Court of Appeal judgment in ParkingEye Limited -v- Beavis, POPLA - Statement by the Lead Adjudicator.

[steveod]

I'm feeling a lot less smug about my 'appeal' to Euro CP now. What a ridiculous judgment. A black letter day for sure, & let's hope sanity is restored by the Supreme Court.

 

send Euro PC a letter requesting your VAT invoice so that you can consider payment. bet you wont get one. However, as our "not-so" learned judges have "decided" the charges are not for breach of contract

but are payment for a license to use the facilities, then VAT is due.

[Billy's mate]

What a cop out by the Judges !. They say that PE's charges are "in line with Council charges ", but Council charges are penalties, therefore,PE's charges must be penalties also ?. The Judge goes on to say how PE's business could be affected. Since when did our legal system look after the commercial interests of a private company ?. I hope Mr. Beavis gets his result in the Supreme Court, but it looks like something more sinister might be going on here. We are still no the wiser. In the meantime, I hope HMRC is looking into the V.A.T question.

[steveod]

I am going to put a sign up in my car that allows people or companies to attach any document, letter or notice for FREE to my vehicle for 2 minutes. If they decide to make use of this facility of placing their documents on my car and the documents or notices remain for longer than 2 minutes, then there will be a charge of £85. As per this ruling I will be perfectly entitled to do that!

[steveod]

I think VAT may be the solution we can hope for. as these charges are payments for a license to extend the parking time they must surely be subject to VAT. wont hold my breath on HMRC doing much though

[havinastella]

Amazing how a little PPC (owned by Capita) has such a sway on UK law.

 

I wonder WHY

[Beesnees]

Amazing how a little PPC (owned by Capita) has such a sway on UK law.

 

I wonder WHY

 

Consider yourself fortunate. Big business runs both the legislature and the executive in the US. Looks like we're only trying to emulate the fine example set by Uncle Sam. That 2nd revolution is long overdue.

[Ell-enn]

European Court of Human Rights?

 

Refuse to use shops who employ these parking companies

[Beesnees]

European Court of Human Rights?

 

I believe only relevant if the judgment has Europe-wide implications. Do they have PPC's on the Continent?

[Dublindel]

Every business should set up under the guise of being a parking company and not pay vat

[steveod]

Every business should set up under the guise of being a parking company and not pay vat

 

 

 

actually, if HMRC don't do anything about the PPC model based on the CoA ruling, then maybe I will start charging for my services using that model.

 

 

Usually I charge £30+VAT per hour to be paid within 30 days.

Instead I will charge £1 per hour for my services plus £29 payment charge for any invoice not paid within 30 seconds. that way I don't have to claim for VAT on the £29 as its not payment under the contract but reasonable compensation not subject to VAT. well that's what the parking companies are basically doing.

[Michael Browne]

Barry Beavis has launched an fund to commence his appeal against the recent Court of Appeal ruling. He needs to raise £1,600 to lodge the notice of appeal and a further £4,500 to lodge the Appellant's bundle.

 

The appeal needs to be lodged within 42 days of the judgment.

 

29% funded so far

 

Contributions can be made at this link.

[Deadwood]

I'm feeling a lot less smug about my 'appeal' to Euro CP now. What a ridiculous judgment. A black letter day for sure, & let's hope sanity is restored by the Supreme Court.

 

I wouldn't hold your breath. I've noticed a tendency to support "commercial considerations" above even statute. One I have direct experience of being compliance with consultation requirements for service charges in leasehold flats.

[DragonFly1967]

Barry Beavis has launched an fund to commence his appeal against the recent Court of Appeal ruling. He needs to raise £1,600 to lodge the notice of appeal and a further £4,500 to lodge the Appellant's bundle.

 

The appeal needs to be lodged within 42 days of the judgment.

 

29% funded so far

 

Contributions can be made at this link.

 

£20 in the pot from me.

 

Now 60% funded.

[honeybee13]

I donated too.

 

HB

[SabreSheep]

Thanks! You raised the campaign total to: £4,539!

[SabreSheep]

£4,539GBP

raised by 288 people in 1 day

76% funded

30 days left

[Mike_hawk]

Some decisions do indeed utterly defy belief...... what happened to intended purpose and government agency guidance on the interpretation and use of instruments such as pofa?

[honeybee13]

It's 84% funded now, 326 people have raised this in one day.

[steveod]

It's 84% funded now, 326 people have raised this in one day.

 

110% funded now. Keep going people then more available for research etc costs. maybe a whole panel of barristers too.

[honeybee13]

Wow, that's excellent.

 

HB

[SabreSheep]

[DragonFly1967]

Just looking at Barry's fundraising page and this jumped out at me...

 

 

Now THATS! funny

[SabreSheep]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2713705/The-parking-ticket-fat-cats-one-s-chum-Prezza-two-drive-Aston-Martins-Meet-men-ve-millions-motorists-misery.html

 

Meet the problemers.

 

I am guessing that they also want this issue finalised in HOL

[slef2003]

Took it up to

£6,832GBP

raised by 378 people in 3 days

[xxs]

Interesting. A number of appeal grounds spring to mind, including a public policy one that will play in the SC better than anywhere else.

 

But none of them are decisive. And it's all so unnecessary, down to the appellant's stupidity in appealing to the CA. Stupid stupid stupid. As stupid as Google's well-deserved spanking last month.

 

Never appeal your losses to precedent-setting level. Let the other side appeal your wins.