familiar with such facilities, from your local pay and display to any number of 'multi deck' car parks and even, more recently, the car parks for many stores.

PRIVATE PARKING COMPANIES RELY ON THE LAW OF CONTRACT

And while contract law can be a minefield of offer, acceptance, terms, implied terms and clauses, it can be surprisingly easy to understand in terms of every day matters such as this.

Essentially when a driver of a vehicle drives into a car park and parks his car he is implied to accept the offer for parking on the terms of the offeror (the parking company or land owner). A contract is formed and therefore the contract can be broken (or breached).

The Private Parking Company (PPC) must make the terms clear to the user of the car park. Therefore they are obliged to place ample and appropriate signage about the car park to make those persons using the facilities aware of the terms. The signs must be clear and unambiguous and it cannot be obscured, faded, covered up or in any way difficult or impossible to read and understand. Often times those terms will include a provision that if you over stay you will be penalised to the tune of £50, £70 or whatever. They may also include a clause on clamping (I will not be dealing with the issue of clamping in this article). These signs are usually displayed at the pay stations (for pay and display) and for other car parks at the entrance and at intervals about the land. If the car park is improperly signed then immediately the PPC will be in difficulty. Thus when the driver parks the vehicle in the car park and pays or otherwise he accepts by way of his actions and a contract is formed between he and the owner of the land.

ONLY THE DRIVER AND THE OWNER OF THE LAND ARE A PARTY TO THE CONTRACT UNLESS THE PARKING COMPANY ACTS AS THEIR AGENT

Therefore should you receive an INVOICE from a PPC as the keeper of a vehicle and you do not know who was driving, I suggest you tell them this and tell them not to contact you again. You are under no obligation whatsoever to provide any information to the PPC. Refuse to do so.

If you were the driver of the vehicle then that will move the goalposts a little. I would never advise anyone to lie in a document that could be used in any future proceedings. Thus I cannot advocate that any person write to the PPC and deny being the driver if this they actually were the driver. That said you are still under no obligation to incriminate yourself or to provide the PPC with any information whatsoever. The onus is on the claimant in a civil action to prove their case. As in criminal matters the defendant will retain their right not to incriminate themselves or provide evidence against themselves. I advise that if you were the driver that you ask the PPC to provide proof of who the driver was, being very careful at every stage in communication NOT to offer that you were. Should they be unable to prove who the driver was or unwilling then I would suggest that you write to them telling them never to contact you again.

There will be instances where the PPC has video evidence or otherwise of the driver’s identity. If it transpires that this is the case I would not advise that you make efforts to deny being the driver. I would advise that you simply refuse to confirm that you were and refrain from offering any evidence that may incriminate you later.

Many guides of this ilk will advise you that if you are accosted by an employee of a PPC that you should simply get into your car, not speak a word to them, and leave. Indeed they will struggle to justify their actions or demands without an issued invoice. However I cannot stress enough that driving away quickly or dangerously would be a foolish action, one which could attract unwanted attention. There are plenty of ways to nullify the effect of receiving one of these invoices, so rather than risk any unpleasant outcomes I recommend that if there is no absolutely safe way to simply drive off that you refrain from doing so. I do advise that you ask that person’s name but say absolutely nothing more. Allow them to go about their business, in so far as they do not assault you, but offer them nothing that they could note and use later. Remember you are under no obligation at all to make their job easier. I suggest that you refuse to accept any invoice they hand to you and that you refuse to allow them to place it on your vehicle.

Once one of these invoices has been issued it will have certain characteristics that I would like to draw your attention to.

It will have a name that can be abbreviated to PCN, so Penalty Charge Notice, Parking Charge Notice etc. The reason for this is that there IS a provision within the Road Traffic Act for an instrument called a ‘Penalty Charge Notice’. This provision in the Road Traffic Act applies ONLY to those acting on behalf of the local authority (FPNs will cover tickets issued by those acting for the police). Penalty charge notices issued by local authorities have a certain format they must adhere to and it is well documented. Invoices from PPCs do NOT have to adhere to this format but it is very easy to confuse the two and assume an invoice from a PPC to be a ticket from a local authority. This is no accident and the effect is to cause the uninitiated to believe that the invoice issued by the PPC has an official bearing (ergo to make the recipient more likely to pay without issue).
To this effect the invoice may say on it that removal is prohibited (removal of a PCN or FPN by anyone other than the keeper/driver is a criminal offence under the Road Traffic Act). Furthermore the invoice may also state that the keeper’s details can be obtained from the DVLA (another characteristic of an FPN or PCN because for both these instruments it is the KEEPER who is liable, unlike when dealing with PPCs). To clarify, invoices issued by PPCs are not in any way covered by the provisions of the Road Traffic Act. They will not lead to criminal proceedings, removal or interference with them is not prohibited and they have no statutory right of access to the DVLA’s keeper information (they must request it).

PPCs COMMIT CRIMINAL OFFENCES

If you take the time to examine Section 40 of the Administration of Justice Act 1970 you will be surprised to discover, I’m sure, that the characteristics described, which give the invoice it’s official bearing and suggest that it’s removal may be a crime make the use, issuing and pursuit of funds claimed due because of such, a crime in itself. Note section 40 (d) specifically.

The Administration of Justice Act 1970.
Section 40 of the act provides that a person commits an offence if, with the object of coercing another person to pay money claimed from the other as a debt due under contract, he or she:
(a) harasses the other with demands for payment which by their frequency, or the manner or occasion of their making, or any accompanying threat or publicity are calculated to subject him or his family or household to alarm, distress or humiliation;
(b) falsely represents, in relation to the money claimed, that criminal proceedings lie for failure to pay it;
(c) falsely represent themselves to be authorised in some official capacity to claim or enforce payment;
(d) utters a document falsely represented by him to have some official character or purporting to have some official character which he knows it has not.
Paragraph (a) above does not apply to anything done by a person which is reasonable (and otherwise legal) for the purpose of :
(1) of securing the discharge of an obligation due, or believed by him to be due, to himself or to persons for whom he acts, or protecting himself or them from future loss; or
(2) of the enforcement of any liability by legal process.
It is also provided that a person may be guilty of an offence under paragraph (a) above if he concerts with others in the taking of such action as is described in that paragraph, notwithstanding that his own course of conduct does not by itself amount to harassment.
Thus if you receive one of these invoices and it appears to purport to be a PCN or FPN then I strongly suggest that you report the incident to the police. The police are DUTY BOUND to investigate and act. I had to have a ‘debate’ with the local Sgt to have him act on my behalf, however if you are polite and firm then the police should take it on for you.

THE CONTRACT ELEMENT

Let’s examine the law that does cover the issuing of these invoices.

As I’ve stated earlier the PPC will base it’s claim on the driver having entered into a contract with them. Strictly speaking this is very much the case. Assuming the signage and notice to be sufficient then the driver accept the offer of parking by his actions and is implied to accept the terms and conditions of so doing.

You will have three co-mingling defences to reply on in this case.

Firstly and most simply – contractual penalties. When you park in the car park and over-stay or misuse the facilities in some way you breach your contract with the land owner. The terms state you will not overstay or misuse the facilities, these are terms on which your contract for parking is based, thus when you do something contrary to these terms you breach the contract. The common law holds that the remedy for breach of contract is damages. Therefore the land owner is entitled to damages covering the costs incurred as a result of your breaching the contract.

Let us examine this – if you over-stay at a car park then the land owner loses revenue. Thus if parking is £1 an hour and you overstay by an hour then the damage is £1. Any company may argue that you are liable for the time of any attendant who may be involved in the issuing of an invoice. This is nonsense. The fact is that the PPC employ staff to be at the car park for all eventualities. Their job description will involve the issuing and preparation of these invoices, therefore to imply that damages are incurred by the involvement of an employee hired for this express purpose is a quite ridiculous prospect and should be sternly resisted (particularly when the cost of one of these invoices is more than the attendant is paid per day). Alternatively if you park incorrectly and use two bays I would suggest that in all reality the most that could be said to be valid damages is the value of the spaces you have used (so if you obscure a second space then double the cost of your parking). So as you can see actual damages in these cases will be absolutely minimal. Why, therefore, do the PPCs seek to charge the users of the car parks figures like £50 and £70? Simply because people do not know any better than to pay. The principle surrounding this is very similar to that surrounding bank charges. Banks cannot charge their customers extortionate rates for going over their overdraft limits (breaching their contract). The law is exactly the same for Private Parking Companies. Thus should matters progress with the parking company you should use this as the cornerstone of your defence.

You took all the time doing this when there is an easier and effective solution

IGNORE IT!!!!

[craig180p]

Originally Posted by skids_vts

You took all the time doing this when there is an easier and effective solution

IGNORE IT!!!!

It's alright saying ignore it but if people don't know the reasoning behind why you might then there may be reluctancy to do so.

This way people understand why.