Parking ticket in my own space
Discussion
I've done the googling and think I'm in the right,
About 18 months ago had a ticket on my car at my apartment block, it seems the parking disk fell off the dash so I was done for no parking permit.
Anyway I appealed which they denied, The point I was saying is that I own the space and I never agreed to let a parking firm manage my space.
On my Lease, it says the following under Easements, Rights & privileges
To me thats my parking spot to do as I want and I didn't allow anyone to look after it.
But I'm sure their argument will be that its not my spot but that I'm only allowed to use it.
They are asking for my full lease now through Gladstone solicitors which I would rather not share.
Would you share it with them? I did share the map on the lease that shows the blue parking spot but now they are asking for the whole thing.
About 18 months ago had a ticket on my car at my apartment block, it seems the parking disk fell off the dash so I was done for no parking permit.
Anyway I appealed which they denied, The point I was saying is that I own the space and I never agreed to let a parking firm manage my space.
On my Lease, it says the following under Easements, Rights & privileges
To me thats my parking spot to do as I want and I didn't allow anyone to look after it.
But I'm sure their argument will be that its not my spot but that I'm only allowed to use it.
They are asking for my full lease now through Gladstone solicitors which I would rather not share.
Would you share it with them? I did share the map on the lease that shows the blue parking spot but now they are asking for the whole thing.
Edited by pacenotes on Monday 3rd July 20:03
Have a google for “Primacy of Contract” specifically for Parking company/own space incidents. An easy win. A parking company can’t unilaterally vary your lease. No sane person would agree to pay consideration to a third party for something they already have use of.
Complete non starter for them in court if it got that far and it was well presented/argued
Also, got a picture of the sign they say forms a contract?
Exactly the same happened to me but many tickets.... went to court and they ended up owing me money for my time.
Complete non starter for them in court if it got that far and it was well presented/argued
Also, got a picture of the sign they say forms a contract?
Exactly the same happened to me but many tickets.... went to court and they ended up owing me money for my time.
pacenotes said:
I've done the googling and think I'm in the right,
About 18 months ago had a ticket on my car at my apartment block, it seems the parking disk fell off the dash so I was done for no parking permit.
Anyway I appealed which they denied, The point I was saying is that I own the space and I never agreed to let a parking firm manage my space.
On my Lease, it says the following under Easements, Rights & privileges
To me thats my parking spot to do as I want and I didn't allow anyone to look after it.
But I'm sure their argument will be that its not my spot but that I'm only allowed to use it.
They are asking for my full lease now through Gladstone solicitors which I would rather not share.
Would you share it with them? I did share the map on the lease that shows the blue parking spot but now they are asking for the whole thing.
Tell them to get it from Land Reg if they want it that badly...About 18 months ago had a ticket on my car at my apartment block, it seems the parking disk fell off the dash so I was done for no parking permit.
Anyway I appealed which they denied, The point I was saying is that I own the space and I never agreed to let a parking firm manage my space.
On my Lease, it says the following under Easements, Rights & privileges
To me thats my parking spot to do as I want and I didn't allow anyone to look after it.
But I'm sure their argument will be that its not my spot but that I'm only allowed to use it.
They are asking for my full lease now through Gladstone solicitors which I would rather not share.
Would you share it with them? I did share the map on the lease that shows the blue parking spot but now they are asking for the whole thing.
Edited by pacenotes on Monday 3rd July 20:03
pacenotes said:
I've done the googling and think I'm in the right,
About 18 months ago had a ticket on my car at my apartment block, it seems the parking disk fell off the dash so I was done for no parking permit.
Anyway I appealed which they denied, The point I was saying is that I own the space and I never agreed to let a parking firm manage my space.
On my Lease, it says the following under Easements, Rights & privileges
To me thats my parking spot to do as I want and I didn't allow anyone to look after it.
But I'm sure their argument will be that its not my spot but that I'm only allowed to use it.
They are asking for my full lease now through Gladstone solicitors which I would rather not share.
Would you share it with them? I did share the map on the lease that shows the blue parking spot but now they are asking for the whole thing.
Presumably the parking company have a contract with the Freehold owner or management company of your block.About 18 months ago had a ticket on my car at my apartment block, it seems the parking disk fell off the dash so I was done for no parking permit.
Anyway I appealed which they denied, The point I was saying is that I own the space and I never agreed to let a parking firm manage my space.
On my Lease, it says the following under Easements, Rights & privileges
To me thats my parking spot to do as I want and I didn't allow anyone to look after it.
But I'm sure their argument will be that its not my spot but that I'm only allowed to use it.
They are asking for my full lease now through Gladstone solicitors which I would rather not share.
Would you share it with them? I did share the map on the lease that shows the blue parking spot but now they are asking for the whole thing.
That being the case, the parking company will be able to obtain a copy of your lease via them, if they really want to see the whole document.
Tell the parking company to get a copy for themselves.
Canon_Fodder said:
This isn't the PCC it's their debt recovery solicitors.
What Our Clients Say
"We never thought it was possible to employ a solicitor to enforce such low-value debts but *****' streamlined process has helped us recover money that we thought we'd have to write off"
What Our Clients Say
"We never thought it was possible to employ a solicitor to enforce such low-value debts but *****' streamlined process has helped us recover money that we thought we'd have to write off"
what a load of made up guff. The debt collectors / solicitors (Gladstone’s?) are a bunch of complete clowns. Quotes like that bandied about to scare people like you. All part of the business model. Seriously - and as above I have gone through this exact situation but far worse with another PPC and their ambulance chasing solicitors.
Don’t be frightened into thinking this is some big scary city law firm. They are the lowest of the low in the pecking order, basically legal “scare factories.”
They may take you to court, but you need to have a read up on Primacy of Contract. If you have a lease that permits exclusive use of a space, and nothing in that lease says you need to contract with a private parking company, your lease trumps them.
They will also need to show that their sign forms a legally binding contract (it will need an offer, acceptance and consideration - “no unauthorised parking, permit holders only” does not form a contract.)
And many other points these clowns always fall down on.
Krhuangbin said:
what a load of made up guff. The debt collectors / solicitors (Gladstone’s?) are a bunch of complete clowns. Quotes like that bandied about to scare people like you. All part of the business model. Seriously - and as above I have gone through this exact situation but far worse with another PPC and their ambulance chasing solicitors.
Don’t be frightened into thinking this is some big scary city law firm. They are the lowest of the low in the pecking order, basically legal “scare factories.”
They may take you to court, but you need to have a read up on Primacy of Contract. If you have a lease that permits exclusive use of a space, and nothing in that lease says you need to contract with a private parking company, your lease trumps them.
They will also need to show that their sign forms a legally binding contract (it will need an offer, acceptance and consideration - “no unauthorised parking, permit holders only” does not form a contract.)
And many other points these clowns always fall down on.
The lease doesn't give them any rights to change the lease at any point.
Thanks for the help, I have replied with the part of the lease about the car parking with offering that they should get the lease from the management company (Their client)
I pulled the see you in court so lets see if I will need to take a day off work.
The lease is very much in my favor from reading it as a layman. Which I'm surprised about. The original company went bank rupt then it was sold to a different freeholder/management company and when I asked for the original agreement they couldn't provide it.
Thanks for the help, I have replied with the part of the lease about the car parking with offering that they should get the lease from the management company (Their client)
I pulled the see you in court so lets see if I will need to take a day off work.
The lease is very much in my favor from reading it as a layman. Which I'm surprised about. The original company went bank rupt then it was sold to a different freeholder/management company and when I asked for the original agreement they couldn't provide it.
Nuttbelle said:
Unless the fine was in its 000's I would say you have already spent more on it in terms of time and stress.
I couldn't be doing with all the hassle for £100 whether I agree with it or not.
My time is more important but good luck
Often a good principle, but not one that I could personally follow if someone was trying to ‘fine’ me for using my own thing (in this case, land/space) for what I want to use it for, legally. I couldn't be doing with all the hassle for £100 whether I agree with it or not.
My time is more important but good luck
pacenotes said:
The lease doesn't give them any rights to change the lease at any point.
Thanks for the help, I have replied with the part of the lease about the car parking with offering that they should get the lease from the management company (Their client)
I pulled the see you in court so lets see if I will need to take a day off work.
The lease is very much in my favor from reading it as a layman. Which I'm surprised about. The original company went bank rupt then it was sold to a different freeholder/management company and when I asked for the original agreement they couldn't provide it.
Completely different issue but I've found the "I look forward to seeing you in court" works very well when you know you're in the right or atleast on the right side of probability of being right. Thanks for the help, I have replied with the part of the lease about the car parking with offering that they should get the lease from the management company (Their client)
I pulled the see you in court so lets see if I will need to take a day off work.
The lease is very much in my favor from reading it as a layman. Which I'm surprised about. The original company went bank rupt then it was sold to a different freeholder/management company and when I asked for the original agreement they couldn't provide it.
ts which they promptly did.GiantCardboardPlato said:
Nuttbelle said:
Unless the fine was in its 000's I would say you have already spent more on it in terms of time and stress.
I couldn't be doing with all the hassle for £100 whether I agree with it or not.
My time is more important but good luck
Often a good principle, but not one that I could personally follow if someone was trying to ‘fine’ me for using my own thing (in this case, land/space) for what I want to use it for, legally. I couldn't be doing with all the hassle for £100 whether I agree with it or not.
My time is more important but good luck
It's a principle thing.
The parking company has already said they will not issue tickets in the bay anymore as they know they are in the wrong.
They replied this morning with
Our Client will rely on the case of ParkingEye v Beavis (2015). In that case it was accepted as an established principle that a valid contract can be made by an offer in the form of the terms and conditions set out on the sign, and accepted by the driver’s actions as prescribed therein. In the above regard, we hold that a valid contract was formed between the driver (you in this instance) and our Client and the charge owed is outstanding.
They missed the point. Copy and paste gone wrong.
The parking company has already said they will not issue tickets in the bay anymore as they know they are in the wrong.
They replied this morning with
Our Client will rely on the case of ParkingEye v Beavis (2015). In that case it was accepted as an established principle that a valid contract can be made by an offer in the form of the terms and conditions set out on the sign, and accepted by the driver’s actions as prescribed therein. In the above regard, we hold that a valid contract was formed between the driver (you in this instance) and our Client and the charge owed is outstanding.
They missed the point. Copy and paste gone wrong.
pacenotes said:
It's a principle thing.
The parking company has already said they will not issue tickets in the bay anymore as they know they are in the wrong.
They replied this morning with
Our Client will rely on the case of ParkingEye v Beavis (2015). In that case it was accepted as an established principle that a valid contract can be made by an offer in the form of the terms and conditions set out on the sign, and accepted by the driver’s actions as prescribed therein. In the above regard, we hold that a valid contract was formed between the driver (you in this instance) and our Client and the charge owed is outstanding.
They missed the point. Copy and paste gone wrong.
Written by a monkey masquerading as a lawyer.The parking company has already said they will not issue tickets in the bay anymore as they know they are in the wrong.
They replied this morning with
Our Client will rely on the case of ParkingEye v Beavis (2015). In that case it was accepted as an established principle that a valid contract can be made by an offer in the form of the terms and conditions set out on the sign, and accepted by the driver’s actions as prescribed therein. In the above regard, we hold that a valid contract was formed between the driver (you in this instance) and our Client and the charge owed is outstanding.
They missed the point. Copy and paste gone wrong.
pacenotes said:
It's a principle thing.
The parking company has already said they will not issue tickets in the bay anymore as they know they are in the wrong.
They replied this morning with
Our Client will rely on the case of ParkingEye v Beavis (2015). In that case it was accepted as an established principle that a valid contract can be made by an offer in the form of the terms and conditions set out on the sign, and accepted by the driver’s actions as prescribed therein. In the above regard, we hold that a valid contract was formed between the driver (you in this instance) and our Client and the charge owed is outstanding.
They missed the point. Copy and paste gone wrong.
I'm not a lawyer but surely parking in your parking space is not an acceptance of a contract. They have no right to set any terms and conditions in the first place.The parking company has already said they will not issue tickets in the bay anymore as they know they are in the wrong.
They replied this morning with
Our Client will rely on the case of ParkingEye v Beavis (2015). In that case it was accepted as an established principle that a valid contract can be made by an offer in the form of the terms and conditions set out on the sign, and accepted by the driver’s actions as prescribed therein. In the above regard, we hold that a valid contract was formed between the driver (you in this instance) and our Client and the charge owed is outstanding.
They missed the point. Copy and paste gone wrong.
bad company said:
pacenotes said:
It's a principle thing.
The parking company has already said they will not issue tickets in the bay anymore as they know they are in the wrong.
They replied this morning with
Our Client will rely on the case of ParkingEye v Beavis (2015). In that case it was accepted as an established principle that a valid contract can be made by an offer in the form of the terms and conditions set out on the sign, and accepted by the driver’s actions as prescribed therein. In the above regard, we hold that a valid contract was formed between the driver (you in this instance) and our Client and the charge owed is outstanding.
They missed the point. Copy and paste gone wrong.
Written by a monkey masquerading as a lawyer.The parking company has already said they will not issue tickets in the bay anymore as they know they are in the wrong.
They replied this morning with
Our Client will rely on the case of ParkingEye v Beavis (2015). In that case it was accepted as an established principle that a valid contract can be made by an offer in the form of the terms and conditions set out on the sign, and accepted by the driver’s actions as prescribed therein. In the above regard, we hold that a valid contract was formed between the driver (you in this instance) and our Client and the charge owed is outstanding.
They missed the point. Copy and paste gone wrong.
Parking Eye v Beavis(2015) is irrelevant as it relates to parking in a public/retail carpark
The OPs lease trumps any third party contracts and to enjoin any parking restrictions would require a deed of variation. OP you could issue 'them' with a trespass notice
Nuttbelle said:
Unless the fine was in its 000's I would say you have already spent more on it in terms of time and stress.
I couldn't be doing with all the hassle for £100 whether I agree with it or not.
My time is more important but good luck
How much of your valuable time did you spend reading this thread and posting your helpful comment?I couldn't be doing with all the hassle for £100 whether I agree with it or not.
My time is more important but good luck
AdamIM said:
bad company said:
pacenotes said:
It's a principle thing.
The parking company has already said they will not issue tickets in the bay anymore as they know they are in the wrong.
They replied this morning with
Our Client will rely on the case of ParkingEye v Beavis (2015). In that case it was accepted as an established principle that a valid contract can be made by an offer in the form of the terms and conditions set out on the sign, and accepted by the driver’s actions as prescribed therein. In the above regard, we hold that a valid contract was formed between the driver (you in this instance) and our Client and the charge owed is outstanding.
They missed the point. Copy and paste gone wrong.
Written by a monkey masquerading as a lawyer.The parking company has already said they will not issue tickets in the bay anymore as they know they are in the wrong.
They replied this morning with
Our Client will rely on the case of ParkingEye v Beavis (2015). In that case it was accepted as an established principle that a valid contract can be made by an offer in the form of the terms and conditions set out on the sign, and accepted by the driver’s actions as prescribed therein. In the above regard, we hold that a valid contract was formed between the driver (you in this instance) and our Client and the charge owed is outstanding.
They missed the point. Copy and paste gone wrong.
Parking Eye v Beavis(2015) is irrelevant as it relates to parking in a public/retail carpark
The OPs lease trumps any third party contracts and to enjoin any parking restrictions would require a deed of variation. OP you could issue 'them' with a trespass notice
Couple of points here.
1. No one wants the hassle of parking control. It's usually because tenants are claiming that the car park is being abused and they can't get into their spaces. The Management firm will get no return on the fine.
2. The OP got a ticket due to his own mistake. The guy looking for people parking in other peoples car spaces is unlikely to remember who goes where. he looks for a pass. No pass you get a ticket, and OP hopefully gets rid of someone who has abused his parking space.
3. The above comes from a service which costs money.
4. Lease trumps all. I'd be looking for any clauses that mean the OP must comply with management set regulations or similar.
I have dealt with tenants like the OP back in the day when clamping was allowed. I did negotiate with the clampers that they would declamp the occasional silly offender for free or 50%, but it took my time that no-one was paying for. The solicitor who got clamped, who had so voraciously complained about the abuse of spaces that we brought the clampers in, then lied about having his pass in place got no leniency.
OP. No one can give advice without reading your lease. Either pay up, or don't. You made a mistake, and got caught in a system designed to protect you. it's a bit pathetic.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff