Appeal against disproportionate parking fine in a private car-park

[Aquarius502]

Hi there, does anyone have any advice or experience on taking action against clamp/tow costs from parking in private Pay and Display carpark.

 

I was recently clamped because my ticket had expired by 5 mins and I arrived to find them already clamping and about to attach it to their tow truck. They demanded on the spot cash payment of £345.00 and refused to accept my debit or credit card as payment even though this was stated on their notice board as a means of accepted payment.

 

I have supporting documentation of paid ticket/ receipt issued and have taken photographic evidence of the notice displayed in the car park.

 

I am ready to commence legal proceedings in the Small Claims court as the company as not responded to any of my letters even though I have proof of delivery and email saying that it would be resolved in a 2 day period (which never happened). They will not let me visit their registered business address in person and I cannot physically find it anyway as the registered address cannot be viewed from the road, even though it matches details on Company House site. I really and want to know that should I persue my claim in a court and was successful, can they be forced to pay me. It is important for me to tell you that the company's website staes a Fair Fine Parking Policy which is proportionate to the offence and that for being parked 10mins over the fine would only be £25.00.

 

Any help or advice would be great.

Thanks

Aquarius502

[green_and_mean]

Sadly most clamping companies never pay even if they have a CCJ against them, but if you can afford the cost of the claim its certainly worth a try.

[Al27]

Find out the landowner and sue them. Clampers probably already have umpteen CCJs.

[Aquarius502]

Thanks for the responses. AI27 - I am prepared to pay the Land Registry fee to find out the landowner but I am not sure on what grounds I can sue them as I thought it had to be the company who clamped me (which I assume is different from the landowner. Any leads appreciated.

[green_and_mean]

Thanks for the responses. AI27 - I am prepared to pay the Land Registry fee to find out the landowner but I am not sure on what grounds I can sue them as I thought it had to be the company who clamped me (which I assume is different from the landowner. Any leads appreciated.

 

You cannot just go around clamping people it has to be at the request of the landowner.

[pin1onu]

Thanks for the responses. AI27 - I am prepared to pay the Land Registry fee to find out the landowner but I am not sure on what grounds I can sue them as I thought it had to be the company who clamped me (which I assume is different from the landowner. Any leads appreciated.

This is all covered in the clamping guide which you will find in the stickies section at the top of this forum.

 

The basic premise is that clamping is a remedy for trespass. Trespass damages should be paid to the landowner. The clamper is acting as an agent of the landowner.

 

Clampers have a nasty habit of ignoring CCJ's and then disappearing. Landowners have a harder job as they have something tangible that can be distressed (i.e. the land) in order to recover the CCJ.

 

You should sue both the clamper and the landowner for this reason.

[Al27]

Can we see photos of the signage and all the paperwork you were given?

[Yorky2008]

Previous posts advise sueing both the PPC/clamper and the landowner.

[Aquarius502]

Thanks to all who replied months ago. As you can see its a while since this matter but I was stressing myself out over it and temporarily put it to rest for a while. In the meantime I have managed to track down the Land Owner via the Land Registry and the clampers - Retail Parking Solution went into compulsory liquidation back in February.

I have managed to contact the Insolvency Agent who dealt with the Winding Up Order and they don't think that RPS were contracted by anyone to operate on the land but they had leased the land. Can anyone tell if this means that the Land Owner cannot be held liable. I have drafted a letter to the Land Owner but need advice before posting it on here for review. Your feedback would be greatly appreciated.

[lamma]

they don't think

 

How about knowing !! They should know all assets and liabilities. A lease would show up..

[Aquarius502]

Lamma, thanks for your reply, but should I contact Companies House to see if I can get a report showing this. I'm not sure how much info the Insolvency Agent can give me or what I can ask of them. Excuse my ignorance but if a liability shows up, then what does it mean for me. If they do have assets then I'm low on their list of people to pay.

[lamma]

have look and see what available documents there are (on Co House website).

 

the insolvency person should know is my point.

[a_bx]

Defo find out who the landowner and site operator is- is there not a sign at the carpark?. When a similar thing to me happened the clamper replied with the usual "we can do what we like" style reply but once the landowner/operater was contacted wanted to wash their hands of their "agents" activities. On starting legal proceedings against both the clamper did pay up but i suspect partly because either the landowner didnt fancy a CCJ so nagged them to pay up, or the clamper volunteered it not wanting to upset their relationship with the landowner/operator.

 

Also if the landowner.operator is based a long way from your local court, the hassle and cost of travel there may be a useful.

 

£345 is so high it seems like a penalty being applied rather than the recovery of losses experienced.

 

Also if its a car park and you've exceeded your time limit, the loss incurred by the landowner/operator is only calculated by the fact another car cant park there and pay for that spot. In effect they will have suffered a loss of another hours worth of paid parking....£2~3 perhaps, so this could be offerered as the sum you will pay for exceeding your stay beyond what was agreed!

 

Oh, and does the sign at the carpark warn of towing? If not threatening it may be an act of extortion which helps your case further.

 

Ps. going after the landowner is probably best anyway because I suspect a lot of clampers will go fully insolvent next year with the law changes coming in

Edited August 27, 2010 by a_bx