Private parking ticket - don't ignore?

[clk320x]

Parking eye are on BBC watchdog tonight as Romeo mentions

 

[ptruman]

I've had two of these "things", appealed both, won both.
They have very few legs to stand on. They don't own the land and cannot prove loss, especially if it's not busy. And loss would have only been the parking fee charged, not £60 or more.

Fighting mine took 30 mins (pic taking) and an email.

 

[Crickleymal]

Misrepresenting (fraudulently, if you do it deliberately) who the driver was, is almost certainly the wrong approach

Especially if it's been flagged up on a forum which it's possible the company might read.

 

[Darren1717]

For what it’s worth, I’ve had 2 of these, both around 3 years ago now.

The first, I simply ignored. After 3 letters, they just stopped sending them. By ignoring it completely they would never have any proof that I’d actually received their ‘invoice’.

The second time I was in my company car. Had a letter and a pretty photo of my car with it, with times in and out of the car park. I wrote back, stating that it’s a company car and if their allegation was that I parked the car there (as opposed to another driver), then they should send me their evidence of this... with a note on the bottom that said words to the effect that I was not legally obliged to keep a record of who was driving the car.
Never heard back!

Things may have changed now, so don’t bank on my experiences being accurate now... jus’ saying!!!

 

[rf065]

I've had two of these also, a few years ago. The first time I knew I was legally parked & they had made a mistake, asked them to recheck their records which would have showed I'd paid for parking and had a receipt which proved it. They just kept sending me notice of their penalty fine and refused to enter into any meaningful dialogue. Second time was for parking in a hospital car park in a town I'd never even been to, again I told them they had made a mistake but to no avail.
After several months of penalty notices in the post every other week they passed my details to a debt collection agency, on both occasions. The debt collection agencies proceeded to harass & intimidate me, or at least they tried to, even after I told them I disputed the penalty notices which under their code of practice meant they should have referred the debt back to the parking company to sort out the dispute before they are allowed to collect any money or contact me again. They did not follow this procedure, so I reported them to the Financial Services Authority who overseen debt collection at that time.
After the FSA contacted them, they sent a letter stating they had told the parking company they could not continue with my case & the parking company sent a letter stating they were not going to proceed any further either. No apology or admission of guilt, more like they were doing me a favour.
I've got to admire Michael McIntyre though, on turning up at a booking for a private function in 2009 and finding out it was for debt collectors, he refused to take any part in it and left the venue giving up his £28,000 fee!

 

[E55BOF]

It sounds as though these companies, unlike the police, have no power to compel the registered keeper of the 'offending' vehicle to tell them who the driver was at the time. If that is so, then without proof of who was driving they have nothing to gain pursuing the matter. Does anybody know if that is correct?

 

[st13phil]

It sounds as though these companies, unlike the police, have no power to compel the registered keeper of the 'offending' vehicle to tell them who the driver was at the time. If that is so, then without proof of who was driving they have nothing to gain pursuing the matter. Does anybody know if that is correct?

Partially correct. See my post here, earlier in this thread.

 

[E55BOF]

Thank you, Phil. I'd forgotten that.

 

[219]

The problem with lying is that should the case end up in court you are committed to the lies which then become perjury.

It is only perjury if you lie in court - telling a lie to a private individual or company isn’t .

 

[Deleted member 6183]

It is only perjury if you lie in court - telling a lie to a private individual or company isn’t .

Eh?

Why would document your lie when submitting your evidence to the parking firm when you would have to admit it wasn't true to avoid committing perjury in the event of a court hearing?

Clutching at straws there.

 

[markjay]

It is only perjury if you lie in court - telling a lie to a private individual or company isn’t .

Eh?
Why would document your lie when submitting your evidence to the parking firm when you would have to admit it wasn't true to avoid committing perjury in the event of a court hearing?
Clutching at straws there.

I don't think Pontoneer was advocating lying in any capacity... he was merely clarifying a point-of-law.

 

[markjay]

The second time I was in my company car. Had a letter and a pretty photo of my car with it, with times in and out of the car park. I wrote back, stating that it’s a company car and if their allegation was that I parked the car there (as opposed to another driver), then they should send me their evidence of this... with a note on the bottom that said words to the effect that I was not legally obliged to keep a record of who was driving the car.

I understand the legalities around enforcing private parking contracts, but all this makes me wonder... why would you (or another company driver as the case may be) park in a marked private car park without paying the parking fee?

 

[Deleted member 6183]

The trick there might be to nominate as the driver someone they can’t chase - eg someone who is out of the country , or even better , someone who died since the alleged contravention.

I don't think Pontoneer was advocating lying in any capacity... he was merely clarifying a point-of-law.

Unconvinced.

 

[Amy]

I have extensive experience of these things

My 100% success rate is down to this -
NEVER reply to ANYTHING
DO NOT enter into ANY correspondence or dialogue WHAT SO EVER, regardless of their threats (stick) or offers to discount (carrot) if you pay now

They have NO contract unless you do co respond

Game over, you win
Same goes for TV licencing, but thats a different thread

 

[Dryce]

I have extensive experience of these things

My 100% success rate is down to this -
NEVER reply to ANYTHING
DO NOT enter into ANY correspondence or dialogue WHAT SO EVER, regardless of their threats (stick) or offers to discount (carrot) if you pay now

They have NO contract unless you do co respond

I think there is an appreciable risk that those following your method in England and Wales will end up finding their lives complicated by default judgments.

Game over, you win

Prior to POFA 2012 you may have had 100% 'success rate' following your 'strategy'.

As has been pointed out more than once in these forums things are more complicated now in England and Wales.

Same goes for TV licencing, but thats a different thread

And not very relevant - either in terms of subject *or law*.

 

[markjay]

This is correct. It is very easy to build a case against someone that does not respond to letters, using dedault judgements. By the time the bailiffs or sheriffs come knocking on the front door, it's too late to do anything about it.

In fact, this strategy does not rely on any legal argument. It is successful simply because many organisations send intimidating letters but often do not follow them up. This is because the amount owed is too small and it's not worth their while chasing it through the courts.

But not responding is not in itself a guarantee that the PPC will give-up and won't take it any further.

 

[neilrr]

Ignore or not?

http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?s=9680aeba40e9420e45c2b3fa9f7e7a1d&showtopic=79586

Ignoring PPC PCNs worked until 2013. After that if you ignore you lose. ^^^ Current state of affairs starts about post 50.

 

[Darren1717]

I understand the legalities around enforcing private parking contracts, but all this makes me wonder... why would you (or another company driver as the case may be) park in a marked private car park without paying the parking fee?

Ahh... to clarify, we were parked in a large shop car park on the weekend, where you get 1 hour for ‘free’, basically to stop people parking there all day to wander around town. We were using the shop in question but I should have learned by now, my wife was actually about 1.25 hours browsing/shopping in it... I didn’t realise!
A few weeks later, I got the letter saying that I was over the 1 hour and therefore had been issued a PCN (which is actually a parking charge notice, as opposed to a penalty charge notice which they are NOT allowed to issue!)

Of course... I don’t know who was driving that day

 

[Deano1972]

So can some one explain to me why shouldn’t you pay for parking in a car park

 

[Darren1717]

I

So can some one explain to me why shouldn’t you pay for parking in a car park

You should...

Some car parks, in the big shops and industrial areas, don’t actually have a facility for paying. You can get a pcn for simply overstaying the time limits, even by a minute as they are computer controlled ANPR cameras, as was the case in both of mine.

Have a look next time you go to Morrison’s or McDonald’s!