parking invoice & now court summons
Discussion
xjay1337 said:
Nope. Obviously not.
Only on PH can someone ask for some genuine advice and get berated by some very odd individuals, but yet they offer no assistance.
Wonder if they / you would be so outspoken in real life. Of course you wouldn't.
So are you saying we can't hold a different view to the OP (on this and other threads)?Only on PH can someone ask for some genuine advice and get berated by some very odd individuals, but yet they offer no assistance.
Wonder if they / you would be so outspoken in real life. Of course you wouldn't.
Just maybe, with others having a different opinion to the OP he may come to change his view or at least understand others point of view.
xjay1337 said:
Aren't you all the righteous ones.
It's not about being "righteous". It's about being considerate. Land isn't free. It costs money. People who spend money on land for their business, be it for customers, patrons, residents, whatever, expect to be able to decide who gets to use that land, for what purpose, and for how long. When some self-entitled chump takes it upon themself to park in a residents' space at a home for elderly persons, rather than walk a few (or even a few hundred) yards extra to the door of a take-away, they usually know that what they are doing isn't right, but excuse themself by believing that "it's doing no-one any harm".
It's been suggested up thread that there was no shortage of spaces. It's been stated that they weren't parked for long. It's also been suggested that the reason a parking enforcement contract is in place is because it isn't "just the occasional one or two" breaking the rules and acting inconsiderately. But this point seems to have been missed by the OP and his cheerleaders.
For clarity: "I'll just be a couple of minutes" is NEVER a good enough reason to occupy/obstruct a space to which you have no entitlement. The key to this, for me at least, is the residential nature of said car park. it's proximity to a take-away almost certainly means that it is subject to many unauthorised vehicle movements at what most reasonable, considerate folk would consider to be "unsociable hours". So residents' rest and reasonable enjoyment of their private property is being disturbed on a regular basis, almost always at night. Imagine that your driveway was being used by a succession of aresholes from 6 pm to 11 pm as they frequented a nearby chip-shop. Car engines starting every ten minutes, laughing, shouting, littering all going on all evening, as you are trying to watch Miss Marple, the News At Ten, or just get some sleep. You wouldn't be happy, but every single person parking on your drive would convince themselves that it was only them that was clever enough to do it, that they were being quiet, and that it "wasn't doing any harm". Yet you'd have your whole evening interrupted every evening, and you'd be far from happy.
TL;DR? Just put up, and shut up. Pay the parking charge you know you deserved, and quit parking like a self-entitled oaf. It's that simple.
You seem to be ignoring the fact that this "private" car park had NO signs visible, and non conforming to any regulations.
Sounds like the PPC also did not follow the relevant follow up documentation.
Also Ppc have failed to protect information under the Data protection act / gdpr etc.
I care less ahout whether it's "right or wrong" because, frankly, I don't care that much... but we should all care whether it's legal.
But hey, just roll over.
Sounds like the PPC also did not follow the relevant follow up documentation.
Also Ppc have failed to protect information under the Data protection act / gdpr etc.
I care less ahout whether it's "right or wrong" because, frankly, I don't care that much... but we should all care whether it's legal.
But hey, just roll over.
xjay1337 said:
You seem to be ignoring the fact that this "private" car park had NO signs visible, and non conforming to any regulations.
Sounds like the PPC also did not follow the relevant follow up documentation.
Also Ppc have failed to protect information under the Data protection act / gdpr etc.
I care less ahout whether it's "right or wrong" because, frankly, I don't care that much... but we should all care whether it's legal.
But hey, just roll over.
Does your driveway have any signs indicating that it is private property? If not, is it "fair game" as an overflow car park for visitors to neighbouring homes and businesses? And I suppose your last sentence typifies the modern attitude that requires there to be an explicit prohibition on doing something, otherwise it's "perfectly legal, innit, bruvv". Sometimes "what is morally right" is far more important, from a considerate point of view, than "what is within the law". It's why we tend to come home to an empty driveway, because other people don't look at it and think "well parking there must be legal, because there's no signs to say otherwise". Instead they see it and think "it's someone's driveway, and parking there would be ridiculously inconsiderate". The car park in the OP is, effectively, just a whole bunch of individual driveways rolled up into a single car park for the sake of using space more efficiently, and parking in/on it is just as inconsiderate as parking your car on a complete stranger's driveway without permission. Or at least it is in my opinion. But that's the last I'll say on the matter. It's clear that you are not about to have your mind changed, and neither am I so any further discussion would be pointless. Sounds like the PPC also did not follow the relevant follow up documentation.
Also Ppc have failed to protect information under the Data protection act / gdpr etc.
I care less ahout whether it's "right or wrong" because, frankly, I don't care that much... but we should all care whether it's legal.
But hey, just roll over.
We'll simply have to agree to disagree. Goodnight all...
xjay1337 said:
I care less ahout whether it's "right or wrong" because, frankly, I don't care that much... but we should all care whether it's legal.
But hey, just roll over.
In case anybody was wondering, this is who the OP really is. Hopefully the parking enforcement company will get a judgement against him...But hey, just roll over.
Yup! I have another account with 130 months, that i replied to my own post on. (???)
Yellowjack - Indeed we can agree to disagree. I am not saying parking "selfishly" is OK - just that IF a PPC are employed to manage a car park - then they must abide by the law RE signage displayed (which seems like they haven't here), follow up letters (seems like they haven't) , etc.
To simply go from an initial Parking charge notice, OP sending an informal appeal, to hearing nothing from PPC , to PPC sending court papers without through without due process, is wrong IMO.
OP has been a bit vague in the details provided, but I am taking him at face value. He may be a complete scoundrel and a menace to society who parks on double yellows!!!!!
I'd rather back a (presumably?) slightly bad parking fellow motoring enthusiast, than a PPC who issue hundreds (if not thousands) of illegal parking charge notices across the country.
Anyway I'm not looking to argue with anyone over something which doesn't impact me so ...should probably leave this thread to those who want to berate OP and not offer any suggestions
Edit:
To be clear, OP I would recommend getting in contact with the solicitors apologising for lack of response and say you are prepared to engage if they are, ask for POPLA code and say you will honour POPLA appeal result without contest. That's your best bet without actually going to court. Looks like you have tried to engage in communication that way.
Yellowjack - Indeed we can agree to disagree. I am not saying parking "selfishly" is OK - just that IF a PPC are employed to manage a car park - then they must abide by the law RE signage displayed (which seems like they haven't here), follow up letters (seems like they haven't) , etc.
To simply go from an initial Parking charge notice, OP sending an informal appeal, to hearing nothing from PPC , to PPC sending court papers without through without due process, is wrong IMO.
OP has been a bit vague in the details provided, but I am taking him at face value. He may be a complete scoundrel and a menace to society who parks on double yellows!!!!!
I'd rather back a (presumably?) slightly bad parking fellow motoring enthusiast, than a PPC who issue hundreds (if not thousands) of illegal parking charge notices across the country.
Anyway I'm not looking to argue with anyone over something which doesn't impact me so ...should probably leave this thread to those who want to berate OP and not offer any suggestions
Edit:
To be clear, OP I would recommend getting in contact with the solicitors apologising for lack of response and say you are prepared to engage if they are, ask for POPLA code and say you will honour POPLA appeal result without contest. That's your best bet without actually going to court. Looks like you have tried to engage in communication that way.
Edited by xjay1337 on Friday 25th October 00:04
Roo said:
Andy20vt said:
I am anti profiteering
Have you always worked for no salary?Andy20vt said:
I don't have a salary which is directly linked to the extortion, threats and intimidation of motorists into paying unreasonable sums of money for some minor parking transgression, without a reasonable (impartial) opportunity to appeal and regardless of whether they are guilty or not.
People parking on private property without authorisation deserve all the aggravation and inconvenience they have to endure. I have no sympathy for them whatsoever.You should try owning a car park sometime. You will then experience the self righteous neanderthal mentality of many motorists.
xjay1337 said:
Drumroll said:
So you feel it is right to park in a car park that you have no connection with (visiting a freind or relative) then moan that the signs weren't visible.
There is no maybe. You are the reason a lot of places use these companies. I would never think to use a car park that clearly belonged to a buisness I had no current connection with.
But I forget you are one of the entitled ones, who feel they can do what they want without consequences.
Ahh the old ad hominem.There is no maybe. You are the reason a lot of places use these companies. I would never think to use a car park that clearly belonged to a buisness I had no current connection with.
But I forget you are one of the entitled ones, who feel they can do what they want without consequences.
If there were no signs saying you couldn't park there, then I would use it without concern.
Sounds like one sign was not lit , so not visible, and the other blocked. Signage is not to the regulation.
Plenty of times I park in a random carpark, as long as there is no signs saying I can't. If it says private etc, then I don't.
I used to park in Sainsburys and walk over into town.
Reason being, Sainsburys is free 2 hour parking and you paid to park in town.
Get off your high horse and get down to reality, you aren't helping the OP, he doesn't want people to berate him, he wants help, and if you want to mug me off feel free to do so directly rather than in this guys thread.
Well done for being a total prick.
Stay in Bed Instead said:
People parking on private property without authorisation deserve all the aggravation and inconvenience they have to endure. I have no sympathy for them whatsoever.
You should try owning a car park sometime. You will then experience the self righteous neanderthal mentality of many motorists.
Okay great, can you answer the following:You should try owning a car park sometime. You will then experience the self righteous neanderthal mentality of many motorists.
Do you agree with and condone the normally dodgy practices employed by these parking companies to collect their revenue (misleading signage, no grace period, ghost ticketing, doctoring of photographs, misuse and/or inaccuracies related to ANPR data, premature threats of CCJ/Bailiffs, etc, etc?
Do you agree that if the parking company's continually fail to adhere to the laws regarding POFA 2012 and Data Protection then that's okay?
Are you aware that motorists have no right to a fair appeal even if the ticket was issued in error (POPLA and IAS are not impartial - they are both funded by and hence unduly influenced by the parking companies, particularly the IAS)? Is that okay in your book?
Do you work for a parking company or run a car park (in which case your opinion is probably heavily biased)?
Andy20vt said:
Stay in Bed Instead said:
People parking on private property without authorisation deserve all the aggravation and inconvenience they have to endure. I have no sympathy for them whatsoever.
You should try owning a car park sometime. You will then experience the self righteous neanderthal mentality of many motorists.
Okay great, can you answer the following:You should try owning a car park sometime. You will then experience the self righteous neanderthal mentality of many motorists.
Do you agree with and condone the normally dodgy practices employed by these parking companies to collect their revenue (misleading signage, no grace period, ghost ticketing, doctoring of photographs, misuse and/or inaccuracies related to ANPR data, premature threats of CCJ/Bailiffs, etc, etc?
Do you agree that if the parking company's continually fail to adhere to the laws regarding POFA 2012 and Data Protection then that's okay?
Are you aware that motorists have no right to a fair appeal even if the ticket was issued in error (POPLA and IAS are not impartial - they are both funded by and hence unduly influenced by the parking companies, particularly the IAS)? Is that okay in your book?
Do you work for a parking company or run a car park (in which case your opinion is probably heavily biased)?
So I have zero sympathy and ever less respect for any parasite who thinks the world revolves around them.
People like you are the problem and the parking companies are only here because of it.
Andy20vt said:
Okay great, can you answer the following:
Do you agree with and condone the normally dodgy practices employed by these parking companies to collect their revenue (misleading signage, no grace period, ghost ticketing, doctoring of photographs, misuse and/or inaccuracies related to ANPR data, premature threats of CCJ/Bailiffs, etc, etc?
Do you agree that if the parking company's continually fail to adhere to the laws regarding POFA 2012 and Data Protection then that's okay?
Are you aware that motorists have no right to a fair appeal even if the ticket was issued in error (POPLA and IAS are not impartial - they are both funded by and hence unduly influenced by the parking companies, particularly the IAS)? Is that okay in your book?
Do you work for a parking company or run a car park (in which case your opinion is probably heavily biased)?
You can bDo you agree with and condone the normally dodgy practices employed by these parking companies to collect their revenue (misleading signage, no grace period, ghost ticketing, doctoring of photographs, misuse and/or inaccuracies related to ANPR data, premature threats of CCJ/Bailiffs, etc, etc?
Do you agree that if the parking company's continually fail to adhere to the laws regarding POFA 2012 and Data Protection then that's okay?
Are you aware that motorists have no right to a fair appeal even if the ticket was issued in error (POPLA and IAS are not impartial - they are both funded by and hence unduly influenced by the parking companies, particularly the IAS)? Is that okay in your book?
Do you work for a parking company or run a car park (in which case your opinion is probably heavily biased)?
h all you like about the conduct of PPC's. It does not negate the actions of some people that think they can park in a private car park without authorisation. As what this thread is about.Yes, I have a private car park. I bet you don't.
Stay in Bed Instead said:
People parking on private property without authorisation deserve all the aggravation and inconvenience they have to endure. I have no sympathy for them whatsoever.
You should try owning a car park sometime. You will then experience the self righteous neanderthal mentality of many motorists.
I agree with your sentiments, however the people to benefit should be those land owners, not some shyster fly by night ex clamper chucking up a couple of signs or ANPR cameras and being unscrupulous in the way they work to generate income. Given that 50% of all appeals to the independent appeal service POPLA go in the favour of the motorist is a good indication that the business practices are far from ideal. You should try owning a car park sometime. You will then experience the self righteous neanderthal mentality of many motorists.
The best way forward would be simply for the landowner to go after the driver for trespass instead and claim "damages" and not some figure plucked from the air for a breach of alleged contract.
Kuji said:
Most of us ho through life never getting a ticket, because we don't park where we know we shouldn't.
So I have zero sympathy and ever less respect for any parasite who thinks the world revolves around them.
People like you are the problem and the parking companies are only here because of it.
Wow you certainly make a lot of assumptions don't you? So I have zero sympathy and ever less respect for any parasite who thinks the world revolves around them.
People like you are the problem and the parking companies are only here because of it.
You are wrong, parking companies only exist because its an easy way to extort a large quantity of money from motorists who are too naive, vulnerable, time poor or timid to fight back. Many of the parking companies were set up by the sort of bullying thugs who used to be clampers, once private clamping became illegal.
Parking companies actively recruit land and car park owners rather than the other way round. I've lost count of the number of unsolicited letters/emails our company has received from these firms offering to manage our firm's car park. Some even offer to cut us a share of the profits.
Why should a sign be lit? Lit signs need planning permission in my area. It's not difficult to make sure you understand the local rules when you park, why the fk should you be spoon fed?
Why should there be a grace period (which by OP's admission they would have over run anyway even if this was a council-run car park)? As pointed out several times, the local residents are no doubt fed up of hundreds of individuals 'only being 5 minutes'.
I'm no angel for the rules myself, but I know when to have enough self-respect to take responsibility for my actions.
k should you be spoon fed?Why should there be a grace period (which by OP's admission they would have over run anyway even if this was a council-run car park)? As pointed out several times, the local residents are no doubt fed up of hundreds of individuals 'only being 5 minutes'.
I'm no angel for the rules myself, but I know when to have enough self-respect to take responsibility for my actions.
pavarotti1980 said:
Stay in Bed Instead said:
People parking on private property without authorisation deserve all the aggravation and inconvenience they have to endure. I have no sympathy for them whatsoever.
You should try owning a car park sometime. You will then experience the self righteous neanderthal mentality of many motorists.
I agree with your sentiments, however the people to benefit should be those land owners, not some shyster fly by night ex clamper chucking up a couple of signs or ANPR cameras and being unscrupulous in the way they work to generate income. Given that 50% of all appeals to the independent appeal service POPLA go in the favour of the motorist is a good indication that the business practices are far from ideal. You should try owning a car park sometime. You will then experience the self righteous neanderthal mentality of many motorists.
The best way forward would be simply for the landowner to go after the driver for trespass instead and claim "damages" and not some figure plucked from the air for a breach of alleged contract.
How do you stop all the self entitled idiots from using private land when they know they shouldn't but do anyway.
How do you ensure that the 99.9% of honest people don't have to pay for something they didn't cause and had zero involvement with?
You must have a solution? Surely
pavarotti1980 said:
I agree with your sentiments, however the people to benefit should be those land owners, not some shyster fly by night ex clamper chucking up a couple of signs or ANPR cameras and being unscrupulous in the way they work to generate income. Given that 50% of all appeals to the independent appeal service POPLA go in the favour of the motorist is a good indication that the business practices are far from ideal.
The best way forward would be simply for the landowner to go after the driver for trespass instead and claim "damages" and not some figure plucked from the air for a breach of alleged contract.
No. The best way forward would be simply for the landowner to go after the driver for trespass instead and claim "damages" and not some figure plucked from the air for a breach of alleged contract.
The best way forward is for motorists not to park anywhere there is not express permission to do so. The car park of an old folks home does not.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff