Private Parking Charging - Capaign for Police Action

[voxlaic]

Further to my reply on 12 March to "Bernie the Bolt" - 'Private Parking Tickets - Template Letters' I have been contacted by my local police. Initially they suggested that my complaint was a 'civil' matter, but when I stressed that - 'that might be the case regarding the actual parking, but not so in respect of the perpetrators subsequent actions' - they said they would investigate further.

 

My points are -

1. In most cases the land owner is under planning and/or contractual obligations to provide FREE parking provision for customer/visitor vehicles
   
2. Terms or conditions cannot be enforced under any criminal or statutory basis and would only be enforceable in some cases if a charge or written contract was effected
   
3. Under civil law the only action that could be pursued by a land owner would be one of trespass - for which the only claim would be for the restitution of any damage caused or loss incurred - Normal usage would not cause damage and wear and tare negligible and in any event the landowner has a obligation to maintain

Therefore there is NO basis upon which a landowner could succeed at Law and they ARE AWARE that this is the case, therefore their action of issuing

parking tickets has no legal basis and when they -

1. mimic local authority documents and statutory highway markings and then use the DVLA to imply they have legal rights to levy penalties and demand money in settlement of an 'offence' by people (who they deem offended various of these)
   
2. harass and threaten so called offenders with visits from bailiffs and debt collectors and court prosecution and adding their names to bad credit lists

THEY are committing CRIMINAL OFFENCES under

s.40 of 'The Administration of Justice Act 1970'.

 

Having now read of so many incidents rather than engage in any way with these touts I suggest

 

ALL recipients should complain to the police

 

and ask them to proceed against the

landowner and all those involved

for contravening the Law

 

If inundated with such demands - positive rulings will ensue

[green_and_mean]

If the charges cannot be enforced and Courts will not enforce them why waste valuable Police time when all you have to do is pop the letters in your recycling bin? Trespass is also technically an offence so Police action could be used both ways. Supermarkets 'steal' more money from customers from overcharging than they will ever get from Car Parks. I have personally had 3 complaints this year arising from overcharging, (charged more than shelf price, not getting buy one get one free discounts etc). Trading Standards should be the first port of call leave the Police to deal with more pressing matters.

[voxlaic]

I am unaware of any action other than the law of trespass that any owner of private property can currently take against someone who parks a vehicle on their property.

The police need to become involved because some private landowners have created private parking provisions for commercial reasons (supermarkets, airports, etc.) and invite the public to make free use of them.

Whether or not they can substantiate that somehow a contract is entered into by users is irrelevant – they have NO authority for clamping or issuing penalties.

Neither have they any legal rights to attempt to enforce the payment of penalties or suggest in the manner they do that – 'an offence as occurred' or that - the mimicked statutory markings had any meaning in regard as to how parking on their land should be undertaken.

Most importantly is the manner they adopt in endeavouring to implement penalties in ways that are an offence under - s.40 of 'The Administration of Justice Act 1970'. and therefore their actions are 'criminal' and squarely a matter for the POLICE and not Trading Standards.

It could also be that the setting up of a registered company to undertake or attempt to imply legitimacy of an illegal operation is Fraud

[pin1onu]

– they have NO authority for clamping

 

Unfortunately the court of appeal ruled otherwise in Arthur Vs Anker. The legal principle argued and accepted was that clamping was a modern form of a medieval remedy for trespass known as "damage distress feasant".

 

The judges in that case ruled that if you parked in defiance of a sign saying that you would be clamped you could expect to be clamped. Vine Vs Waltham Forest further amplified this by saying the sign must be clear and be able to be understood. Objective and Subjective judgement are both required. It could be argued that if you were to park in defiance of well posted signs that a supermarket or other could reasonably clamp you. Not very nice but unfortunately legal, at least in England and Wales. Scotland did hold that clamping is illegal.

 

There is of course the matter of SIA licensing for private companies but that only covers the person not the actual act apart from saying that ambulances and vehicles used by disabled people should not be clamped.

[green_and_mean]

I am unaware of any action other than the law of trespass that any owner of private property can currently take against someone who parks a vehicle on their property.

The police need to become involved because some private landowners have created private parking provisions for commercial reasons (supermarkets, airports, etc.) and invite the public to make free use of them.

Whether or not they can substantiate that somehow a contract is entered into by users is irrelevant – they have NO authority for clamping or issuing penalties.

Neither have they any legal rights to attempt to enforce the payment of penalties or suggest in the manner they do that – 'an offence as occurred' or that - the mimicked statutory markings had any meaning in regard as to how parking on their land should be undertaken.

Most importantly is the manner they adopt in endeavouring to implement penalties in ways that are an offence under - s.40 of 'The Administration of Justice Act 1970'. and therefore their actions are 'criminal' and squarely a matter for the POLICE and not Trading Standards.

It could also be that the setting up of a registered company to undertake or attempt to imply legitimacy of an illegal operation is Fraud

 

 

Let us know how you get on down the police station.

[voxlaic]

The difference of the cases referred to by pin1onu is that in most of the recent reported instances there would be difficulty proving trespass when the use of the land as a public car park was a condition of the granting of planning permission and most likely to also be a contractual requirement in the tenancies granted by the owners.

 

However, the point I make is not for the police or the courts to take action in respect of the rights or wrongs of parking or clamping

but that they should proceed against the

agents who have set up parking companies that contravene of the 'Admin. of J.Act' in a manner which is criminal,

- and also against the landowners and solicitors/collection firms who aid and abet in the harassment and intimidation and misuse of that law.