Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Ok well thanks for the help it is appreciate. It’s Car Cash Point. Will press on with the FOS hopefully can salvage something from the situation. 
    • Hi   Sorry did not notice that. Yes I contacted them.immediately after getting their first letter (sent to wrong address) and they advised to send in proof which I did ( and have done  several times). They advised they do not have payment registered and did say the site may not have paid it to them. Is there anything I can do if I have used an unofficial site? 
    • Thanks.  The car was on lease and the leasing co have already grassed me up, so to speak!   I guess it is probably best to wait and see what POPLA have to say and then decide on strategy,  
    • Hang on with the letter till the experts come on, as bits that identify you as the driver definitely need to be changed and writing at all to Parking Lie might not be a good idea at this stage. PE will have sent their letters (IF they sent them) to the address your vehicle is registered with at the DVLA.  With you moving, that could explain the missing correspondence.  Watch out with the DVLA, if you don't update your details and they find out, it's a grand's fine! Yes, get on to the Holiday Inn area manager, and if they are useless, the CEO.  I reckon they will call their dogs off.   Edit - just reading PE's reply to you.  They are an utter disgrace (not a surprise I know).  They reckon you have broken some imaginary contract with them but refuse to give the details and say you have to contact a powerless third party.  Doubt a judge would be very impressed.
    • The later you leave it the more chance you have of receiving the claimants statement...which you can then use as a guide to refute their main points of claim.Drafting a statement in the absence of the claimants really leaves you in no mans land because you are not aware of their main points of claim on which they will rely on...or which you must refute.   Also as previously advised if they dont pay the hearing fee on time and they dont file or serve a statement on you....its a good indication that they do not intend to proceed so all your work has been in vain.   However it is good to be prepared and have a basic statement in case they do pay and do file at the death..leaving you little time to respond and counter.I think a mixture of the two you have already prepared would be the way forward however your point 1 with regards to hearsay evidence wont come into play until you actually receive their statement and if in fact they are relying on hearsay evidence..   Just for information Moriarty do not attend hearings they litigate using and relying on CPR 27.9   Non-attendance of parties at a final hearing 27.9 (1) If a party who does not attend a final hearing– (a) has given written notice to the court and the other party at least 7 days before the hearing date that he will not attend; (b) has served on the other party at least 7 days before the hearing date any other documents which he has filed with the court; and (c) has, in his written notice, requested the court to decide the claim in his absence and has confirmed his compliance with paragraphs (a) and (b) above, the court will take into account that party’s statement of case and any other documents he has filed and served when it decides the claim. (2) If a claimant does not – (a) attend the hearing; and (b) give the notice referred to in paragraph (1), the court may strike out(GL) the claim. So and if you do receive their statement it must include notice as per above.(CPR 27.9(1) Andy
  • Our picks

Surfer01

Gritting etc a supermarket car park

style="text-align:center;"> Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 2461 days.

If you are trying to post a different story then you should start your own new thread. Posting on this thread is likely to mean that you won't get the help and advice that you need.

If you are trying to post information which is relevant to the story in this thread then please flag it up to the site team and they will allow you to post.

Thank you

Recommended Posts

We all know that the PPCs are supposed to manage car parking on supermarket etc car parks. Would they also be responsible for ensuring that car parks were gritted to prevent accidents as that would be part of managing the car park to ensure safe parking? If the car park was not gritted and an accident happen, would you be able to claim off the PPC who has a contract from the leaseholder to manage the car park?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Only if you could prove that the contract between the landowner and the PPC included a clause to that effect. Good luck with that one!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is interesting to the extent that if the parking companies manage to establish a situation where they do have the right to sue for parking charges, then that would probably make them an "Occupier" for the purposes of owing motorists a duty of care - both under the Occupiers Liability Act and also in contract.

One moght be able to establish a whole range of liabilities - including liability for security of cars an of people in the car park.


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Only if you could prove that the contract between the landowner and the PPC included a clause to that effect. Good luck with that one!!

 

I don't have any issue but I was wondering about the situation in the event of a mishap. If you review the Parking Eye vs Somerfield, it talks about PE managing the car park and parking and no mention of adverse conditions. If they do not take action to manage the car park, then surely they are failing in their contractual duties as they are not managing car parking. I am just looking for another reason to make their tickets unenforceable.

I wonder if any are out there today issuing tickets for not parking between white lines or in disabled spaces? Or perhaps issuing tickets because they cannot see them under the layer of snow? :wink:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It is interesting to the extent that if the parking companies manage to establish a situation where they do have the right to sue for parking charges, then that would probably make them an "Occupier" for the purposes of owing motorists a duty of care - both under the Occupiers Liability Act and also in contract.

One might be able to establish a whole range of liabilities - including liability for security of cars an of people in the car park.

 

That would include vandalism, damage to car, car stolen and probably a host of other issues that they never thought of at the time of the contract.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have noticed on some Parking Eye signs a statement to the effect that PE are only responsible for monitoring the use of parking bays, and are not responsible for anything else to do with the car park, including damage to vehicles, the state of the road surface etc.

Edited by DBC

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder if any are out there today issuing tickets for not parking between white lines or in disabled spaces? Or perhaps issuing tickets because they cannot see them under the layer of snow? :wink:

 

A couple of years ago a council run car park where I live was covered in snow one morning. Cars were parked in nice neat rows but when the snow melted the traffic warden issued tickets to all those that were not parked within the marked bays . The council refused all appeals.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the standard contracts I have seen leave the PPC with no liability for anything, including their own actions so that is one you would have to test. It beats me why any retailer would sign up a company on the terms seen, they are unbelievably poor value for the landowner.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...