Return of the clampers

Daily Echo: Return of the clampers Return of the clampers

THEY’RE back. Just when the public believed the curse of car clampers was over, the nightmare is set to get worse than ever.

A Daily Echo investigation has found former clampers are back in business – this time handing out tickets demanding as much as £90 a day.

Clampers have made life a misery for motorists and preyed on the elderly and vulnerable who have paid out hundreds of pounds in release fees.

A year after our Give Clampers the Boot campaign, the Protection of Freedoms Act made it a criminal offence to clamp on private land in a bid to draw a line under the scourge.

But that appears to have been wishful thinking.

Today we can reveal that firms are back threatening motorists with cash demands instead of car clamps – just days after the new law slammed the brakes on their money spinning venture. They are issuing steep charges and now have the right to track drivers down through the DVLA to force them to pay up.

One of them is Premier Park Ltd, based in Exeter. The firm has now moved in on the territory once occupied by the city’s best known clamper Jason White who disappeared from the city after his firm Whites Car Park Solutions financially collapsed.

This includes St Mary’s Church in Southampton, throughout the city centre and Eastleigh with charges from £100 if they are not paid within two weeks.

Another firm operating in Southampton is UK Car Park Management which charges up to £90 a day. It offers its service to landowners free of charge as long as they can bag the cash they demand from drivers.

It also threatens unspecified charges resulting from action over unpaid fees.

Our investigation into the firm also found that it does not have the right to use the accreditation logos that feature on its website.

This includes a stamp from the Security Industry Authority and UKAS Quality management badge.

Neither of the organisations said they had the company listed and Trading Standards are now investigating.

The Echo also found the firm has changed its name from Parking Control Management (South) Ltd, or PCM which once clamped victims across Hampshire – charging release fees of more than £300.

The newly named firm has now applied for membership of the British Parking Association (BPA) allowing it access to DVLA data to track down motorists to their homes.

All a parking firm has to do is sign up with the BPA and agree to keep to their code of conduct.

But motoring organizations say changes to clamping laws do not provide sufficient protection from rogue parking operators.

They say while clamping was stopped the clampers can now operate as freelance ticketers.

Paul Watters, head of roads policy for the Hampshire based AA, said: “We did warn that the exclampers would find a new arm.

“The Government has failed and this is one area of the parking industry that the AA and other organisations wanted regulation.

“Without regulation every Tom, Dick and Harry will carry on. They are working on the basis that people will be scared into paying.

“We think it would have been better to have all firms licensed by the local authority.”

The Association of British Drivers said it also predicted this would happen and has joined calls for tight regulation and licensing. However, the BPA said it was aware that the cowboy clampers could switch to becoming “rogue ticketers” but felt that by becoming a member of its organisation they control their behaviour via its code of conduct.

If breached it can discipline the firm with measures including expulsion. It also has discretion not to allow members it feels would bring it into disrepute.

A spokesman said: “We say being a member of our organisation is better because it shows you are complying with our regulations.

“But there is no regulations holding them to be a member. We want regulation so that everyone can be a member with the same rules.”

Comments (32)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

4:30pm Fri 12 Oct 12

owen_thesaints says...

Get over it Echo. Something has to be done to stop people parking on someone else's land.

What does the Echo suggest?

I assume by the Echo constantly running this story that it's fine for me to come and park outside their offices or on their home driveway without any repercussions?
Get over it Echo. Something has to be done to stop people parking on someone else's land. What does the Echo suggest? I assume by the Echo constantly running this story that it's fine for me to come and park outside their offices or on their home driveway without any repercussions? owen_thesaints
  • Score: 0

4:33pm Fri 12 Oct 12

Graeme Harrison says...

Fact: these parking "fines" can only be enforced through a claim brought in the county court against the driver or registered keeper of the vehicle.
Fact: the law only allows ticketers to recover damages equivalent to what you should have paid to park in the car park in the first place. For example, if a car park charges £1.20 per hour to park and you overstay by 1 hour, the court can only award the ticketers £1.20 in damages.
Ask yourself how likely it is that a ticketer would go to the trouble of bringing a claim in the county court for £1.20 and then decide whether you're going to pay the ticketer anything.
Fact: these parking "fines" can only be enforced through a claim brought in the county court against the driver or registered keeper of the vehicle. Fact: the law only allows ticketers to recover damages equivalent to what you should have paid to park in the car park in the first place. For example, if a car park charges £1.20 per hour to park and you overstay by 1 hour, the court can only award the ticketers £1.20 in damages. Ask yourself how likely it is that a ticketer would go to the trouble of bringing a claim in the county court for £1.20 and then decide whether you're going to pay the ticketer anything. Graeme Harrison
  • Score: 0

4:35pm Fri 12 Oct 12

Frank28 says...

Anyone finding their vehicle clamped should call the Police, who will arrest the clamper on suspicion of Blackmail. I've already seen it done.
Anyone finding their vehicle clamped should call the Police, who will arrest the clamper on suspicion of Blackmail. I've already seen it done. Frank28
  • Score: 0

4:38pm Fri 12 Oct 12

BerryMan says...

Its Easy, Park where you are supposed too! If you park where you are not supposed to, take the consequences, you have no grounds to moan. Whats the big deal?
Its Easy, Park where you are supposed too! If you park where you are not supposed to, take the consequences, you have no grounds to moan. Whats the big deal? BerryMan
  • Score: 0

4:54pm Fri 12 Oct 12

Paramjit Bahia says...

I wonder how many people still remember press coverage of former Home Secretary David Blunket's affair with an American lady. At one time it was quoted that in the immigration case of one of her employee; he'd allegedly said something like I know the law because I wrote it. He obviously was referring to some loophole in the law.

With that in mind I wonder if Cameron and Clegg led Coalition may have left these loopholes for cowboys in latest legislation deliberately.

Otherwise when even respectable organisations like AA have warned why nobody is listened?

Going by what Echo has explained this new law could be abused and become a charter for even more easy exploitation of motorists by same or similar characters that new legislation was supposed to have eliminated.

Perhaps Echo should be starting another new campaign.
I wonder how many people still remember press coverage of former Home Secretary David Blunket's affair with an American lady. At one time it was quoted that in the immigration case of one of her employee; he'd allegedly said something like I know the law because I wrote it. He obviously was referring to some loophole in the law. With that in mind I wonder if Cameron and Clegg led Coalition may have left these loopholes for cowboys in latest legislation deliberately. Otherwise when even respectable organisations like AA have warned why nobody is listened? Going by what Echo has explained this new law could be abused and become a charter for even more easy exploitation of motorists by same or similar characters that new legislation was supposed to have eliminated. Perhaps Echo should be starting another new campaign. Paramjit Bahia
  • Score: 0

5:01pm Fri 12 Oct 12

Georgem says...

BerryMan wrote:
Its Easy, Park where you are supposed too! If you park where you are not supposed to, take the consequences, you have no grounds to moan. Whats the big deal?
The big deal is that the consequences are effectively uncapped. You're absolutely right that we simply shouldn't park in those areas, but conversely, the cost of doing so should not be at the whim of some cowboy.
[quote][p][bold]BerryMan[/bold] wrote: Its Easy, Park where you are supposed too! If you park where you are not supposed to, take the consequences, you have no grounds to moan. Whats the big deal?[/p][/quote]The big deal is that the consequences are effectively uncapped. You're absolutely right that we simply shouldn't park in those areas, but conversely, the cost of doing so should not be at the whim of some cowboy. Georgem
  • Score: 0

5:05pm Fri 12 Oct 12

BerryMan says...

Georgem wrote:
BerryMan wrote:
Its Easy, Park where you are supposed too! If you park where you are not supposed to, take the consequences, you have no grounds to moan. Whats the big deal?
The big deal is that the consequences are effectively uncapped. You're absolutely right that we simply shouldn't park in those areas, but conversely, the cost of doing so should not be at the whim of some cowboy.
I understand, but park properly and they will soon be out of business!
[quote][p][bold]Georgem[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]BerryMan[/bold] wrote: Its Easy, Park where you are supposed too! If you park where you are not supposed to, take the consequences, you have no grounds to moan. Whats the big deal?[/p][/quote]The big deal is that the consequences are effectively uncapped. You're absolutely right that we simply shouldn't park in those areas, but conversely, the cost of doing so should not be at the whim of some cowboy.[/p][/quote]I understand, but park properly and they will soon be out of business! BerryMan
  • Score: 0

5:12pm Fri 12 Oct 12

Georgem says...

BerryMan wrote:
Georgem wrote:
BerryMan wrote:
Its Easy, Park where you are supposed too! If you park where you are not supposed to, take the consequences, you have no grounds to moan. Whats the big deal?
The big deal is that the consequences are effectively uncapped. You're absolutely right that we simply shouldn't park in those areas, but conversely, the cost of doing so should not be at the whim of some cowboy.
I understand, but park properly and they will soon be out of business!
There have been incidents where people were parked properly, but misjudged the length of their parking stay. There have been incidents of operatives hovering around vehicles waiting until the very second the parking expires, in order to milk it for some easy money. There have been incidents where vehicles are held to ransom, late at night, leaving people unable to get home. These are underhand tactics, regardless of what parking misdemeanours are going on.

The problem with clamping is, it doesn't solve the immediate problem. You find a vehicle where it shouldn't be? Hmm, I'm not convinced that effectively gluing it in place solves that. Delivery vans have been clamped for "obstructing traffic". What kind of idiocy is that?
[quote][p][bold]BerryMan[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Georgem[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]BerryMan[/bold] wrote: Its Easy, Park where you are supposed too! If you park where you are not supposed to, take the consequences, you have no grounds to moan. Whats the big deal?[/p][/quote]The big deal is that the consequences are effectively uncapped. You're absolutely right that we simply shouldn't park in those areas, but conversely, the cost of doing so should not be at the whim of some cowboy.[/p][/quote]I understand, but park properly and they will soon be out of business![/p][/quote]There have been incidents where people were parked properly, but misjudged the length of their parking stay. There have been incidents of operatives hovering around vehicles waiting until the very second the parking expires, in order to milk it for some easy money. There have been incidents where vehicles are held to ransom, late at night, leaving people unable to get home. These are underhand tactics, regardless of what parking misdemeanours are going on. The problem with clamping is, it doesn't solve the immediate problem. You find a vehicle where it shouldn't be? Hmm, I'm not convinced that effectively gluing it in place solves that. Delivery vans have been clamped for "obstructing traffic". What kind of idiocy is that? Georgem
  • Score: 0

5:18pm Fri 12 Oct 12

downfader says...

BerryMan wrote:
Georgem wrote:
BerryMan wrote:
Its Easy, Park where you are supposed too! If you park where you are not supposed to, take the consequences, you have no grounds to moan. Whats the big deal?
The big deal is that the consequences are effectively uncapped. You're absolutely right that we simply shouldn't park in those areas, but conversely, the cost of doing so should not be at the whim of some cowboy.
I understand, but park properly and they will soon be out of business!
How about improving the standards/regulation
s by which private land is supposed to have with regards notification of private property..? There are one or two places in the city centre that have a 12 inch sign, often unlit at night and our of the eye-line.

Having said that there are a lot of issues with people parking where they shouldn't, but these are usually on double yellows, corners, pavements etc.. outside the remit of these private firms.
[quote][p][bold]BerryMan[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Georgem[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]BerryMan[/bold] wrote: Its Easy, Park where you are supposed too! If you park where you are not supposed to, take the consequences, you have no grounds to moan. Whats the big deal?[/p][/quote]The big deal is that the consequences are effectively uncapped. You're absolutely right that we simply shouldn't park in those areas, but conversely, the cost of doing so should not be at the whim of some cowboy.[/p][/quote]I understand, but park properly and they will soon be out of business![/p][/quote]How about improving the standards/regulation s by which private land is supposed to have with regards notification of private property..? There are one or two places in the city centre that have a 12 inch sign, often unlit at night and our of the eye-line. Having said that there are a lot of issues with people parking where they shouldn't, but these are usually on double yellows, corners, pavements etc.. outside the remit of these private firms. downfader
  • Score: 0

5:22pm Fri 12 Oct 12

BerryMan says...

Georgem wrote:
BerryMan wrote:
Georgem wrote:
BerryMan wrote:
Its Easy, Park where you are supposed too! If you park where you are not supposed to, take the consequences, you have no grounds to moan. Whats the big deal?
The big deal is that the consequences are effectively uncapped. You're absolutely right that we simply shouldn't park in those areas, but conversely, the cost of doing so should not be at the whim of some cowboy.
I understand, but park properly and they will soon be out of business!
There have been incidents where people were parked properly, but misjudged the length of their parking stay. There have been incidents of operatives hovering around vehicles waiting until the very second the parking expires, in order to milk it for some easy money. There have been incidents where vehicles are held to ransom, late at night, leaving people unable to get home. These are underhand tactics, regardless of what parking misdemeanours are going on.

The problem with clamping is, it doesn't solve the immediate problem. You find a vehicle where it shouldn't be? Hmm, I'm not convinced that effectively gluing it in place solves that. Delivery vans have been clamped for "obstructing traffic". What kind of idiocy is that?
I've seen a delivery van obstruct traffic too. In that traffic was an ambulance on blue lights. He should have been towed as he obviously considered his delivery far more important than any other traffic getting through. Many people don't consider the knock on impact or possible consequences of their parking, in extreme cases could be life or death, very extreme obviously! Prices may be high, but if people weren't so lazy, they would park legally a bit further away, or maybe in a pay to stay car park.
[quote][p][bold]Georgem[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]BerryMan[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Georgem[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]BerryMan[/bold] wrote: Its Easy, Park where you are supposed too! If you park where you are not supposed to, take the consequences, you have no grounds to moan. Whats the big deal?[/p][/quote]The big deal is that the consequences are effectively uncapped. You're absolutely right that we simply shouldn't park in those areas, but conversely, the cost of doing so should not be at the whim of some cowboy.[/p][/quote]I understand, but park properly and they will soon be out of business![/p][/quote]There have been incidents where people were parked properly, but misjudged the length of their parking stay. There have been incidents of operatives hovering around vehicles waiting until the very second the parking expires, in order to milk it for some easy money. There have been incidents where vehicles are held to ransom, late at night, leaving people unable to get home. These are underhand tactics, regardless of what parking misdemeanours are going on. The problem with clamping is, it doesn't solve the immediate problem. You find a vehicle where it shouldn't be? Hmm, I'm not convinced that effectively gluing it in place solves that. Delivery vans have been clamped for "obstructing traffic". What kind of idiocy is that?[/p][/quote]I've seen a delivery van obstruct traffic too. In that traffic was an ambulance on blue lights. He should have been towed as he obviously considered his delivery far more important than any other traffic getting through. Many people don't consider the knock on impact or possible consequences of their parking, in extreme cases could be life or death, very extreme obviously! Prices may be high, but if people weren't so lazy, they would park legally a bit further away, or maybe in a pay to stay car park. BerryMan
  • Score: 0

7:10pm Fri 12 Oct 12

MGRA says...

BerryMan wrote:
Its Easy, Park where you are supposed too! If you park where you are not supposed to, take the consequences, you have no grounds to moan. Whats the big deal?
the big deal is how idiots like you fail to understand the difference between parking enforcement and extorsion. :0)
[quote][p][bold]BerryMan[/bold] wrote: Its Easy, Park where you are supposed too! If you park where you are not supposed to, take the consequences, you have no grounds to moan. Whats the big deal?[/p][/quote]the big deal is how idiots like you fail to understand the difference between parking enforcement and extorsion. :0) MGRA
  • Score: 0

7:16pm Fri 12 Oct 12

biggus2 says...

Most of the time its motorists who are to lazy to find a parking space or don;t want to pay to park. Berry man is right. Park correctly and they will be out of business in no time at all. Don't pay the fine and let them take you to the County Court.
Most of the time its motorists who are to lazy to find a parking space or don;t want to pay to park. Berry man is right. Park correctly and they will be out of business in no time at all. Don't pay the fine and let them take you to the County Court. biggus2
  • Score: 0

7:38pm Fri 12 Oct 12

SOULJACKER says...

Fact of the matter is that these filth hold people to ransom!

They don't give a dayam about the person they work for...they are doing it to line their own nests!

They are greedy little scum bags (usually called Jason) who need to be taken down a peg or two.

If Jason comes near my car, he will get a big surprise & mouthful!

Wake up Britain & stop letting the system & the rules govern your lives......GET A BACK BONE & SAY NO!

Everyday on TV it's some bent politician saying "you can't do this or that & if you do then we will tax you" ........STAND UP TO THEM for goodness sake!
Fact of the matter is that these filth hold people to ransom! They don't give a dayam about the person they work for...they are doing it to line their own nests! They are greedy little scum bags (usually called Jason) who need to be taken down a peg or two. If Jason comes near my car, he will get a big surprise & mouthful! Wake up Britain & stop letting the system & the rules govern your lives......GET A BACK BONE & SAY NO! Everyday on TV it's some bent politician saying "you can't do this or that & if you do then we will tax you" ........STAND UP TO THEM for goodness sake! SOULJACKER
  • Score: 0

7:42pm Fri 12 Oct 12

chunky_lover says...

Well, the lower classes of people do need a job, so I guess that's why it still exists. But really, you get a ticket, pay it and carry on a good person - the clamp ilk have to live their whole lives in shame as the scum of society.
Well, the lower classes of people do need a job, so I guess that's why it still exists. But really, you get a ticket, pay it and carry on a good person - the clamp ilk have to live their whole lives in shame as the scum of society. chunky_lover
  • Score: 0

7:44pm Fri 12 Oct 12

Turtlebay says...

BerryMan wrote:
Georgem wrote:
BerryMan wrote:
Georgem wrote:
BerryMan wrote:
Its Easy, Park where you are supposed too! If you park where you are not supposed to, take the consequences, you have no grounds to moan. Whats the big deal?The big deal is that the consequences are effectively uncapped. You're absolutely right that we simply shouldn't park in those areas, but conversely, the cost of doing so should not be at the whim of some cowboy.I understand, but park properly and they will soon be out of business!There have been incidents where people were parked properly, but misjudged the length of their parking stay. There have been incidents of operatives hovering around vehicles waiting until the very second the parking expires, in order to milk it for some easy money. There have been incidents where vehicles are held to ransom, late at night, leaving people unable to get home. These are underhand tactics, regardless of what parking misdemeanours are going on.

The problem with clamping is, it doesn't solve the immediate problem. You find a vehicle where it shouldn't be? Hmm, I'm not convinced that effectively gluing it in place solves that. Delivery vans have been clamped for "obstructing traffic". What kind of idiocy is that?I've seen a delivery van obstruct traffic too. In that traffic was an ambulance on blue lights. He should have been towed as he obviously considered his delivery far more important than any other traffic getting through. Many people don't consider the knock on impact or possible consequences of their parking, in extreme cases could be life or death, very extreme obviously! Prices may be high, but if people weren't so lazy, they would park legally a bit further away, or maybe in a pay to stay car park.BerryMan wrote:]I've seen a delivery van obstruct traffic too. In that traffic was an ambulance on blue lights. He should have been towed as he obviously considered his delivery far more important than any other traffic getting through. Many people don't consider the knock on impact or possible consequences of their parking, in extreme cases could be life or death, very extreme obviously! Prices may be high, but if people weren't so lazy, they would park legally a bit further away, or maybe in a pay to stay car park.

All very well but deliveries need to be made and many van drivers have over 90 such drops to make each day, so parking further away isn't an option. A van driver could help the traffic flow by parking on part of the pavement but that is illegal whereas parking on the road on double yellow lines for a delivery or collection is not.
[quote][p][bold]BerryMan[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Georgem[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]BerryMan[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Georgem[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]BerryMan[/bold] wrote: Its Easy, Park where you are supposed too! If you park where you are not supposed to, take the consequences, you have no grounds to moan. Whats the big deal?[/p][/quote]The big deal is that the consequences are effectively uncapped. You're absolutely right that we simply shouldn't park in those areas, but conversely, the cost of doing so should not be at the whim of some cowboy.[/p][/quote]I understand, but park properly and they will soon be out of business![/p][/quote]There have been incidents where people were parked properly, but misjudged the length of their parking stay. There have been incidents of operatives hovering around vehicles waiting until the very second the parking expires, in order to milk it for some easy money. There have been incidents where vehicles are held to ransom, late at night, leaving people unable to get home. These are underhand tactics, regardless of what parking misdemeanours are going on. The problem with clamping is, it doesn't solve the immediate problem. You find a vehicle where it shouldn't be? Hmm, I'm not convinced that effectively gluing it in place solves that. Delivery vans have been clamped for "obstructing traffic". What kind of idiocy is that?[/p][/quote]I've seen a delivery van obstruct traffic too. In that traffic was an ambulance on blue lights. He should have been towed as he obviously considered his delivery far more important than any other traffic getting through. Many people don't consider the knock on impact or possible consequences of their parking, in extreme cases could be life or death, very extreme obviously! Prices may be high, but if people weren't so lazy, they would park legally a bit further away, or maybe in a pay to stay car park.[/p][/quote][quote][p][bold]BerryMan[/bold] wrote:]I've seen a delivery van obstruct traffic too. In that traffic was an ambulance on blue lights. He should have been towed as he obviously considered his delivery far more important than any other traffic getting through. Many people don't consider the knock on impact or possible consequences of their parking, in extreme cases could be life or death, very extreme obviously! Prices may be high, but if people weren't so lazy, they would park legally a bit further away, or maybe in a pay to stay car park.[quote] All very well but deliveries need to be made and many van drivers have over 90 such drops to make each day, so parking further away isn't an option. A van driver could help the traffic flow by parking on part of the pavement but that is illegal whereas parking on the road on double yellow lines for a delivery or collection is not. Turtlebay
  • Score: 0

8:01pm Fri 12 Oct 12

vag says...

Nothing to see here. Don't respond in any form to the demands. They are not legally enforceable. Ergo, you don't respond, they give up eventually.
Nothing to see here. Don't respond in any form to the demands. They are not legally enforceable. Ergo, you don't respond, they give up eventually. vag
  • Score: 0

8:47pm Fri 12 Oct 12

thedavie says...

Watch out for VP Parking Solutions Ltd or whatever they are called today
even a permit will not deter them issuing a ticket & chasing for payment
Watch out for VP Parking Solutions Ltd or whatever they are called today even a permit will not deter them issuing a ticket & chasing for payment thedavie
  • Score: 0

9:43pm Fri 12 Oct 12

Ginger_cyclist says...

downfader wrote:
BerryMan wrote:
Georgem wrote:
BerryMan wrote:
Its Easy, Park where you are supposed too! If you park where you are not supposed to, take the consequences, you have no grounds to moan. Whats the big deal?
The big deal is that the consequences are effectively uncapped. You're absolutely right that we simply shouldn't park in those areas, but conversely, the cost of doing so should not be at the whim of some cowboy.
I understand, but park properly and they will soon be out of business!
How about improving the standards/regulation

s by which private land is supposed to have with regards notification of private property..? There are one or two places in the city centre that have a 12 inch sign, often unlit at night and our of the eye-line.

Having said that there are a lot of issues with people parking where they shouldn't, but these are usually on double yellows, corners, pavements etc.. outside the remit of these private firms.
I think parking tickets should be heavily regulated, there's videos on youtube of people's vehicles being held to ransom, also it wouldn't surprise me to find they've held mobility scooters or bikes to ransom when left outside a shop or locked to a lamp post respectively.
[quote][p][bold]downfader[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]BerryMan[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Georgem[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]BerryMan[/bold] wrote: Its Easy, Park where you are supposed too! If you park where you are not supposed to, take the consequences, you have no grounds to moan. Whats the big deal?[/p][/quote]The big deal is that the consequences are effectively uncapped. You're absolutely right that we simply shouldn't park in those areas, but conversely, the cost of doing so should not be at the whim of some cowboy.[/p][/quote]I understand, but park properly and they will soon be out of business![/p][/quote]How about improving the standards/regulation s by which private land is supposed to have with regards notification of private property..? There are one or two places in the city centre that have a 12 inch sign, often unlit at night and our of the eye-line. Having said that there are a lot of issues with people parking where they shouldn't, but these are usually on double yellows, corners, pavements etc.. outside the remit of these private firms.[/p][/quote]I think parking tickets should be heavily regulated, there's videos on youtube of people's vehicles being held to ransom, also it wouldn't surprise me to find they've held mobility scooters or bikes to ransom when left outside a shop or locked to a lamp post respectively. Ginger_cyclist
  • Score: 0

9:45pm Fri 12 Oct 12

Ginger_cyclist says...

Ginger_cyclist wrote:
downfader wrote:
BerryMan wrote:
Georgem wrote:
BerryMan wrote:
Its Easy, Park where you are supposed too! If you park where you are not supposed to, take the consequences, you have no grounds to moan. Whats the big deal?
The big deal is that the consequences are effectively uncapped. You're absolutely right that we simply shouldn't park in those areas, but conversely, the cost of doing so should not be at the whim of some cowboy.
I understand, but park properly and they will soon be out of business!
How about improving the standards/regulation


s by which private land is supposed to have with regards notification of private property..? There are one or two places in the city centre that have a 12 inch sign, often unlit at night and our of the eye-line.

Having said that there are a lot of issues with people parking where they shouldn't, but these are usually on double yellows, corners, pavements etc.. outside the remit of these private firms.
I think parking tickets should be heavily regulated, there's videos on youtube of people's vehicles being held to ransom, also it wouldn't surprise me to find they've held mobility scooters or bikes to ransom when left outside a shop or locked to a lamp post respectively.
No idea why this quoted the comment, I never even clicked quote.
[quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]downfader[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]BerryMan[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Georgem[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]BerryMan[/bold] wrote: Its Easy, Park where you are supposed too! If you park where you are not supposed to, take the consequences, you have no grounds to moan. Whats the big deal?[/p][/quote]The big deal is that the consequences are effectively uncapped. You're absolutely right that we simply shouldn't park in those areas, but conversely, the cost of doing so should not be at the whim of some cowboy.[/p][/quote]I understand, but park properly and they will soon be out of business![/p][/quote]How about improving the standards/regulation s by which private land is supposed to have with regards notification of private property..? There are one or two places in the city centre that have a 12 inch sign, often unlit at night and our of the eye-line. Having said that there are a lot of issues with people parking where they shouldn't, but these are usually on double yellows, corners, pavements etc.. outside the remit of these private firms.[/p][/quote]I think parking tickets should be heavily regulated, there's videos on youtube of people's vehicles being held to ransom, also it wouldn't surprise me to find they've held mobility scooters or bikes to ransom when left outside a shop or locked to a lamp post respectively.[/p][/quote]No idea why this quoted the comment, I never even clicked quote. Ginger_cyclist
  • Score: 0

11:52pm Fri 12 Oct 12

MGRA says...

anyone that pays a "charge" from these companies is an idiot... if a total stranger posted a letter to you demanding money you would ignore it. These people are strangers. You have entered into no contract with them so you don't have to pay them a penny. They have no legal right to any money ( although curiously so have a legal right to demand it ) so just bin the letter and plead total ignorance.
anyone that pays a "charge" from these companies is an idiot... if a total stranger posted a letter to you demanding money you would ignore it. These people are strangers. You have entered into no contract with them so you don't have to pay them a penny. They have no legal right to any money ( although curiously so have a legal right to demand it ) so just bin the letter and plead total ignorance. MGRA
  • Score: 0

10:28am Sat 13 Oct 12

Huffter says...

Access to DVLC information will not help in reclaiming car parking charges - they can only be claimed from the driver, not the owner of the car; the claimant would have to prove who parked the car and that a notice of the charges was displayed; if you park where such a notice is displayed then you have entered into a contract to pay the charges. Vehicles CAN be legally clamped on private property - by the police.
Access to DVLC information will not help in reclaiming car parking charges - they can only be claimed from the driver, not the owner of the car; the claimant would have to prove who parked the car and that a notice of the charges was displayed; if you park where such a notice is displayed then you have entered into a contract to pay the charges. Vehicles CAN be legally clamped on private property - by the police. Huffter
  • Score: 0

10:38am Sat 13 Oct 12

VictorMeldrew says...

The stupid greedy cowboys are the reason clamping was outlawed. The demand for a Parking Charge Notice should be no more than a parking ticket issued by the local authority. Any breach of the rules should invalidate the PÇÑ. If you get a PÇN on private land, collect all the evidence you can to defend a court action then sit back and wait. After a few nasty demands they will go away.
The stupid greedy cowboys are the reason clamping was outlawed. The demand for a Parking Charge Notice should be no more than a parking ticket issued by the local authority. Any breach of the rules should invalidate the PÇÑ. If you get a PÇN on private land, collect all the evidence you can to defend a court action then sit back and wait. After a few nasty demands they will go away. VictorMeldrew
  • Score: 0

10:50am Sat 13 Oct 12

userds5050 says...

Huffter wrote:
Access to DVLC information will not help in reclaiming car parking charges - they can only be claimed from the driver, not the owner of the car; the claimant would have to prove who parked the car and that a notice of the charges was displayed; if you park where such a notice is displayed then you have entered into a contract to pay the charges. Vehicles CAN be legally clamped on private property - by the police.
That's changed now under the new legislation. Under the new legislation they no longer need to prove who was driving. The registered owner of the vehicle is liable. I tend to agree with MGRA. I don't think they will follow these threats up in court because enough people will pay up. There was a clamper on tv rubbing his hands together saying they're gonna make more money than clamping.
[quote][p][bold]Huffter[/bold] wrote: Access to DVLC information will not help in reclaiming car parking charges - they can only be claimed from the driver, not the owner of the car; the claimant would have to prove who parked the car and that a notice of the charges was displayed; if you park where such a notice is displayed then you have entered into a contract to pay the charges. Vehicles CAN be legally clamped on private property - by the police.[/p][/quote]That's changed now under the new legislation. Under the new legislation they no longer need to prove who was driving. The registered owner of the vehicle is liable. I tend to agree with MGRA. I don't think they will follow these threats up in court because enough people will pay up. There was a clamper on tv rubbing his hands together saying they're gonna make more money than clamping. userds5050
  • Score: 0

10:59am Sat 13 Oct 12

Ginger_cyclist says...

VictorMeldrew wrote:
The stupid greedy cowboys are the reason clamping was outlawed. The demand for a Parking Charge Notice should be no more than a parking ticket issued by the local authority. Any breach of the rules should invalidate the PÇÑ. If you get a PÇN on private land, collect all the evidence you can to defend a court action then sit back and wait. After a few nasty demands they will go away.
Even if they got the bailiffs involved, those bailiffs can't do anything unless you let them in which I don't recommend doing.
[quote][p][bold]VictorMeldrew[/bold] wrote: The stupid greedy cowboys are the reason clamping was outlawed. The demand for a Parking Charge Notice should be no more than a parking ticket issued by the local authority. Any breach of the rules should invalidate the PÇÑ. If you get a PÇN on private land, collect all the evidence you can to defend a court action then sit back and wait. After a few nasty demands they will go away.[/p][/quote]Even if they got the bailiffs involved, those bailiffs can't do anything unless you let them in which I don't recommend doing. Ginger_cyclist
  • Score: 0

4:10pm Sat 13 Oct 12

be_serious says...

Take into consideration Totton Retail park where i've the unfortunate incident of being 'ticketed' by the famous Premier Park Ltd.

The retail park offers FREE parking, as long as you walk to the machine, print out a free ticket and then display it - well anyway one day i stopped for a few minutes to go collect a pre-booked argos purchase and completely forgot to get a ticket, anyway i paid argos with my card and was out in less than 5 minutes to find a parking ticket already issued on my vehicle.

I thought what the hell! and ignored it - a few weeks ago i got my first letter from Premier Park Ltd, along with photos of my car with the ticket on and a demand for £130!!!

Goes without saying but i won't be paying and they can continue trying to all they like but it's not enforceable and i would love them to take me to court and try justify that extortionate amount from me for a 5 minute stint in a FREE car park!

I know i didn't fulfil the terms and get a free ticket, but the fact i was rushing in and out i just didnt think! can they get away with ticketing in a FREE carpark just because you didn't get a ticket?
Take into consideration Totton Retail park where i've the unfortunate incident of being 'ticketed' by the famous Premier Park Ltd. The retail park offers FREE parking, as long as you walk to the machine, print out a free ticket and then display it - well anyway one day i stopped for a few minutes to go collect a pre-booked argos purchase and completely forgot to get a ticket, anyway i paid argos with my card and was out in less than 5 minutes to find a parking ticket already issued on my vehicle. I thought what the hell! and ignored it - a few weeks ago i got my first letter from Premier Park Ltd, along with photos of my car with the ticket on and a demand for £130!!! Goes without saying but i won't be paying and they can continue trying to all they like but it's not enforceable and i would love them to take me to court and try justify that extortionate amount from me for a 5 minute stint in a FREE car park! I know i didn't fulfil the terms and get a free ticket, but the fact i was rushing in and out i just didnt think! can they get away with ticketing in a FREE carpark just because you didn't get a ticket? be_serious
  • Score: 0

5:30pm Sat 13 Oct 12

Georgem says...

Please, nobody take any legal advice from any of these armchair experts that seem to think because something doesn't seem "fair", then miraculously, it isn't happening.

You can be chased for these parking charges in court, and even though you can ignore it and pretend it isn't happening, and maybe even end up not paying it, in the background, your credit rating is taking the brunt of it.
Please, nobody take any legal advice from any of these armchair experts that seem to think because something doesn't seem "fair", then miraculously, it isn't happening. You can be chased for these parking charges in court, and even though you can ignore it and pretend it isn't happening, and maybe even end up not paying it, in the background, your credit rating is taking the brunt of it. Georgem
  • Score: 0

6:57pm Sat 13 Oct 12

Ginger_cyclist says...

Georgem wrote:
Please, nobody take any legal advice from any of these armchair experts that seem to think because something doesn't seem "fair", then miraculously, it isn't happening.

You can be chased for these parking charges in court, and even though you can ignore it and pretend it isn't happening, and maybe even end up not paying it, in the background, your credit rating is taking the brunt of it.
No, take it from BBC Watchdog in stead.
"In issuing a Parking Charge Notice, the parking operator is relying on the law of contract to make a claim for damages. The amount they ask for is to compensate for you breaching the contract you formed when you parked on the land in question. According to the Citizen's Advice Bureau, this charge should be reasonable and in line with the loss suffered by the business, although excessive charges are common. This isn't a criminal matter despite any impression given to the contrary by the operator.

The operator has no right to recover a parking charge from you without first taking you to court, so if you think there has been a mistake and you shouldn't have been issued a ticket, you may wish to dispute the charge with the parking company as soon as possible. You should ask them to provide proof of their case against you. If you fail to reach an agreement with them, then, as with all civil matters, it is up to the parking company to prove their case in court, but it is advisable to seek advice from the Citizens Advice Bureau or a solicitor before things get to this stage. Remember that the parking operator has to prove its case on the balance of probabilities.

It is also important to note that, as things currently stand, the driver of the vehicle is the only person who can enter into a contract with the landowner. Therefore if you were not the person driving you may wish to inform the parking company of this straight away. Just because you are the registered keeper of the car, you are under no legal obligation to provide the parking operator with any further information, as you would be with the police. In particular you do not have to identify the driver or supply his or her name and address.

Indeed if you are certain that you have not parked in contravention of the rules of the car park, you do not have to contact the parking company if you do not wish to do so as the obligation is on the parking company to prove its case. However you should let them know that you contest the notice as if not, you can expect a series of letters from the company itself, debt collectors and solicitors, all warning of court action. However, the reality is that extremely few cases ever reach court because of the difficulties the private company has in proving its case. Consequently, the letters usually stop. Even if a case does reach court, the company may have trouble convincing a judge that the charge is fair." -direct quote from the BBC Watchdog site.
[quote][p][bold]Georgem[/bold] wrote: Please, nobody take any legal advice from any of these armchair experts that seem to think because something doesn't seem "fair", then miraculously, it isn't happening. You can be chased for these parking charges in court, and even though you can ignore it and pretend it isn't happening, and maybe even end up not paying it, in the background, your credit rating is taking the brunt of it.[/p][/quote]No, take it from BBC Watchdog in stead. "In issuing a Parking Charge Notice, the parking operator is relying on the law of contract to make a claim for damages. The amount they ask for is to compensate for you breaching the contract you formed when you parked on the land in question. According to the Citizen's Advice Bureau, this charge should be reasonable and in line with the loss suffered by the business, although excessive charges are common. This isn't a criminal matter despite any impression given to the contrary by the operator. The operator has no right to recover a parking charge from you without first taking you to court, so if you think there has been a mistake and you shouldn't have been issued a ticket, you may wish to dispute the charge with the parking company as soon as possible. You should ask them to provide proof of their case against you. If you fail to reach an agreement with them, then, as with all civil matters, it is up to the parking company to prove their case in court, but it is advisable to seek advice from the Citizens Advice Bureau or a solicitor before things get to this stage. Remember that the parking operator has to prove its case on the balance of probabilities. It is also important to note that, as things currently stand, the driver of the vehicle is the only person who can enter into a contract with the landowner. Therefore if you were not the person driving you may wish to inform the parking company of this straight away. Just because you are the registered keeper of the car, you are under no legal obligation to provide the parking operator with any further information, as you would be with the police. In particular you do not have to identify the driver or supply his or her name and address. Indeed if you are certain that you have not parked in contravention of the rules of the car park, you do not have to contact the parking company if you do not wish to do so as the obligation is on the parking company to prove its case. However you should let them know that you contest the notice as if not, you can expect a series of letters from the company itself, debt collectors and solicitors, all warning of court action. However, the reality is that extremely few cases ever reach court because of the difficulties the private company has in proving its case. Consequently, the letters usually stop. Even if a case does reach court, the company may have trouble convincing a judge that the charge is fair." -direct quote from the BBC Watchdog site. Ginger_cyclist
  • Score: 0

8:34pm Sat 13 Oct 12

userds5050 says...

Ginger_cyclist wrote:
Georgem wrote:
Please, nobody take any legal advice from any of these armchair experts that seem to think because something doesn't seem "fair", then miraculously, it isn't happening.

You can be chased for these parking charges in court, and even though you can ignore it and pretend it isn't happening, and maybe even end up not paying it, in the background, your credit rating is taking the brunt of it.
No, take it from BBC Watchdog in stead.
"In issuing a Parking Charge Notice, the parking operator is relying on the law of contract to make a claim for damages. The amount they ask for is to compensate for you breaching the contract you formed when you parked on the land in question. According to the Citizen's Advice Bureau, this charge should be reasonable and in line with the loss suffered by the business, although excessive charges are common. This isn't a criminal matter despite any impression given to the contrary by the operator.

The operator has no right to recover a parking charge from you without first taking you to court, so if you think there has been a mistake and you shouldn't have been issued a ticket, you may wish to dispute the charge with the parking company as soon as possible. You should ask them to provide proof of their case against you. If you fail to reach an agreement with them, then, as with all civil matters, it is up to the parking company to prove their case in court, but it is advisable to seek advice from the Citizens Advice Bureau or a solicitor before things get to this stage. Remember that the parking operator has to prove its case on the balance of probabilities.

It is also important to note that, as things currently stand, the driver of the vehicle is the only person who can enter into a contract with the landowner. Therefore if you were not the person driving you may wish to inform the parking company of this straight away. Just because you are the registered keeper of the car, you are under no legal obligation to provide the parking operator with any further information, as you would be with the police. In particular you do not have to identify the driver or supply his or her name and address.

Indeed if you are certain that you have not parked in contravention of the rules of the car park, you do not have to contact the parking company if you do not wish to do so as the obligation is on the parking company to prove its case. However you should let them know that you contest the notice as if not, you can expect a series of letters from the company itself, debt collectors and solicitors, all warning of court action. However, the reality is that extremely few cases ever reach court because of the difficulties the private company has in proving its case. Consequently, the letters usually stop. Even if a case does reach court, the company may have trouble convincing a judge that the charge is fair." -direct quote from the BBC Watchdog site.
Not sure where you are getting your infotmation from. They no longer need to prove who was driving the vehicle. The registered owner is now liable. Also they don't need you to provide any further information as the DVLA has already given them your name and address. As for proving their case they can simply take a photo or install CCTV.
[quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Georgem[/bold] wrote: Please, nobody take any legal advice from any of these armchair experts that seem to think because something doesn't seem "fair", then miraculously, it isn't happening. You can be chased for these parking charges in court, and even though you can ignore it and pretend it isn't happening, and maybe even end up not paying it, in the background, your credit rating is taking the brunt of it.[/p][/quote]No, take it from BBC Watchdog in stead. "In issuing a Parking Charge Notice, the parking operator is relying on the law of contract to make a claim for damages. The amount they ask for is to compensate for you breaching the contract you formed when you parked on the land in question. According to the Citizen's Advice Bureau, this charge should be reasonable and in line with the loss suffered by the business, although excessive charges are common. This isn't a criminal matter despite any impression given to the contrary by the operator. The operator has no right to recover a parking charge from you without first taking you to court, so if you think there has been a mistake and you shouldn't have been issued a ticket, you may wish to dispute the charge with the parking company as soon as possible. You should ask them to provide proof of their case against you. If you fail to reach an agreement with them, then, as with all civil matters, it is up to the parking company to prove their case in court, but it is advisable to seek advice from the Citizens Advice Bureau or a solicitor before things get to this stage. Remember that the parking operator has to prove its case on the balance of probabilities. It is also important to note that, as things currently stand, the driver of the vehicle is the only person who can enter into a contract with the landowner. Therefore if you were not the person driving you may wish to inform the parking company of this straight away. Just because you are the registered keeper of the car, you are under no legal obligation to provide the parking operator with any further information, as you would be with the police. In particular you do not have to identify the driver or supply his or her name and address. Indeed if you are certain that you have not parked in contravention of the rules of the car park, you do not have to contact the parking company if you do not wish to do so as the obligation is on the parking company to prove its case. However you should let them know that you contest the notice as if not, you can expect a series of letters from the company itself, debt collectors and solicitors, all warning of court action. However, the reality is that extremely few cases ever reach court because of the difficulties the private company has in proving its case. Consequently, the letters usually stop. Even if a case does reach court, the company may have trouble convincing a judge that the charge is fair." -direct quote from the BBC Watchdog site.[/p][/quote]Not sure where you are getting your infotmation from. They no longer need to prove who was driving the vehicle. The registered owner is now liable. Also they don't need you to provide any further information as the DVLA has already given them your name and address. As for proving their case they can simply take a photo or install CCTV. userds5050
  • Score: 0

10:21pm Sat 13 Oct 12

Ginger_cyclist says...

userds5050 wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
Georgem wrote:
Please, nobody take any legal advice from any of these armchair experts that seem to think because something doesn't seem "fair", then miraculously, it isn't happening.

You can be chased for these parking charges in court, and even though you can ignore it and pretend it isn't happening, and maybe even end up not paying it, in the background, your credit rating is taking the brunt of it.
No, take it from BBC Watchdog in stead.
"In issuing a Parking Charge Notice, the parking operator is relying on the law of contract to make a claim for damages. The amount they ask for is to compensate for you breaching the contract you formed when you parked on the land in question. According to the Citizen's Advice Bureau, this charge should be reasonable and in line with the loss suffered by the business, although excessive charges are common. This isn't a criminal matter despite any impression given to the contrary by the operator.

The operator has no right to recover a parking charge from you without first taking you to court, so if you think there has been a mistake and you shouldn't have been issued a ticket, you may wish to dispute the charge with the parking company as soon as possible. You should ask them to provide proof of their case against you. If you fail to reach an agreement with them, then, as with all civil matters, it is up to the parking company to prove their case in court, but it is advisable to seek advice from the Citizens Advice Bureau or a solicitor before things get to this stage. Remember that the parking operator has to prove its case on the balance of probabilities.

It is also important to note that, as things currently stand, the driver of the vehicle is the only person who can enter into a contract with the landowner. Therefore if you were not the person driving you may wish to inform the parking company of this straight away. Just because you are the registered keeper of the car, you are under no legal obligation to provide the parking operator with any further information, as you would be with the police. In particular you do not have to identify the driver or supply his or her name and address.

Indeed if you are certain that you have not parked in contravention of the rules of the car park, you do not have to contact the parking company if you do not wish to do so as the obligation is on the parking company to prove its case. However you should let them know that you contest the notice as if not, you can expect a series of letters from the company itself, debt collectors and solicitors, all warning of court action. However, the reality is that extremely few cases ever reach court because of the difficulties the private company has in proving its case. Consequently, the letters usually stop. Even if a case does reach court, the company may have trouble convincing a judge that the charge is fair." -direct quote from the BBC Watchdog site.
Not sure where you are getting your infotmation from. They no longer need to prove who was driving the vehicle. The registered owner is now liable. Also they don't need you to provide any further information as the DVLA has already given them your name and address. As for proving their case they can simply take a photo or install CCTV.
I included my source though I didn't notice at the time that page hadn't been updated for a while but I found other stuff on the net that is much more recent, published between september and now that says they still have to charge the driver, not the owner and to do so would mean getting proof of who was driving.
[quote][p][bold]userds5050[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Georgem[/bold] wrote: Please, nobody take any legal advice from any of these armchair experts that seem to think because something doesn't seem "fair", then miraculously, it isn't happening. You can be chased for these parking charges in court, and even though you can ignore it and pretend it isn't happening, and maybe even end up not paying it, in the background, your credit rating is taking the brunt of it.[/p][/quote]No, take it from BBC Watchdog in stead. "In issuing a Parking Charge Notice, the parking operator is relying on the law of contract to make a claim for damages. The amount they ask for is to compensate for you breaching the contract you formed when you parked on the land in question. According to the Citizen's Advice Bureau, this charge should be reasonable and in line with the loss suffered by the business, although excessive charges are common. This isn't a criminal matter despite any impression given to the contrary by the operator. The operator has no right to recover a parking charge from you without first taking you to court, so if you think there has been a mistake and you shouldn't have been issued a ticket, you may wish to dispute the charge with the parking company as soon as possible. You should ask them to provide proof of their case against you. If you fail to reach an agreement with them, then, as with all civil matters, it is up to the parking company to prove their case in court, but it is advisable to seek advice from the Citizens Advice Bureau or a solicitor before things get to this stage. Remember that the parking operator has to prove its case on the balance of probabilities. It is also important to note that, as things currently stand, the driver of the vehicle is the only person who can enter into a contract with the landowner. Therefore if you were not the person driving you may wish to inform the parking company of this straight away. Just because you are the registered keeper of the car, you are under no legal obligation to provide the parking operator with any further information, as you would be with the police. In particular you do not have to identify the driver or supply his or her name and address. Indeed if you are certain that you have not parked in contravention of the rules of the car park, you do not have to contact the parking company if you do not wish to do so as the obligation is on the parking company to prove its case. However you should let them know that you contest the notice as if not, you can expect a series of letters from the company itself, debt collectors and solicitors, all warning of court action. However, the reality is that extremely few cases ever reach court because of the difficulties the private company has in proving its case. Consequently, the letters usually stop. Even if a case does reach court, the company may have trouble convincing a judge that the charge is fair." -direct quote from the BBC Watchdog site.[/p][/quote]Not sure where you are getting your infotmation from. They no longer need to prove who was driving the vehicle. The registered owner is now liable. Also they don't need you to provide any further information as the DVLA has already given them your name and address. As for proving their case they can simply take a photo or install CCTV.[/p][/quote]I included my source though I didn't notice at the time that page hadn't been updated for a while but I found other stuff on the net that is much more recent, published between september and now that says they still have to charge the driver, not the owner and to do so would mean getting proof of who was driving. Ginger_cyclist
  • Score: 0

10:36pm Sat 13 Oct 12

IronLady2010 says...

I am currently in receipt of a Notice of Intended Prosecution for supposedly jumping a Red light dated 05/12.

As this date is a long time ago, I have wrote back stating as my vehicle is personal and has 2 named drivers, I cannot state who was the driver at the time.

This is an honest answer, so I look forward to the response.

If I state it was myself, would I then be in the same position as Mr Huhne?
I am currently in receipt of a Notice of Intended Prosecution for supposedly jumping a Red light dated 05/12. As this date is a long time ago, I have wrote back stating as my vehicle is personal and has 2 named drivers, I cannot state who was the driver at the time. This is an honest answer, so I look forward to the response. If I state it was myself, would I then be in the same position as Mr Huhne? IronLady2010
  • Score: 0

10:39pm Sat 13 Oct 12

userds5050 says...

Ginger_cyclist wrote:
userds5050 wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
Georgem wrote:
Please, nobody take any legal advice from any of these armchair experts that seem to think because something doesn't seem "fair", then miraculously, it isn't happening.

You can be chased for these parking charges in court, and even though you can ignore it and pretend it isn't happening, and maybe even end up not paying it, in the background, your credit rating is taking the brunt of it.
No, take it from BBC Watchdog in stead.
"In issuing a Parking Charge Notice, the parking operator is relying on the law of contract to make a claim for damages. The amount they ask for is to compensate for you breaching the contract you formed when you parked on the land in question. According to the Citizen's Advice Bureau, this charge should be reasonable and in line with the loss suffered by the business, although excessive charges are common. This isn't a criminal matter despite any impression given to the contrary by the operator.

The operator has no right to recover a parking charge from you without first taking you to court, so if you think there has been a mistake and you shouldn't have been issued a ticket, you may wish to dispute the charge with the parking company as soon as possible. You should ask them to provide proof of their case against you. If you fail to reach an agreement with them, then, as with all civil matters, it is up to the parking company to prove their case in court, but it is advisable to seek advice from the Citizens Advice Bureau or a solicitor before things get to this stage. Remember that the parking operator has to prove its case on the balance of probabilities.

It is also important to note that, as things currently stand, the driver of the vehicle is the only person who can enter into a contract with the landowner. Therefore if you were not the person driving you may wish to inform the parking company of this straight away. Just because you are the registered keeper of the car, you are under no legal obligation to provide the parking operator with any further information, as you would be with the police. In particular you do not have to identify the driver or supply his or her name and address.

Indeed if you are certain that you have not parked in contravention of the rules of the car park, you do not have to contact the parking company if you do not wish to do so as the obligation is on the parking company to prove its case. However you should let them know that you contest the notice as if not, you can expect a series of letters from the company itself, debt collectors and solicitors, all warning of court action. However, the reality is that extremely few cases ever reach court because of the difficulties the private company has in proving its case. Consequently, the letters usually stop. Even if a case does reach court, the company may have trouble convincing a judge that the charge is fair." -direct quote from the BBC Watchdog site.
Not sure where you are getting your infotmation from. They no longer need to prove who was driving the vehicle. The registered owner is now liable. Also they don't need you to provide any further information as the DVLA has already given them your name and address. As for proving their case they can simply take a photo or install CCTV.
I included my source though I didn't notice at the time that page hadn't been updated for a while but I found other stuff on the net that is much more recent, published between september and now that says they still have to charge the driver, not the owner and to do so would mean getting proof of who was driving.
The new legislation came in on October 1st. The same day they outlawed clamping. The infos in an earlier Echo article as well as on the BBC site: http://www.bbc.co.uk
/news/uk-19782680
[quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]userds5050[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Georgem[/bold] wrote: Please, nobody take any legal advice from any of these armchair experts that seem to think because something doesn't seem "fair", then miraculously, it isn't happening. You can be chased for these parking charges in court, and even though you can ignore it and pretend it isn't happening, and maybe even end up not paying it, in the background, your credit rating is taking the brunt of it.[/p][/quote]No, take it from BBC Watchdog in stead. "In issuing a Parking Charge Notice, the parking operator is relying on the law of contract to make a claim for damages. The amount they ask for is to compensate for you breaching the contract you formed when you parked on the land in question. According to the Citizen's Advice Bureau, this charge should be reasonable and in line with the loss suffered by the business, although excessive charges are common. This isn't a criminal matter despite any impression given to the contrary by the operator. The operator has no right to recover a parking charge from you without first taking you to court, so if you think there has been a mistake and you shouldn't have been issued a ticket, you may wish to dispute the charge with the parking company as soon as possible. You should ask them to provide proof of their case against you. If you fail to reach an agreement with them, then, as with all civil matters, it is up to the parking company to prove their case in court, but it is advisable to seek advice from the Citizens Advice Bureau or a solicitor before things get to this stage. Remember that the parking operator has to prove its case on the balance of probabilities. It is also important to note that, as things currently stand, the driver of the vehicle is the only person who can enter into a contract with the landowner. Therefore if you were not the person driving you may wish to inform the parking company of this straight away. Just because you are the registered keeper of the car, you are under no legal obligation to provide the parking operator with any further information, as you would be with the police. In particular you do not have to identify the driver or supply his or her name and address. Indeed if you are certain that you have not parked in contravention of the rules of the car park, you do not have to contact the parking company if you do not wish to do so as the obligation is on the parking company to prove its case. However you should let them know that you contest the notice as if not, you can expect a series of letters from the company itself, debt collectors and solicitors, all warning of court action. However, the reality is that extremely few cases ever reach court because of the difficulties the private company has in proving its case. Consequently, the letters usually stop. Even if a case does reach court, the company may have trouble convincing a judge that the charge is fair." -direct quote from the BBC Watchdog site.[/p][/quote]Not sure where you are getting your infotmation from. They no longer need to prove who was driving the vehicle. The registered owner is now liable. Also they don't need you to provide any further information as the DVLA has already given them your name and address. As for proving their case they can simply take a photo or install CCTV.[/p][/quote]I included my source though I didn't notice at the time that page hadn't been updated for a while but I found other stuff on the net that is much more recent, published between september and now that says they still have to charge the driver, not the owner and to do so would mean getting proof of who was driving.[/p][/quote]The new legislation came in on October 1st. The same day they outlawed clamping. The infos in an earlier Echo article as well as on the BBC site: http://www.bbc.co.uk /news/uk-19782680 userds5050
  • Score: 0

11:32pm Sat 13 Oct 12

Ginger_cyclist says...

userds5050 wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
userds5050 wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
Georgem wrote:
Please, nobody take any legal advice from any of these armchair experts that seem to think because something doesn't seem "fair", then miraculously, it isn't happening.

You can be chased for these parking charges in court, and even though you can ignore it and pretend it isn't happening, and maybe even end up not paying it, in the background, your credit rating is taking the brunt of it.
No, take it from BBC Watchdog in stead.
"In issuing a Parking Charge Notice, the parking operator is relying on the law of contract to make a claim for damages. The amount they ask for is to compensate for you breaching the contract you formed when you parked on the land in question. According to the Citizen's Advice Bureau, this charge should be reasonable and in line with the loss suffered by the business, although excessive charges are common. This isn't a criminal matter despite any impression given to the contrary by the operator.

The operator has no right to recover a parking charge from you without first taking you to court, so if you think there has been a mistake and you shouldn't have been issued a ticket, you may wish to dispute the charge with the parking company as soon as possible. You should ask them to provide proof of their case against you. If you fail to reach an agreement with them, then, as with all civil matters, it is up to the parking company to prove their case in court, but it is advisable to seek advice from the Citizens Advice Bureau or a solicitor before things get to this stage. Remember that the parking operator has to prove its case on the balance of probabilities.

It is also important to note that, as things currently stand, the driver of the vehicle is the only person who can enter into a contract with the landowner. Therefore if you were not the person driving you may wish to inform the parking company of this straight away. Just because you are the registered keeper of the car, you are under no legal obligation to provide the parking operator with any further information, as you would be with the police. In particular you do not have to identify the driver or supply his or her name and address.

Indeed if you are certain that you have not parked in contravention of the rules of the car park, you do not have to contact the parking company if you do not wish to do so as the obligation is on the parking company to prove its case. However you should let them know that you contest the notice as if not, you can expect a series of letters from the company itself, debt collectors and solicitors, all warning of court action. However, the reality is that extremely few cases ever reach court because of the difficulties the private company has in proving its case. Consequently, the letters usually stop. Even if a case does reach court, the company may have trouble convincing a judge that the charge is fair." -direct quote from the BBC Watchdog site.
Not sure where you are getting your infotmation from. They no longer need to prove who was driving the vehicle. The registered owner is now liable. Also they don't need you to provide any further information as the DVLA has already given them your name and address. As for proving their case they can simply take a photo or install CCTV.
I included my source though I didn't notice at the time that page hadn't been updated for a while but I found other stuff on the net that is much more recent, published between september and now that says they still have to charge the driver, not the owner and to do so would mean getting proof of who was driving.
The new legislation came in on October 1st. The same day they outlawed clamping. The infos in an earlier Echo article as well as on the BBC site: http://www.bbc.co.uk

/news/uk-19782680
It also contradicts the law governing contracts since when you park on private property, the DRIVER is the one who enters a contract with the land owner and NOT the registered owner, also if there is inadequate signage then that contract becomes null and void therefore making it illegal for them to give you a ticket in the first place.
[quote][p][bold]userds5050[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]userds5050[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Georgem[/bold] wrote: Please, nobody take any legal advice from any of these armchair experts that seem to think because something doesn't seem "fair", then miraculously, it isn't happening. You can be chased for these parking charges in court, and even though you can ignore it and pretend it isn't happening, and maybe even end up not paying it, in the background, your credit rating is taking the brunt of it.[/p][/quote]No, take it from BBC Watchdog in stead. "In issuing a Parking Charge Notice, the parking operator is relying on the law of contract to make a claim for damages. The amount they ask for is to compensate for you breaching the contract you formed when you parked on the land in question. According to the Citizen's Advice Bureau, this charge should be reasonable and in line with the loss suffered by the business, although excessive charges are common. This isn't a criminal matter despite any impression given to the contrary by the operator. The operator has no right to recover a parking charge from you without first taking you to court, so if you think there has been a mistake and you shouldn't have been issued a ticket, you may wish to dispute the charge with the parking company as soon as possible. You should ask them to provide proof of their case against you. If you fail to reach an agreement with them, then, as with all civil matters, it is up to the parking company to prove their case in court, but it is advisable to seek advice from the Citizens Advice Bureau or a solicitor before things get to this stage. Remember that the parking operator has to prove its case on the balance of probabilities. It is also important to note that, as things currently stand, the driver of the vehicle is the only person who can enter into a contract with the landowner. Therefore if you were not the person driving you may wish to inform the parking company of this straight away. Just because you are the registered keeper of the car, you are under no legal obligation to provide the parking operator with any further information, as you would be with the police. In particular you do not have to identify the driver or supply his or her name and address. Indeed if you are certain that you have not parked in contravention of the rules of the car park, you do not have to contact the parking company if you do not wish to do so as the obligation is on the parking company to prove its case. However you should let them know that you contest the notice as if not, you can expect a series of letters from the company itself, debt collectors and solicitors, all warning of court action. However, the reality is that extremely few cases ever reach court because of the difficulties the private company has in proving its case. Consequently, the letters usually stop. Even if a case does reach court, the company may have trouble convincing a judge that the charge is fair." -direct quote from the BBC Watchdog site.[/p][/quote]Not sure where you are getting your infotmation from. They no longer need to prove who was driving the vehicle. The registered owner is now liable. Also they don't need you to provide any further information as the DVLA has already given them your name and address. As for proving their case they can simply take a photo or install CCTV.[/p][/quote]I included my source though I didn't notice at the time that page hadn't been updated for a while but I found other stuff on the net that is much more recent, published between september and now that says they still have to charge the driver, not the owner and to do so would mean getting proof of who was driving.[/p][/quote]The new legislation came in on October 1st. The same day they outlawed clamping. The infos in an earlier Echo article as well as on the BBC site: http://www.bbc.co.uk /news/uk-19782680[/p][/quote]It also contradicts the law governing contracts since when you park on private property, the DRIVER is the one who enters a contract with the land owner and NOT the registered owner, also if there is inadequate signage then that contract becomes null and void therefore making it illegal for them to give you a ticket in the first place. Ginger_cyclist
  • Score: 0

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree