Parking 'Invoice' at Toys R Us?
Discussion
stemll said:
the_scorpion said:
I read something on Pepipoo (i think) about that and although the registered keeper will become liable, there is still the issue of the landowner only being able to sue for actual loss and not whatever a parking company decides to charge. So if I read right then these would still be unenforceable invoices.
So overstaying in a free carpark would mean their loss amounts to £0.00 (if you are correct)?http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?autocom=ibwiki...
If you are parked in a 'free' car park, and the sign actually says "first 2 hours free, then a fee of £80 payable thereafter", so that the figure is payable for parking, what then? It is not a claim for damages over a breach of contract or trespass, but an agreed charge for parking.
The only negative issue I see in that scenario is the likelihood that the payments due for 'overstay' would then become VAT liable, whereas those paid for breach of contract or tresspass would likely not (assuming the contract between the land owner and the agent suitably allowed for such rights in the first place).
The only negative issue I see in that scenario is the likelihood that the payments due for 'overstay' would then become VAT liable, whereas those paid for breach of contract or tresspass would likely not (assuming the contract between the land owner and the agent suitably allowed for such rights in the first place).
Edited by 10 Pence Short on Sunday 3rd June 07:24
KevinA3DSG32 said:
Alternatively the friend's fil should reply to the parking company informing them he sold the car on X date and does not have contact details for the new owner and that any further correspondence will potentially start a harrassment claim in court. Send this SD (£5.45) and retain the documentation concerned.
Yes. Indeed. 10 pence short....
Car park near me allows 2hrs fee parking, but charges over that by means of a pay on exit machine.
In order for the £80.00 to be 'chargable and an agreed fee, it would therefore follow they would have to put machines in to accept this amount... rather doubtful methinks.
So if there is no machine, surely it would still be an excessive charge levied. ie way over and above what the landowner is financialy losing.seeing as the car is only taking up a space, which, if free,can be used by another person for 2hrs ad infinitum.
I know some guys on here are working on how to circumvent the RK being responsible, and methods involving making a defunct company as the RK are being looked at, (but how will this get round the problem of getting the tax disc' etc as well as the plod etc obtaining info operate?), as they are only ,now ,legalised crooks who will look for any small print by which to 'steal' from unsuspecting motorists.
Loos like it is going to take a few court cases before this settles down to the 'status quo' with it being ok to ignore these 'penalties' as now, or will it be actual losses plus costs?
I dont like they way these guys operate but if you dont like it write to your MP, it may get turned round like the pasty tax!!!
Car park near me allows 2hrs fee parking, but charges over that by means of a pay on exit machine.
In order for the £80.00 to be 'chargable and an agreed fee, it would therefore follow they would have to put machines in to accept this amount... rather doubtful methinks.
So if there is no machine, surely it would still be an excessive charge levied. ie way over and above what the landowner is financialy losing.seeing as the car is only taking up a space, which, if free,can be used by another person for 2hrs ad infinitum.
I know some guys on here are working on how to circumvent the RK being responsible, and methods involving making a defunct company as the RK are being looked at, (but how will this get round the problem of getting the tax disc' etc as well as the plod etc obtaining info operate?), as they are only ,now ,legalised crooks who will look for any small print by which to 'steal' from unsuspecting motorists.
Loos like it is going to take a few court cases before this settles down to the 'status quo' with it being ok to ignore these 'penalties' as now, or will it be actual losses plus costs?
I dont like they way these guys operate but if you dont like it write to your MP, it may get turned round like the pasty tax!!!
If the £80 for parking applies and there are no machines around to take that level of payment, I suppose the parking company would need to think of an alternate way of collecting it. Perhaps they could write out an invoice, put it into a little yellow weatherproof docket and stick it to your windscreen?
I know what you mean about pay on exit car parks- it's an interesting logistical question. In my experience, because of the way they operate, they don't need to charge draconian amounts to prevent overstay, because you can't exit until you've paid the requisite amount, so the 'problem' doesn't exist.
I know what you mean about pay on exit car parks- it's an interesting logistical question. In my experience, because of the way they operate, they don't need to charge draconian amounts to prevent overstay, because you can't exit until you've paid the requisite amount, so the 'problem' doesn't exist.
silverfoxcc said:
..In order for the £80.00 to be 'chargable and an agreed fee, it would therefore follow they would have to put machines in to accept this amount...
So it is not possible to agree to pay a charge for a service on production of an invoice? Payment must always be made at the time the service is provided for the payment to be a charge for that service? Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff