private parking invoice and I stupidly admitted being the driver - Help!

[Preciouskezz]

Really hoping someone can help here!

 

I received a PCN today stating I had parked for 4 hours 20 minutes in a private carpark and the maximum time allowed was only 3 hours.

 

The company is Inner Guard Security.

 

They have pictures of me entering and leaving the carpark.

 

There are signs stating parking terms. (Of which I was not aware)

 

The fees are usually free (Up to 3 hours) with no option to pay to stay longer.

 

Over the telephone to the com[any I stupidly admitted being the driver.

 

What now? Will they pursue this to court? Should I write to their appeals dept. and claim I was not infact the driver? Should I pay or ignore this?

 

Please help me.

[Michael Browne]

Just ignore.

Their letter chain is here (scroll down);

http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.php?t=2214803

[silverfox1961]

Hi and welcome to CAG

 

I would work out the losses they got from a FREE car park then follow the advice above:-D

[Preciouskezz]

Even though I admitted being the driver?

[honeybee13]

Hello there.

 

I'll move this to the parking forum where the guys should be able to advise you further.

 

My best, HB

[Bang!]

I think its unlikey to be chased.

 

HOWEVER.

 

I feel parking signs stating prices are valid if visible to form a contract (against the driver not owner).

 

To claim nothing is due as its a free car park is accepting the contractual terms where it states its free, but ignores those suggesting the charge.

 

Now if there was land with no notices then parking could result in damages (tort/delict) that would be close to zero - but I have yet to be convinced a contract is not formed with undeniable noticable signs.

 

 

Ok - most would not proceed to court due to the owner/keeper issue - but I still feel a contract has been created?

 

If there was never a contract based on signs, then are NCP extorting moneys from drivers to lift the barrier blocking exit?

 

I would be delighted if shown I was wrong.

[silverfox1961]

I think its unlikey to be chased.

 

HOWEVER.

 

I feel parking signs stating prices are valid if visible to form a contract (against the driver not owner).

 

To claim nothing is due as its a free car park is accepting the contractual terms where it states its free, but ignores those suggesting the charge.

 

Now if there was land with no notices then parking could result in damages (tort/delict) that would be close to zero - but I have yet to be convinced a contract is not formed with undeniable noticable signs.

 

 

Ok - most would not proceed to court due to the owner/keeper issue - but I still feel a contract has been created?

 

If there was never a contract based on signs, then are NCP extorting moneys from drivers to lift the barrier blocking exit?

 

I would be delighted if shown I was wrong.

 

I'm afraid your point is not relevant on this thread as the car park was a free one.

You do have to ask yourself though that if a contract has been made, what is the cost of that contract.

Have they lost anything? I don't think so

Is it a money spinner-hell yes

[Bang!]

It is relevant on this thread.

 

Loss in the way you state applies to tort/delict - and the 'free carpark' is only free under some of the terms of the contract.

 

Accordingly what you claim is landowners cannot set terms or prices to park on their land.

 

As two examples - its free to park at Glasgow Airport for 10 mins - but normal style charges apply subsrquently. This is displayed on their notices. Does this mean I can park for an hour - drive out tailgating a paying car - and claim they made no loss? Its pretty much like saying carparks must have barriers.

 

Alternately if i pinched a pizza in asda and was caught - should I repay the price - or only the costs related to making it as this would prevent a loss (and ptrevent a profit).

[SURFBOY]

Even if there is a contract formed there is the issue of the charge being a penalty.

[ManxRed]

The terms have to be reasonable to both parties though. Depending on what they are pursuing the OP for, £75 (for example) after three hours free in a car park is clearly a punitive charge designed to deter the driver from overstaying. As such, its a penalty.

[dx100uk]

its a penalty and comes on a speculative invoice.

 

neither are enforceable.

 

dx

[Bang!]

Even if there is a contract formed there is the issue of the charge being a penalty.

 

But the charge would not have to be a penalty if not referred to as such, and reasonable in amount.

 

A term suggesting '£20 per hour waived for the first three hours for shoppers staying under 3 hours, this concession being removed when remaining over that time' would imply a flat but high rate to all.

[silverfox1961]

But the charge would not have to be a penalty if not referred to as such, and reasonable in amount.

 

A term suggesting '£20 per hour waived for the first three hours for shoppers staying under 3 hours, this concession being removed when remaining over that time' would imply a flat but high rate to all.

We are drifting off the point here. The OP came for advice, not a debate on the whys and wherefores of contract law

[Bang!]

Yes - but it was to clarify what I felt were incorrect perspectives as no actual charge was specified.

 

 

Replies here constantly disregard it being a contract - and 'penalty charge' was not stated.

[Preciouskezz]

OMG - I am so twitchy in whether to pay or not - going to drive over and have a look at their sign.

I have admitted being the driver but thought the contract part was negligable?

 

I really really don't want to pay this, but want, even less, to pay any more!

 

It is very annoying as I was in the carpark designated for the shopping centre whilst actually shopping the whole time - 4 days before xmas which is why I was so long!

[dx100uk]

bang! you are not helping

 

to the OP

 

please ignore the speculative invoice

 

dx

[sailor sam]

Can I ask the OP what 'charge' (as in how much) you are being asked to pay?

[Preciouskezz]

The carpark is free - the signage doesn't actually state "Free for x amount of hours" it just states "4 hours maximum stay"

I was there for 4 hours 20 minutes! Although I spent over 20 minutes actually locating and pulling into a parking space - does this count for anything?

Sign says "MAXIMUM STAY" does stay also include the time you take driving around?

 

So nowhere does it state a charge per hour, waivered for so many hours for customers.

 

The sign states a £50 charge rising to £75 if not paid within 14 days of the PCN.

[Preciouskezz]

Also not sure where I got the 3 hours from as I have re checked the PCN and it doesn't state on there, anywhere, what the maximum stay time was? Maybe it was mentioned in the phone call to the company.

 

Sorry to ask for confirmation yet again, but even though I have admitted over the phone (Probably recorded call) that I was indeed the driver, I should still make no further contact (Not even to deny being the driver) or pay the charge notice?

[HYMN AND MI]

Ignore. Have you put in writing you were the driver? Did they warn/advise you the call would be recorded?

[dx100uk]

admittance on the phone even if recorded is not admissable

 

please forget about it

 

dx

[Preciouskezz]

The automated response to my call said it may be recorded for training purposes (You know the usual stuff!)

 

I did not put anything inwriting yet and wondered if I might write to say I am refusing to pay and that I was not the driver - if I get challenged on the phone call I will claim I was confused and not thinking straight after receiving the letter or was being sarcastic???

 

Really unsure what to do - even more so since reading the Money Expert guide. The only mitigating circumstance I have left is the charge is exorbitant.

[HYMN AND MI]

Sorry, my questions were not meant to be understood as to contact them again. Just ignore it, however threatened and upset you feel, as this is their tactic. Put it to sleep. Nowt to do with mitigating circumstances as you have committed nothing!

Edited March 9, 2012 by HYMN AND MI

[dx100uk]

its not a pcn anyway

 

dx

[HYMN AND MI]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R3J-Xl6rSlk&feature=related