Parking fine

[Deleted member 18243]

Pay the fine and don't do it again.

 

[Bodd]

Pay the fine and don't do it again.

Do you know I'll end up paying it and its not even mine

 

[motorbiking]

Here is an example (not precedent).
http://nebula.wsimg.com/c8348f3d7a1...8F2392A09CF228A46&disposition=0&alloworigin=1

The ticket can be challenged (probably through PoPLA) on the following grounds:
1. The Parking company have no Authority to enforce (ask them to provide it).
2. The parking was authorised by a lease holder in accordance with the terms and conditions of the lease (name him)
3. No contract therefore exists between driver and parking scumbag.
4. take your (the claimant) claim up with whoever agreed to your terms of service (i.e. parking scumbag claims against the management company).

or pay the 40 if you don't fancy the bother (worth a PoPLA appeal though).

 

[Bodd]

Here is an example (not precedent).
http://nebula.wsimg.com/c8348f3d7a1...8F2392A09CF228A46&disposition=0&alloworigin=1

The ticket can be challenged (probably through PoPLA) on the following grounds:
1. The Parking company have no Authority to enforce (ask them to provide it).
2. The parking was authorised by a lease holder in accordance with the terms and conditions of the lease (name him)
3. No contract therefore exists between driver and parking scumbag.
4. take your (the claimant) claim up with whoever agreed to your terms of service (i.e. parking scumbag claims against the management company).

Thank MB. I'll look at this tomorrow.


Thank you all even you Andy for telling me to give up...

 

[Deleted member 18243]

Cars and vans are anti social.

I like Thomas Nagy, the electrician YouTube blogger, but his attitude to parking irks me something rotten. He often works in central London, and parks illegally, accepting the fine because it costs him less than it would have done to park legally and pay the charge.

 

[Notch7]

Cars and vans are anti social.

I like Thomas Nagy, the electrician YouTube blogger, but his attitude to parking irks me something rotten. He often works in central London, and parks illegally, accepting the fine because it costs him less than it would have done to park legally and pay the charge.

Is he the guy that raffles his van?

 

[Bodd]

Is he the guy that raffles his van?

He's raffled Andy.

 

[Bodd]

Cars and vans are anti social.

I like Thomas Nagy, the electrician YouTube blogger, but his attitude to parking irks me something rotten. He often works in central London, and parks illegally, accepting the fine because it costs him less than it would have done to park legally and pay the charge.

Very moral Andy. But I need to drive to do my business.
I'm happy to ban anyone who cannot give good reason for owning a vehicle.

But I need one unless you can supply me a small army of Sherpas

 

[noseall]

Cars and vans are anti social.

In the same way social media can be. It'll never stop you using either though will it boyo.

 

[ban-all-sheds]

Cars and vans are anti social.

Give us another bonkers suggestion for us to laugh at you, and mock you, over - tell us what alternative(s) you would suggest.

 

[motorbiking]

I don't think its unreasonable for a person visiting a flat to park in the visitors bay. I do think its unreasonable to expect them to obtain a scratch card parking ticket for the number of hours he intends to use the bay. Its almost as if it is a system designed to increase non-compliance. Either way, I can't imagine such a restriction exists in the lease and I can't imaging the freeholder or management company has the power to introduce such restrictions.

Notwithstanding this, the sign has some problems in contract law:
- the charge of £100 is for failure to comply with all the terms and conditions - these are not established for those not authorised to park and like the case in the link this does not establish an offer to park for £100, for those without authority.
- the reference to additional charges for non-payment has no basis in law.
- Lastly retrospective evidence not being accepted makes no difference to the obligation or otherwise to pay.

The county court case I posted seems a good fit. I think that case was weaker from a defence point of view than this, because in this case there will almost certainly be a deed between land owner and lease holder.

 

[JohnD]

I don't think its unreasonable for a person visiting a flat to park in the visitors bay. I do think its unreasonable to expect them to obtain a scratch card parking ticket for the number of hours he intends to use the bay.

I know some people who live in a place with such a system, and if you visit them, they rush out with a card and scratch it and put it in your window. They say they have to be quick to get it there before the Enforcer sees you.

 

[motorbiking]

I'd be curious to know if they have a copy of the lease and (assuming they have read it) if the lease requires them to do so. I doubt it.

In which case no obligation exists. Given the above case, you are better off not having the scratch card, than having it.

 

[securespark]

5 quid charge to pay by CC and £1 to pay using their automated service.
They kick you in the knuts when you're down...

 

[Deleted member 18243]

Give us another bonkers suggestion for us to laugh at you, and mock you, over - tell us what alternative(s) you would suggest.

Find the nearest available legal parking space, pay the fee, then cart your gear to wherever you're working.

Better still, take on an unemployed youngster to do your fetching and carrying.

Why should the environment be destroyed for your profit?