the one on the video?

This weekend I parked in a carpark above a shop in Nottinghamshire that seemingly used to be a pay & display, however all machines were marked as 'not in use' and everyone seemed to be parked freely.

My problem is that on entry to the carpark, which is up a very narrow ramp almost exactly the width of a car with a small pavement either side of the ramp at the bottom, the metal gate which was held back with a length of chain and a padlock moved. This happened when I was half way past the gate and the top of the bolt at the bottom dug into the side of the rear passenger door, leaving a scratch through the paint and down to the primer that is around 2/3 of the width of the door.

I entered the carpark slowly and carefully in a normal sized car, didn't mount the pavement on either side and due to the width of the road there was no way of moving away from it - there was literally nowhere else for the car to be. I initially stopped to make sure I was lined up okay because it looked a bit tight, but the gate wasn't obstructing the entry at all at that point so it seemed safe to continue.

Although all the machines were covered over with 'not in use' plastic covers in the parking companies corporate colours (and the one where someone had cut through so the keypad was visible also said 'not in use' on the screen) the parking company had their pay & display terms and condition board at the top, complete with the obligatory 'you agree to the following terms... we are not responsible for any loss or damage' paragraph that you could only actually read after the point the damage occurred so I'd think that you couldn't reasonably expect to have agreed to that term when it happened.

The fact that everyone was parked for free and the T&Cs were related to pay & display makes me wonder if the parking company named are still responsible for the carpark though. Likewise I didn't actually shop in the store the carpark is above on that day, as I entered on the understanding that it was a public pay & display carpark with the intention of paying for a stay and nowhere did I see a 'customers only' sign.

I have photos of the damage, the T&Cs board and the gate but I didn't see any CCTV covering the entrance, or any of the carpark whilst I was there (and I can't really go back - I live about 150 miles away).

So... where do I stand with this? Is this going to be something that I'm going to have to take on the chin and pay to fix myself (not had an official assessment, but my friendly mechanic says it's beyond the point of T-cut), or would either the parking company or the shop the carpark is above have any liability?

(Sorry if I've missed any useful information - I don't really want to give too much away just yet, but if I've been a bit too guarded...)

oh okay - I was under the impression it was only illegal if you did it for personal gain, whereas protecting yourself from being repeatedly doorstepped by bailiffs (or them gaining entry from an open window) would be fair enough...

I'm not sure where this post goes, as it seems to cover a few different things which have their own forums, but here goes....

I live in a rented house (been there just over a year now) and I'm told that the ex-tenant ran off without paying rent for 6 months. Being that kind of person I've done the usual opening debt collectors and local council letters, informing them that he's not here to collect debts from, notifying the bank about the fact he's not here every time an overdraft extension letter comes though... and for the most part it's just been dealt with.

Apart from the bank - the extension letters come through each time I notify them he's not at this address and I just assumed it was incompetence on their part, or at least until yesterday. When I got in I found a letter from retail loss prevention saying that he's been caught shoplifting in the last 3 weeks and has given his old address and they've sent him the usual demand for cash. I'm reasonably sure now he's outright lying to people and running some sort of a con.

Now the only way I can think of that he's doing this is using his driving licence as 'proof of address' and is intentionally misleading people. Is there any way of reporting this to the DVLA and hopefully removing his means to keep doing this? I can't find anything on their webpages

I never knew Swindon had a problem with badly parked matchbox toys

I think the answer is simple really. You should have the right to disconnect from the responsibilities of society - but at the cost of disconnecting from the rights and privileges that go with it. Basically living a 'don't give, don't take' lifestyle.

so let's take a walk outside and see where this new-found freedom takes us shall we? Ah. You're now using a public road surfaced, maintained and lit with public funds.

That *was* a short journey, wasn't it?

It's about time they added 'court' and 'justice' to the list at http://www.companieshouse.gov.uk/about/gbhtml/gp1.shtml#appA

It seems to me that the OP cancelled the job due to the AAs failure to deliver.

 

To be stuck on the A4 at the Hogarth Roundabout must have been unbelievably scary as the road is still very busy at that time.

That is true, and I don't mean this to be any defence as to how the AA have handled this - but I did have to go down that stretch to the Hogarth Roundabout on the night in question and the average speed was around 8MPH across all lanes due to an accident towards Hammersmith, so I can't imagine it would've been easy to get a van down there and would've suspected that it might take longer than usual (I think it took me over an hour from the M25 to the roundabout).

A bit more communication would've been in order from the AA though

Vinci also do council permit administration and enforcement too - are we 100% definitely sure this is private?

The potential other vehicle element is possibly worth looking at too - but it'll probably turn out to be a mistake...

Another STRANGE coincidence.....according to the company director check website, Mr Martin Toby Gardiner is also a Director of another company called: SEXTOYS are US Limited which was incorporated in Sept 2012. Another similar named company (SEXTOYS are US UK Limited) was dissolved.

 

The plot thickens.....

maybe he'd got an excess of chains and clamps left over from his first business venture and didn't want them to go to waste?

'Officers pounced on his modern four-bedroom detached pad when the conman was on holiday, but they left with his white tow truck.

Ryan was left with a £350 bill when he returned if he wanted the vehicle back.'

That is just beautiful...

here's a link he may be interested in:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Streisand_effect

Failing that if everything stated is true and accurate I'm not sure what he thinks is going to happen

what about directors?

probably the same person - I didn't think much of the web design so obviously their talents lay elsewhere

except maybe they share a web designer

one of that long list taught me to drive and always went on at me to be more prepared at traffic lights regardless of colour - I'm assuming you aren't him

I know a name alone isn't much to go on - but if people have you on record regarding something like this it wouldn't take too much for them to sniff around the usual forums on a fishing expedition and put 2+2 together.

It's probably more likely that the private parking folks would be more likely to do it than a council or the police, but anything people can do to not make life easier for people giving them a rough ride has to be a good thing.

and just a thought - for issues like this maybe a more discreet username would be in order? some kind of friendly, memorable but not too identifying alias that you aren't known by?

(Assuming you haven't already thought of that and this is actually an Alias that just looks like a real name)

I had one, and all the dealer in Twickenham would tell me after keeping it for 2 days was 'It is behaving in the same way as all cars of this particular age and model do'. Sadly I get the feeling he was telling the truth, but wasn't a great help and oddly enough at this point I realised during the course of the conversation he'd steered me outside into the used car sales area.

I traded mine in - and not for a Volkswagen group car either

judging by the references to the DMV I think he's in America

I actually live in Kingston and I'm not aware of ever having been to newham

I'm not sure if this is exactly the right forum for this question, so feel free to move it if I'm wrong.

I moved into a house last April and as sometimes happens I found a whole stack of debt collectors letters for the previous tennant, most of which were dealt with very quickly and politely with a few phonecalls.

Then there's the Newham Council parking ticket...

They instructed a bailiff around april/may and I called them, giving them our council tax details so they could confirm the debtor is no longer at the address and they apologised, returning the debt to the council.

The council then instructed Whyte & co. to chase it with the same address details, who requested tenancy agreement info to prove we are the current occupants, which I did and I asked them to notify the council of the problem as they were the second agency to chase this debt. They said I'd have to do that myself.

I contacted the council via email, who replied via letter that they only ever instructed one company of bailiffs in September (implying that I am lying), and that they cannot accept my assertion that the debtor doesn't live here because he's not notified the DVLA of his new address, and all they can suggest is proving myself to the bailiffs.

I've done that twice now, and I get a sneaking feeling if this doesn't get stopped soon I'm going to end up having to do it at least once more and I'm getting annoyed with it - it's not my job to do their legwork because they've lost track of someone owing them money. I also get the suspicion that they might be in breach of the data protection act here as they have been asked to correct data held on 2 separate occasions (although only once by me personally) and have refused to do so, but I'm not 100% sure of that.

And ideas what do I need to do to stop Newham council repeatedly sending debt collectors and bailiff threats?

This is an interesting one in as much as the name could be considered to be extremely misleading in as much as they are iimplying some kind of legal status, a copy to the DVLA and OFT MAY be worth a thought.

I'm surprised that 'Court' doesn't appear on the list of restricted words at companies house to be honest

In the end I gave up and traded it in for a Hyundai i30.

I know a few people I work with who find they woke up one day to go to work and their 1.2l Polos just didn't really have any power. They work in the sanse that they start and go places, they just feel like a shadow of their former selves and acceleration is laggy and unpredictable. All VW dealers just say 'well.. that's how this model is'.

There also seems to be a pattern amongst at least a couple of PPCs of sending out court papers, but then backing down when the motorist submits a proper defence. Could that be construed as another example of a "threatogram"?

To be fair the DVLA do that as well as anybody looking at the forumload of 'failure to notify' threads.

You have every right to be a freeman and opt-out of society - just find yourself a nice, unoccupied field in the middle of nowhere to wander around and never leave!

Seriously - do these freeman folks not realise that if they were right then they would just be taking the benefits of society without taking on any of its responsibilities or contributing back into it? It's just selfishness dressed up in bats**t insanity

it's not just carparks - I used to live in a house with a clear view of a one-way road and it seems that every 3rd driver thought that one-way only applied to the direction the car was pointed in. So long as the front of the car was pointing the right way it didn't matter, so throw it into reverse and drive down it as far as you like.