Written by John Kruse, one of the leading experts on Bailiff Law, this consumer friendly guide is essential reading for anyone who comes into contact with a bailiff.
The book is easy to understand and clearly explains the rights
a bailiff has, and also what they cannot do when collecting debts and repossessing goods etc.
A short while ago, and envelope addressed to my father arrived with a parking charge from G24, as the registered keeper of the vehicle they had snapped leaving a car park, a car that it is in fact myself (and occasionally my mother) who drives.
Anyways, after a quick Google, I found a forum with a letter to send as follows:
What evidence do you hold that shows I was parking in your car park over the allotted time? If you hold documentary evidence please provide copies of the same. As a private car park, any claim you have lies in contract and not in Statute. I could only be contractually liable if I personally parked a car in the car park. Mere evidence that a car registered to me was parking in your car park does not prove that it was the case that I parked it.
What are your charges for parking in the car park? If there are no charges then what are the contractual terms that you (your client) apply in relation to this car park.
Please provide me with a copy of any ticket you claim to have issued.
Please advise me how it is alleged I have breached any purported contract. In anticipation of receiving the documents requested above I would make the following comments:-
As your claim lies in contract it represents a claim for damages for breach of that contract. Your penalty charge of £90 bears no correlation to the damages you have allegedly incurred.
In light of the damages you have claimed, your claim represents a penalty charge and is consequently not recoverable le in contract law.
It is my view that any contractual terms you rely upon to claim your penalty charge are unfair and consequently unenforceable pursuant to the Unfair Terms and Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 and the Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977.
Please refrain from any further contact regarding this matter unless and until you have answered each of the points above and where appropriate provided copies of the letters referred to. Any further attempt to demand monies from me without responding to my reasonable request for information as set out above, will result in my solicitors being instructed to bring proceedings under the Protection from Harassment Act which entitles me to an award of damages together with a non-harassment order. In that event my solicitors will also seek the cost of those proceedings.
This letter was indeed sent of, although I think that was maybe a rushed decision, partly due to having my father on my back to deal with this, as he can be very narrow-minded with this sort of thing, not to mention he gets stressed very easily. Alas, I digress...
Anyway, the following is the reply received:
Thank you for your letter,
We confirm we have already provided you with sufficient evidence demonstrating that your car was parked for a period in excess of that allowed by the owner of the land - we refer you to the Charge Certificate which you have received, which states the date, time and location of the parking contravention, together with photographic evidence in this regard.
Furthermore, the terms and conditions of the car par where clearly shown on the signage displayed in the car park and accordingly, you, as the driver of your vehicle when the parking contravention occurred, are contractually liable to pay the parking fine. The payment requested is not a penalty, but a contractually agreed sum, for which we are entitled to demand payment.
We confirm that no ticket has been issued to you, only the documentation you have already been sent.
We act completely in accordance with the relevant Regulations and although we appreciate that no-one wishes to receive a parking fine, we regret to say that in this instance it is clear that a parking contravention has occurred and payment is still required from you.
We therefore looking forward to receiving from you by return of the sum of £90.00, failing which the matter will be pursued further through our nominated debt collection agency, and thereafter, if necessary, by issuing county court proceedings against you, for the principal sum, plus interest and costs. We trust this will not be necessary.
Now, based on the titbit of reading I've been doing and common sense, I've noticed a few things in their reply, both about the argument itself and than their ability to enforce it.
The payment requested is not a penalty, but a contractually agreed sum, for which we are entitled to demand payment.
As much as we are entitled to tell them to go swivel?
...you, as the driver of your vehicle when the parking contravention occurred, are contractually liable to pay the parking fine.
So they are admitting that it is the driver that is liable for the sum. Despite wording that my infer the opposite, should my father still be able to point blank deny that he was the driver (which he wasn't anyway).
...clear that a parking contravention has occurred...
Surely exiting and leaving a car park, which is (almost surely the only) photographic evidence they claim to have does not constitute a 'clear' contravention. For one, surely I haven't parked until I've stopped in a bay and left my car?
But finally, as I touched on early, the nature of my father simply won't allow a common train of thought to just ignore the letters, so it looks like this will need to played out to get them to go away.
But basically, as it is more myself dealing with this, some advice as to exactly how to proceed would be more than welcome.
As kiptower says [problem]. You will get 2 letters from G24 then 2 from next desk(DCA) then a further 2 letters from next but one desk(Supposed solicitor).
Usual G24 templated letter. We've seen it a million times.
The fact they talk about it being a 'parking fine' tells you nothing will ever come of this.
Ignore their rubbish, unless you have some spare stamps and want to provoke them. My personal favourite is 'thankyou for your letter, but I regret to inform you that your appeal for money have been rejected. '
Aha. Just read a lovely get out clause. Their letter refers to a 'parking fine'. A fine is a penalty in law which is different to the parking charge they are trying to invoke upon you. Which LAW is it they claim you have broken? None.
There is no FINE just an unenforceable invoice which you can quite lawfully ignore.
They will not go to couirt, but on the off chance they ever do (0.00000000001% chance of that) they would lose simply because they claim to have issued a fine to which they are not empowered to do so. Police, magistrates, council parking enforcement can all invoke a penalty or fine. Mr knuckle scraping lowdog scumbucket Ltd cannot.
Again, IGNORE THEM. do not be tempted to respond at all.
Accepting that the usual (and undoubtedly correct) modus operandi is to simply ignore these idiots and their equally stupid bits of paper, please take note of this from the OP's original post.
But finally, as I touched on early, the nature of my father simply won't allow a common train of thought to just ignore the letters, so it looks like this will need to played out to get them to go away.
So I suggest that Bernie's template letters may be the way to go with this one. Possibly (and, of course, completely accidentally) forgetting to put a stamp on anything you send them...
G24
of the car par where clearly shown on the signage displayed in the car park and accordingly, you, as the driver of your vehicle when the parking contravention occurred, are contractually liable to pay the parking fine
Reply With Quote
20/03/2008 settled in full out of court
Originally Posted by Ernest Spruce
