Should I, she, or we pay this private companies parking fine?

[Ming the Merciless]

Point them at this thread @Accy cyclist . Bound to let you off with your explanation here.

 

[Accy cyclist]

You say tell the truth, but if the truth in this case is 'I was wearing a hideous jacket so I didn't want to go into your shop' then I think that might be quite difficult to defend. If an additional truth is 'I need to draw out this case in order to fulfil the need I have for validation by means of shitposting on social media', then that might be something that needs addressing by someone with a different type of expertise than a parking enforcement company.

Can't you see that it's you who feels the need to 'shitpost' on social media? I asked a reasonable question that has been answered and as i said earlier i was ok to leave it until i received professional advice, but you just want to keep commenting about it.

 

[winjim]

In general, too much is made of 'case law' and 'precedents', neither of which mean what many people think they do.

It may have been a High Court judge who passed judgment in Beavis, but no judge can change the law, which remains the same.

Just because Beavis lost, it does not mean that every other motorist will lose.

Put another way, had Beavis won, it would not make every subsequent private parking ticket unenforceable.

Beavis was a good win for the parking companies, but changes nothing with regard to establishing damages.

Post Beavis, parking companies continue to win and lose cases, each of which is judged on its own merits.

Some enforcement is needed, for example when drivers use the supermarket car park to park all day for work elsewhere.

Taking nine hours of free parking every working day is a great deal different to once overstaying a 90 minute limit by 10 minutes.



Not every case is pursued.

Parking Eye declined to pursue my most recent ticket, which was post Beavis.

Instead, they chose to flog it as part of a job lot to another company, who wrote a few letters then did the same again.

The whole process is rather low rent, reminiscent of the trade in credit card and other personal details.

See my first post in this thread regarding gambling.

 

[Drago]

I long for the good old days of wheel clamping. Sensible folk were much less inclined to take the parking pith back then!

 

[winjim]

Can't you see that it's you who feels the need to 'shitpost' on social media? I asked a reasonable question that has been answered and as i said earlier i was ok to leave it until i received professional advice, but you just want to keep commenting about it.

I'm not shitposting though, I'm chatting bollocks, there's a difference. And the question has been answered with an almost unequivocal 'just pay up' but then you're like 'fark it, I'll take my chances in court'. Which is fair enough, that's your prerogative but it reads like shitposting to me.

 

[Accy cyclist]

" Grrr, i hate posters who post stuff i don't like, so

I long for the good old days of wheel clamping. Sensible folk were much less inclined to take the parking pith back then!

A neighbour was clamped about 18 months ago because his car wasn't taxed and insured. He got his friends to cut the clamp off late at night and hide the car in a nearby lockup. I know because another neigbour saw it happen. So, he escaped having to pay to have the clamp removed, paying back duty on tax and insurance and also avoided being taken to court for damaging the DVLA's wheel clamp.

 

[Drago]

Not a good tactic. Once the clamp goes on the DVLA have a financial interest in the vehicle, and for the purposes of criminal law become an owner until the matter is settled.

The problem doesn't go away because the car is hidden, because he can't ever use the car again, can't sell it, can't do anything with it, and he will now be now be wanted for theft of motor vehicle.

He's taken a minor mater and turned it into a serious one, which is a bit chumpish.

 

[Accy cyclist]

because he can't ever use the car again, can't sell it,

Seriously, about a month or so later he sold the car (A Ford Red in colour Cougar, K Reg') and it's now to be seen being driven around town! The dodgy neighbour has an old Jaguar,registered in August 1991...i know because i looked it up online. I checked about a month ago to see if it was 'road legal'. The MOT was due to run out on the 12th of August. I can see the car but not the reg' plate from my flat. When i go out soon i'll write down the reg' number then check it when i get back home. I bet he hasn't had it MOT'd. In fact it hasn't moved for weeks so i'm 99.9999999% sure he hasn't!!

 

[Pale Rider]

See my first post in this thread regarding gambling.

Gambling has very little to do with it.

Once Accy has lost the prompt payment offer, the claim from the parking company is £90.

Their damages cannot increase, only their costs, which they know they cannot claim in a 'small claim'.

Accy's liability, even if he loses which is by no means certain, is all but limited to £90.

Also worth bearing in mind the parking company is the claimant, Accy is the respondent.

They have to establish a loss, no easy task in these cases as I've outlined.

As the respondent, Accy doesn't really have to establish anything, although his first line of defence will be that his actions occasioned no loss to the parking company, therefore they cannot be entitled to an award of damages - which is the only option open to the county court judge.

Put another way, Accy can afford to concede he returned to his car 30 minutes after the posted limit.

The whys, wherefores and the stripey jackets of that are entirely irrelevant.

 

[Rocky]

Accy - do you feel confident that you are able to pursue this case? Are you on top of the law as it relates to this area? Do you have the facilities and abilities to write appeal letters? This whole process takes ages and is quite demanding. And should you lose, are you prepared to have the bailiffs come round and take your car/other property away to settle the debt and legal fees of the parking company?

I'm not sure how much per hour you charged as a window cleaner but I bet that fighting this fine will cost you huge amounts of money and time. We are talking days not minutes here.

There are many on here that would advise you to fight this case or ignore it. My very strong advise is to pay £45. Draw a line under it and sleep easy in your bed rather than staying awake at night wondering when the bailiffs will come to take your TV, car and computer.

 

[Pale Rider]

And should you lose are you prepared to have the bailiffs come round and take your car/other property away to settle the debt and legal fees of the parking company?

Scaremongering - as used by the parking companies.

Should Accy lose, he will have a county court judgment against him for £90, which he has already said he can settle immediately.

Bailiffs and the like only come into it if the now established debt is not settled.

 

[winjim]

Gambling has very little to do with it.

Once Accy has lost the prompt payment offer, the claim from the parking company is £90.

Their damages cannot increase, only their costs, which they know they cannot claim in a 'small claim'.

Accy's liability, even if he loses which is by no means certain, is all but limited to £90.

Also worth bearing in mind the parking company is the claimant, Accy is the respondent.

They have to establish a loss, no easy task in these cases as I've outlined.

As the respondent, Accy doesn't really have to establish anything, although his first line of defence will be that his actions occasioned no loss to the parking company, therefore they cannot be entitled to an award of damages - which is the only option open to the county court judge.

Put another way, Accy can afford to concede he returned to his car 30 minutes after the posted limit.

The whys, wherefores and the stripey jackets of that are entirely irrelevant.

Yeah, so he either pays £45 (£22.50 if taps up his mate) or takes the chance on paying either £90 or nothing. Sounds a lot like gambling to me.

It will be interesting to see which way it goes, if this is the route he decides to go down.

 

[Tenkaykev]

🎶 As he parks in Lidl's Car Park, with an independent air, you can hear CC declare,
" He must be a Millionaire! "
You can hear them sigh, and say "Oh My " as he claims to be so hard done by,
He's the man who parked his car in Lidl's Car Park 🎶

 

[Rocky]

Scaremongering - as used by the parking companies.

Should Accy lose, he will have a county court judgment against him for £90, which he has already said he can settle immediately.

Bailiffs and the like only come into it if the now established debt is not settled.

I'm not scaremongering - I'm offering sensible advice. If he follows your advice are you prepared to help him submit all the legal paperwork and pay any dues when he loses?

Accy.....how much are you prepared to lose in this case? Your car? Your TV? Your laptop?

 

[Rocky]

Accy - one more thing, and then I'll not contribute any more - who do you trust on CC to give you decent sensible advice? Have a good think and then act accordingly.