Just For Amusement

[Mossycat]

Having had about 50 or 60 Parking Charge Notices (all of them ignored) the Parking Enforcement Company has now stopped bothering sending me letters, I still get the notices stuck to my windscreen but the Company isn't bothering following them up (presumably to save postage costs), so I've upped my game and started winding them up with a little provocation.

 

So far the best we (there's a few of us that are bored) have come up with is an A3 notice that we leave in our cars, clearly visible from the outside, which states in bold letters.

 

Attention Parking Attendants (or whatever you call yourselves).

 

Notice, you may attach notices to this vehicle without charge, however in so attaching notices to this vehicle you are entering in to a contract.

 

Your notices (or anything else you attach or fix) must be written in latin and every letter must be in blue, black and red ink consecutively.

 

Failure to comply with this will result in the issue of a penalty charge notice against you personally and/or the Company that you act on behalf of.

 

The penalty charge is £50, rising to £90 if not paid within 14 days of notification.

 

By fixing or attaching a notice to this vehicle you have agreed to accept the conditions of this contract and agree to pay the amounts stated in this notice.

 

So far I've noticed two of them read it and one of them actually got out his mobile phone and was obviously reading it to the person he was ringing. So far I haven't had a ticket

[josephbloggs]

Pathetic

[firstclassx]

You are being absolutely anal.

 

For the odd parking ticket, it is okay to ignore (usually), but repeated misuse of car parks is likely to provoke a response where a judge may not look to favourably on you, if it got that far.

 

Although parking tickets are usually non-enforceable, you should not be misusing private land in such a way that you clearly are, if you are amassing such an amount of tickets.

 

As for provoking them, just, why? Park somewhere else and move on with your life.

[Mossycat]

So, for the odd 'offence' it's OK in your eyes but not for repeated 'offences'. Your argument is a joke, either it is OK or it is not OK, Using your logic then I suppose you would argue that it's OK to shoplift once or twice, but not all the time.And before you get on your high-horse about we shouldn't be 'mis-using' private land, we are not, it's a retail car-park, a well known one who actively ticket people who stray out of the complex. We are actively targetting this car-park and the Company involved because of their actions.And, you might also like to learn the law, we'd love this to go before a judge, the local paper is already aware of our campaign and the actions of the Company.Mossycat

[Crocdoc]

In my opinion, by blatantly abusing private parking areas we are playing into the hands of those comapnies and the BPA who are trying very hard to justify yheir existance.

[Mossycat]

I'd be interested to know exactly how this is abusing private parking.A family go to a retail park, the mother and kids go shopping in the retail park, the dad (car driver) leaves the retail park on foot and crosses the road, they meet up about 90 minutes later (well within the 2 hour limit) and find a ticket on the car. They are then hounded by the Company for payment and eventually give in and pay it. That is what triggered this action by a few of us who work with the person concerned.This particular car-park is well known for the car parking staff watching new cars pull in and then following/observing the occupants to see if any of the party leave the retail park.

[josephbloggs]

How would you feel if your next door neighbour had visitors and they parked on your property and walked next door to see them only returning when they felt like it giving no thought to you the land owner, by your logic that is ok?

The fact remains by driving your vehicle onto someone elses property you should at the very least abide by the request to either pay or park properly albeit council private or otherwise.

if you as the driver have no intention of using the park yourself why cant you drop your family off and drive to your destination and park the car on the land designated for that.

If indeed you have had as many fines or penalties as you say in your first post if the company take action against you you fully deserve it

[Mossycat]

How would you feel if your next door neighbour had visitors and they parked on your property and walked next door to see them only returning when they felt like it giving no thought to you the land owner, by your logic that is ok?

The fact remains by driving your vehicle onto someone elses property you should at the very least abide by the request to either pay or park properly albeit council private or otherwise.

if you as the driver have no intention of using the park yourself why cant you drop your family off and drive to your destination and park the car on the land designated for that.

If indeed you have had as many fines or penalties as you say in your first post if the company take action against you you fully deserve it

 

You are missing the point completely.

 

First off, the Company cannot take any action, I know it, they know it and most users of this forum know it.

 

Secondly, if you are going to give an analogy then at least try and think of a suitable one.

 

I think you have failed to see either the amusement or the irony, try re-reading it again

 

Mossycat

[deano_uk]

despite the criticism toward the OP, i quite like it! its funny! also helps to show others what a joke parking enforcement companies are!

[lamma]

How would you feel if your next door neighbour had visitors and they parked on your property and walked next door to see them only returning when they felt like it giving no thought to you the land owner, by your logic that is ok?

The fact remains by driving your vehicle onto someone elses property you should at the very least abide by the request to either pay or park properly albeit council private or otherwise.

if you as the driver have no intention of using the park yourself why cant you drop your family off and drive to your destination and park the car on the land designated for that.

If indeed you have had as many fines or penalties as you say in your first post if the company take action against you you fully deserve it

 

Standard PPC argument, rebutted so many times that I have lost count, at least you do not say "on ypurr driveway". And they are not fines nor are they penalties. And the Retail Park is not the PPC's land. Nor in the example case did the landowner suffer any loss at all. IF I knew which Retail Park it was and logistics permitted I would pay it a visit. I do have to wonder if the landowner is paying a sufficiently high Business Rate for the car park as it is being used to generate revenue. Perhaps the Local Council should be prevailed upon in this regard. In that vein there is another point. Accountancy is not my suit so I lay this out for any readers who may be accountants. As a recent binding case has reiterated only the landowner may pursue and only for their losses. Is the total of losses shown on their profit and loss account ? Have they dealt with the tax situation correctly ? Why a landowner should take losses and hand them all over to a PPC is beyond me logic. All the paid PPC invoices are not a loss, only the unpaid ones amount to al loss for the landowner. are these reported back in detaill so that the landowner can record them in the Profit and Loss Account ? Does the revenue of the paid invoices, which can only be loss recovered by the landowner, landowner even go through the landowner's accounts ? if not then why not ? Is the landowner happy to gift the entire income from the paid invoices to the PPC ? Does this money show in the landowner's accounts at all ? I suspect that if a landowners feet were put to the flames by for example Companies House or HMRC they would disavow the income (and losses). That would mean goodbye PPC. It represents somewhat of a cleft stick for both the Landowner and the PPC as if it as accepted that the revenue from parking was not part of the landowners losses then some unpleasant conclusions can be drawn. Hence my putting this out to any accountants who may be reading. Or readers in general who know any good accountants.

[Mossycat]

OK for those that missed it, I'll spell it out.

 

The thread was called just for amusement because of the irony of a parked vehicle displaying a sign that echoes the signs around the car-park, a sign that informs them that if they do something then they enter into and agree to the terms of a contract for which a penalty will be imposed if they don't so per se (a bit like when they argue that your tyre was touching a white line in the car park).

 

The reason for upping the ante and actively provoking them is to hopefull force their hand and annoy them so much that they do issue and take me/us to Court because as far as I'm aware the changes in legislation which make the RK responsible for the actions of the driver if they do not disclose has not yet been tested and the Parking Companies are trying to convince the unwary that this now makes the punitive damages payable (which anyone who knows the Dunlop case will know full well why they are not). By antagonising them in this way we hope to force the showdown and at the same time maximise publicity regarding their business practices.

 

Mossycat

 

PS Thanks lamma for pointing out to josephbloggs what I really couldn't be bothered to type, which by the way you did far more eloquently than I would have

[Homer67]

The OP is correct, you cannot pick and choose when you think it's OK to ignore a PPC invoice, I couldn't be bothered to do the notice thing and I don't agree with winding them up but then again, why not? They do it to us every day, however you either agree that we should not pay PPC invoices or you don't - and if you don't then you're in the wrong forum!

[*Thumper]

If the Company, can prove, that you are habitually, parking on private land, for the porposes of harresment

and or entertainment.

 

A good lawyer, may be able to convince a judge, to fall on their side.

 

This would set a legal precident ..... something no one wants to see.

 

All if , buts, and maybe's... a complete, long shot.

But one that gets ever closer, everytime you pull your stunts.

[DBC]

If the case is heard in the County Court, then no legal precedent can be set.

[lamma]

we have legal precedent with PPCs HMRC v VCS lets have more I say

[Mossycat]

If the Company, can prove, that you are habitually, parking on private land, for the porposes of harresment

and or entertainment.

 

A good lawyer, may be able to convince a judge, to fall on their side.

 

This would set a legal precident ..... something no one wants to see.

 

All if , buts, and maybe's... a complete, long shot.

But one that gets ever closer, everytime you pull your stunts.

 

All I can say is

 

1) Learn the law

 

2) Learn to spell

 

Mossycat

[Mossycat]

OK quick update, one of our team got a Parking Charge Notice today, so now we can send our letters to the PPC together with pictures of the sign clearly on display inside the car and demand our money.

 

I can't wait to see what their defence is.

 

And before any of you ask, yes we fully intend issuing proceedings on them if they ignore or fail to pay, either way we get the publicity, which will hopefully highlight just how absurd their penalty charges are.

 

Game on

 

Mossycat

[citizenB]

Hmm, I thought it was amusing. I dont believe he is misusing the car park. His family are using the shops at the Retail Park - if they want to return to the vehicle to leave packages then they are able to.

 

I dont see what is wrong or what people are upset about !

 

Or is the Retail Park (or ticketing company) saying that where a family is going shopping, the Driver must also be seen to use the shopping facilities ?

Edited December 6, 2012 by citizenB

[Mikes1992]

would they give me a ticket if I parked a pedel go kart there? lol. I do think you're taking it too far, also I'm not sure if this just applys to PPCs but you should not call it a Penalty Charge.

 

I recently sent an Email doing the same kind of thing though, where I said I never agreed with there contract blah bla and included this...

 

Further action on my part will incur charges which be chargeable to your company.

 

My charges will be invoiced at the following rates...

 

Initial Charge of £250 then £100 each time I have to respond in relation to this matter. All legal expenses and costs will be charged in addition to the above charges. Pursuing this matter will trigger these charges and by doing so, your company agrees to these terms.

[Mikes1992]

If they do take you to court just say you thought it was a s.c.a.m. (which many would argue is true), since you ignored so many of the tickets without consequence you assumed you was right.

 

How did you even managed to get multiple tickets anyway? they must have a strict contract. lol

 

:S, when I type S.cam in full it says [problem]

[citizenB]

yes, that is correct Mikes1992.. it is one of the words in our filtering system

[Tony P]

yes, that is correct Mikes1992.. it is one of the words in our filtering system

 

Strange.

I don't have the problem entering the word "sсam".

 

But my posts get moderated manually. In time !