The morals of private parking thread

[porkyp1g]

Simple way of avoiding the extortionate fines, park properly. Works for me.

[renegadeimp]

i thinkw eneed to end it there. Its going round and round, and porky seems to be walking round with his fingers in his/her ears going "lalalalala".

[dpick]

I agree close thread I do not seem to see anything about the morals of the PPC's from Porky

 

 

dpick

[porkyp1g]

That's it, lose the debate and throw your toys out of the pram. It's a simple discussion guys. Do you not think I've made a fair point? PPCs wouldn't be able to fine anyone if people parked as they should instead of (in some cases) being lazy or cutting corners. In some cases it's an accident, but then just learn from it and don't do it again.

 

I am sorry if it appears I am not understanding your side of it, because I really can't see my way to helping (some people) who have been caught out.

 

I have posts where I have given advice in cases where people are innocent in terms of their actions, so it's not like you can say i am on a wind up.

[porkyp1g]

This is fundamentally unfair - either the bank should accept that it is a free service or else split the cost fairly (as in many other countries which often have a e.g. £2 monthly charge to have a current account).

 

This I do agree with...

[sequenci]

That's it, lose the debate and throw your toys out of the pram. It's a simple discussion guys. Do you not think I've made a fair point? PPCs wouldn't be able to fine anyone if people parked as they should instead of (in some cases) being lazy or cutting corners. In some cases it's an accident, but then just learn from it and don't do it again.

 

I am sorry if it appears I am not understanding your side of it, because I really can't see my way to helping (some people) who have been caught out.

 

I have posts where I have given advice in cases where people are innocent in terms of their actions, so it's not like you can say i am on a wind up.

 

I think it's important to understand the mechanics of PPCs, and I fear this is something that you seem unable to grasp. For a start you keep mentioning the word 'fine' - I assume you understand that a PPC cannot fine somebody? It's important to bear in mind that parking tickets are founded within the law of contract, the others have already succinctly discussed the position as regards penalties.

 

All that said, I do think you have a bit of a point. If someone was parking all day in a private car park for a shop and thus deprives someone who could be a legitimate customer from parking I feel that there should be the option for proportionate recourse. Trying to sting someone £75 for overstaying twenty minutes is, of course, totally disproportionate. I personally cannot see much of a moral argument, this sort of thing is very process based from where I'm sat.

[porkyp1g]

Has anyone actually argued one of these in court and the judge has accepted that whilst there was a parking infringement, the amount being asked for is disproportionate? And has thus agreed a lower amount is due to the parking firm?

[renegadeimp]

Plenty of times. Not one has succeeded where there was a proper defense/representation. Also, very few PPC's actually go to court. PE do, but they issue claims en masse hoping for a default judgement.

[steampowered]

There is a rule of common law that says liquidated damages clauses (clauses which specify an amount due in damages if a contract is breached) must be a genuine pre-estimate of the loss which would be suffered if the contract is breached. If the liquidated damages clause is a penalty, it is not enforceable. In this case the person who breached the contract can only be required to pay damages equivalent to the actual loss the other side has suffered.

 

This is the big problem for PPCs. Clearly, the amounts imposed are completely disproportionate to the loss the PPC would suffer from someone overstaying in a carpark. At most they could claim what someone else would have paid to go in the spot, but as these are generally free carparks there is no loss to claim for.

 

There was one case where the PPC was successful in justifying its charges. But in the vast majority they have not succeeded. However I am sure there have also been many cases where the PPC either got default judgment because no defence was filed, or won because the person defending tried to use a dodgy defence.

[porkyp1g]

Lets just say in the case of the woman who parked in a disabled bay, and shouldn't have. How do you go about figuring out actual costs?

 

I thought the whole point of a larger than cost penalty was to act as a deterrent. If the amount charged was a nominal actual cost amount, surely people wouldn't pay much notice to the limitations.

[renegadeimp]

I thought the whole point of a larger than cost penalty was to act as a deterrent.

 

Not in private parking. In council parking you are correct.

[porkyp1g]

So how much do you think private companies should be charging to ensure people park correctly and fairly whilst on their land? Just out of interest. Surely the same deterrent needs to be there.

[labrat]

ok ill end up arguing with you when i see u later PP but..

 

i do not mind a proportional charge for inconsiderate parking, personally i have had a go at several people who park in parent and child, including making an old man move the car after having a go at in him infront of several dozen people in a supermarket

 

however there is a "deterrent" level and a disproportionate level, £15 where a normal ticket is a £1 is a deterrent, £100 is disproportionate

 

i will admit to once "accidently" blocking a car in that parked across two parent and child bays because he was too lazy to walk to the cash machine, (rear bumper at bollard, i parked across front) but i was annoyed that day (Around march last year you will remember why PP)

 

personally the thing i hate is how many car parks still have clamping signs up, i have also got to admit ive written "clamping banned on private land October 2013" on a couple

[porkyp1g]

Fair enough, but the signs saying they will charge a £100 penalty for parking over two spaces, or parking in a disabled bay etc would make you and me think twice about doing that right? Some people see the signs and still think sod it I'll park how I want regardless as they know they are unlikely to be caught or hit with a bill. They do this with no thought of anyone but themselves, certainly not for you and me.

 

Then when some do get caught, they come on here and ask for help as to how to avoid the charges. Thy ask for ways to worm out of it and avoid paying. Without establishing facts first people on here offer their pearls of wisdom and the fact is some of those being helped are a result of scenarios like that listed above.

 

Tell me this don't sit right with you labrat?

[Michael Browne]

Right, so first we should sit in moral judgment of people before we decide whether they are worthy of help?

[renegadeimp]

Thats pretty much what porky's saying MB

[porkyp1g]

You gonna answer my point renegade? How do you quantify a loss where someone has parked in a disabled bay.

[porkyp1g]

Right, so first we should sit in moral judgment of people before we decide whether they are worthy of help?

 

By not doing so, I think people will be aiding those out of sticky situations who got themselves their in the first place. Let me ask you a question, if it were your disabled family member who had to work further because they were denied a parking space by someone who shouldn't be there, would you advise that person how to challenge the pcn?

[renegadeimp]

You gonna answer my point renegade? How do you quantify a loss where someone has parked in a disabled bay.

 

There is no loss. Therefore there cant be a penalty. You can discourage it sure, by saying something like £20 instead of a fiver. But £100 is extortionate and not proportional. if it was, then everyone would do it and hike the charges up and up and up.

[porkyp1g]

I dunno, I just think if there is a sign up saying they will charge £100 (and I agree it's a lot) if you park where you shouldn't and you ignore it, then you are accepting the risk of being done for £100. You make your bed, you lie in it.

[renegadeimp]

The law says different. Otherwise it would be a free for all.

[armadillo71]

Basically the point I was trying to make are that those who choose to park wrongly and know the consequences of doing so somehow try and exploit loopholes with the aid of some on here advising on legal get outs to avoid paying up. Surely if someone has abused the system (even the harsh world of private parking) and isn't a genuine victim of the system, then they should face the consequences of their actions. Albeit harsh consequences, as in the case of topics like these.

 

For example, someone might post they got caught on ANPR. They don't state the alleged offence (as most don't) and it could be something such as parking in a disabled bay and they weren't entitled to use the space. Surely they should be paying the fine for being lazy etc, rather than being told on here how to get out of paying. I don't think that the CAG should be used in cases like this and the facts of the offence should be established before advice is handed out willy nilly. I know you guys don't like to judge, but surely you don't want to be helping people in these circumstances.

 

 

 

 

You call it a fine...

It cannot be a fine... Or penalty... That is the point.

[f16]

OK Porkyp1g. Rather than "Run round and round". Please allow me to put a very valid point.

 

9 times out of 10 there is "No contract" in place on private land between the" land owner" and the "parking co." So the signs mean nothing... because there is no contract to breach.

 

You however think it is correct that innocent people pay . Motorists are getting "Conned" here and it might just be someone related to you.

 

How can you accept this as OK ?

[porkyp1g]

Citizens advice would disagree with you f16

 

http://www.adviceguide.org.uk/wales/consumer_w/consumer_cars_and_other_vehicles_e/consumer_driving_and_parking_e/consumer_parking_tickets_e/consumer_parking_tickets_on_private_land_e/youve_got_a_parking_ticket_on_private_land_what_can_you_do.htm

 

By parking on their private land, you enter into contract law with them, and you agree to their rules parking on said land.

 

I would ask if it were my relative and if they ignored the signs and parking stupidly then I would laugh at them and tell them to learn from it. If they were a victim of circumstance and hadn't breached the terms of the contract then I would help. See the difference.

 

Now answer my question please? If it were your family member wronged by someone's awful parking, would you advise the 'offender'?

[armadillo71]

Citizens advice would disagree with you f16

 

http://www.adviceguide.org.uk/wales/consumer_w/consumer_cars_and_other_vehicles_e/consumer_driving_and_parking_e/consumer_parking_tickets_e/consumer_parking_tickets_on_private_land_e/youve_got_a_parking_ticket_on_private_land_what_can_you_do.htm

 

By parking on their private land, you enter into contract law with them, and you agree to their rules parking on said land.

 

I would ask if it were my relative and if they ignored the signs and parking stupidly then I would laugh at them and tell them to learn from it. If they were a victim of circumstance and hadn't breached the terms of the contract then I would help. See the difference.

 

Now answer my question please? If it were your family member wronged by someone's awful parking, would you advise the 'offender'?

 

 

What do the Citizens advice know...

 

 

Parking and contract law

 

Parking on private land is all about the law of contract. If landowners allow you to park on their land, you enter into a contract with the landowner. If you break the landowner’s parking rules, you break your contract with the landowner. You might do this by not paying, staying longer than the time you have paid for or parking in the wrong place.

If you park without any permission at all you are trespassing.

If you break the parking rules private landowners can issue a parking ticket and recover the losses they’ve suffered. These losses are likely to be a small amount of money.

 

 

'Contract with the land owner...' Not agent.

'Recover losses... likely to be a small amount of money.'

 

 

Must admit they've updated it since I last looked.