Is the man ticketing your car acting illegally?

[RichardM]

Question for the lawyers amongst us.

Having read again the Administration of Justice Act 1970 section 40, I paid a bit more attention to paragraph 2 rather than just paragraph 1.

A person may be guilty of an offence by virtue of subsection (1)(a) above if he concerts with others in the taking of such action as is described in that paragraph, notwithstanding that his own course of conduct does not by itself amount to harassment.

My question is:

If presented with a ticket on private ground, which proports to claim it is a PCN, court action will follow if not paid, ballifs will call, etc, etc., all of which are breaches of paragraph 1 of the section 40 of the act, can it be argued that the person who placed the ticket on the car is as guilty of a breach as the person who designed and authorised the ticket as they are working in concert with each other.

[buzby]

BUT... (and in no way endorsing or supporting the actions of these firms) the posting of a sign or signage alerting the parker to they possible penalties of not complying with the owners wishes would be a preamble to the driver supposedly 'accepting' those terms?

I've just found that a Morrisons supermarket in Glasgow is ticketing parkers and it doesn't even own the land it's hired henchmen issue tickets for!

[RichardM]

No arguement about the posting of signage and possible accepting of terms Buzby but that's not the point.

If they present you with a ticket in a nice yellow sealed envelope, which they call a PCN or any derivative of words, looks exactly like a ticket issued by the council under the RTA and start referring to fines, owners responsibility, court actions, bayliffs, CCJ's etc as many do, they are still in breach of the AJA 1970.

[green_and_mean]

Originally Posted by RichardM

No arguement about the posting of signage and possible accepting of terms Buzby but that's not the point.

If they present you with a ticket in a nice yellow sealed envelope, which they call a PCN or any derivative of words, looks exactly like a ticket issued by the council under the RTA and start referring to fines, owners responsibility, court actions, bayliffs, CCJ's etc as many do, they are still in breach of the AJA 1970.

Only threatening Criminal action is mentioned in the statute, it is NOT illegal to threaten County Court action to chase a debt, or inform that if the Court action is won baliffs will be intructed as its legal to do so.

[buzby]

Clearly the presentation and wording is meant to 'encourage' the recipient to pay the fee for overstaying their welcome, and will do so use all the means at their disposal. It's a bit like those parking signs "POLITE NOTICE" which for the dyslexic among us may mistake the sign to be one from a law enforcement agency. But the error for this, is with the recipient - not that the notice actually contained actionable text. Giving an impression and making a false claim may be close, but no breach could be assumed unless a genuine fraudulent claim was being made.

In my case, the ticket was OK, but the plastic bag stuck to the windscreen stated "IT IS AN OFFENCE TO TAMPER WITH THIS TICKET". Now to me that was a verifiable false statement. Took it round to the police station and they weren't interested. I was basically told it was my fault if I believed anything that was stuck on my windscreen! I got no sympathy saying "so if yours says the same I can disregard it too"?

[green_and_mean]

Originally Posted by buzby

In my case, the ticket was OK, but the plastic bag stuck to the windscreen stated "IT IS AN OFFENCE TO TAMPER WITH THIS TICKET". Now to me that was a verifiable false statement.

Missleading but not entirely false since they do not say what offence. If you removed it and took it away it could be theft....which is an offence or if you ripped it up criminal damage an offence also. If they had stated the law that is used on PCNs that would have been false but the vagueness of the statement would make it hard to prove a criminal act.

[buzby]

How can a private limited company have any say in what 'offence' is committed . They may be offended, but that's not the same as a statutory 'offence' for removal. Criminal damage, they have no say in - and unless the glue in their ticket damages my paintwork then the boot is on the other foot! So for my money, no individual or company can use ther term 'Offence' without linking their claim to a criminal prosecution - which is something they cannot do. Thoughts?

[Bernie_the_Bolt]

Originally Posted by buzby

How can a private limited company have any say in what 'offence' is committed . They may be offended, but that's not the same as a statutory 'offence' for removal. Criminal damage, they have no say in - and unless the glue in their ticket damages my paintwork then the boot is on the other foot! So for my money, no individual or company can use ther term 'Offence' without linking their claim to a criminal prosecution - which is something they cannot do. Thoughts?

What about petrol companies who say "Driving away without paying is theft" or shops who say "shoplifters will be prosecuted", record companies who say "illegal copying is a crime"?

[Mossycat]

Originally Posted by buzby

How can a private limited company have any say in what 'offence' is committed . They may be offended, but that's not the same as a statutory 'offence' for removal. Criminal damage, they have no say in - and unless the glue in their ticket damages my paintwork then the boot is on the other foot! So for my money, no individual or company can use ther term 'Offence' without linking their claim to a criminal prosecution - which is something they cannot do. Thoughts?

It's a bit like a sign in a shop that says 'All breakages must be paid for' in reality that is unenforceable, they may refer you to the sign but if you refuse to pay up they would never win in a court of law

Trespassers will be prosecuted is my favourite, the only place that this is true is Ministry of Defence property, for all other land the land-owner cannot prosecute you for trespass since trespass is a tort, so unless they already have an injunction against you in place they can do nothing about you trespassing.

Warning Huge Doberman Who Hasn't Eaten For Days is however a sign that I would be tempted to respect though

Mossycat

[buzby]

Originally Posted by Bernie_the_Bolt

What about petrol companies who say "Driving away without paying is theft" or shops who say "shoplifters will be prosecuted", record companies who say "illegal copying is a crime"?

Ah, but then - with the petrol station, they're stating the obvious. A bit like "Stealing from our shop is a crime." It most certainly is, as the shop may well have a policy to prosecute shoplifters, but a Ltd company sticking a plastic bag on your windscreen without your permission cannot blithely say to tamper with it is an offence. What offence would this be? As for copying, illegal copying is most certainly a crime, but I copy legally (so it isn't!).