Well it looked like a pub car park

[paulok]

Hello,today i had a no parking ticket stuck to my car window for what i thought was a pub car park.There are 3 signs explaining about the £85 pounds i would have to pay for 25 mimiuts parking as it turned out, one on the pub wall and 2 on garages on the same bit of land.The notices were plain to see after looking around when i returned.The company is Cental Ticketing of Birmingham.The ticket warden was not wearing a hat(i thought that was part of the uniform).I asked her about the hat and was told they were not issued with head gear(i photgraphed her without her hat just in case i might have a case).As i did not look around at the time for signs(why would i) i got a parking ticket from a private firm working on behalf of the pub i was told by the warden.Have i a case for not paying the fine.Kind regards

[Zamzara]

What did the signs say, and what does the ticket say?

 

The hat isn't remotely relevant: it isn't even a parking ticket, it's an invoice for parking (probably disguised as a parking ticket).

[Filthy Monkey]

Don't worry about it. It's not an official ticket. As Zamzara says, it is nothing more than an invoice with no legal back up, so all they can do is ask you to pay. Whether or not you do is entirely up to you

[Zamzara]

Don't worry about it. It's not an official ticket.

 

I agree not to worry, but I wouldn't be complacent either. These people do fight dirty and it requires some knowledge and advice to get rid of them.

[paulok]

Hello all,on the back of the invoice from top to bottom is:

1 Payment details

2 Late payment

3 appeals

4 correspondence

5 administration

6 police only

7 DVLA

8 data protection

On the front from top to bottom:

1 Customer Reference No

2 Vehical reg/date/time

3 vehical make/colour

4 location/location code

5 Payment slip details

I think the signs just mentioned about coming onto private land and the fine £85 for 25 miniutes as it turned out.

Will keep you posted if i hear from them, as i will in the short term anyway.Thanks i do feel alot better knowing there is help out there if i need it.Paul

[demon_x_slash]

It's a private ticket - look at the 'Sticky' thread at the top of the Parking forum for how to proceed. Out of interest, what does it say about '6 police only'?

[paulok]

Hello Demon,it Says:

If The Parking Charge Is Presented Before A Police Officer With Reference To Payment,it Is Important The Officer Does Not Discourage Payment.when In Receipt Of Correspondence On A Police Headed Paper Central Ticketing Will Be Happy To Respond To The Police And Answer Any Questions Put Forward Or Issue Information Requested By Them.please Allow 14 Days For Reply.By the way on the sticky envelope the invoice came in it says photographic evidence taken.I do not now if it was thou .regards

[demon_x_slash]

All designed to trick any unsuspecting and ill-informed passing Police Officer into believing that this lawful. It makes me sick.

 

Make sure to read that thread. If you haven't found it already it's here.

[jampot]

Hello Demon,it Says:

If The Parking Charge Is Presented Before A Police Officer With Reference To Payment,it Is Important The Officer Does Not Discourage Payment.when In Receipt Of Correspondence On A Police Headed Paper Central Ticketing Will Be Happy To Respond To The Police And Answer Any Questions Put Forward Or Issue Information Requested By Them.please Allow 14 Days For Reply.By the way on the sticky envelope the invoice came in it says photographic evidence taken.I do not now if it was thou .regards

 

Of course it is "important" that the Officer does not discourage payment. Important for the issuing company anyway.

 

Stating that on their own ticket is pretty much admitting that they're not dealing with the backing of the law.

 

What a bunch of jokers.

[Zamzara]

They all write that for some reason: I've no idea why. It's a 'monkey see, monkey do' clause.

[paulok]

Thanks again for the input.Can't wait for there letters to start rolling in for payment.Regards:D

[Guest tlusnoc]

You state that the signs were plain to see when you returned to the vehicle, Yet you obviously chose to ignore them when you parked. What right did you have to park there in the first place? Just because it was a pub car park does not give you that right, unless you are going straight in to the said pub as a customer. The sooner people stop being selfish and park in authorised parking spaces the better. You got what you deserved in my opinion. Yes I know there are rogue clamping outfits out there, but customer parking is what it means....parking for customers, even if there is no sign saying so, common courtesy says a shop/pub car park is meant for customer use only.

[jampot]

You state that the signs were plain to see when you returned to the vehicle, Yet you obviously chose to ignore them when you parked. What right did you have to park there in the first place? Just because it was a pub car park does not give you that right, unless you are going straight in to the said pub as a customer. The sooner people stop being selfish and park in authorised parking spaces the better. You got what you deserved in my opinion. Yes I know there are rogue clamping outfits out there, but customer parking is what it means....parking for customers, even if there is no sign saying so, common courtesy says a shop/pub car park is meant for customer use only.

 

I think that's a bit strong.

 

Signs were plain when the OP was looking for them, having now seen the warden and got a ticket, but if they weren't clear when he parked, they aren't valid.

 

It is no accident that councils have reams and reams of legislation regarding the exact nature of their signage, and what is allowed / isn't allowed, including position. As the signs in this case formed a material part of the "contract" which the OP is alleged to have entered into, their visibility (or otherwise) is at the very heart of the issue.

 

What if the sign had said "If you park here, we'll charge you £10,000." If the £10,000 were enforceable, wouldn't you think that anyone parking there would have a right to know what the charge was before parking?

 

I agree that "Customer Parking" is "Customer Parking", but a common-sense approach often helps. If he wasn't preventing their genuine customers from parking, and wasn't regularly using the car park to avoid paying charges elsewhere, I don't see the issue. If you (as a company) invite people onto your land, paint spaces as guidelines for them to drive into, they will be used.

 

It seems to me that the fairest (and probably least abused) car parks are the barrier operated ones. You have to pay in relation to the length of your stay, and can't get out without paying their (usually reasonable) charge.

 

Car parks who operate a "park for free for x minutes, after which we'll [problem] you" or a wonky "Pay and Display" system (which is open to abuse) are just asking for trouble, IMHO.

[Guest tlusnoc]

The op said he didn't look for signs when he parked, "why would I" well I would have thought that as he was aware it was private land he would have looked. Therefore rather silly of him not to.

[jampot]

The op said he didn't look for signs when he parked, "why would I" well I would have thought that as he was aware it was private land he would have looked. Therefore rather silly of him not to.

 

If the signs aren't clearly visible to anyone entering the "private" land, they're useless.

 

Are you telling me that a 2 inch sign on top of a 10ft pole is acceptable, as you WOULD have found it if you'd looked properly?

[Guest tlusnoc]

Jampot, stop trying to wriggle out of it, the poster said "they were plain to see" Nobody is saying they were 2" signs. He parked on private land and got caught, therefore I don't see the problem.

[jampot]

The land might be privately owned, but isn't considered "private" if the owner allows the general public access to park on it.

 

As for getting "caught". He hasn't. He's been issued an invoice. It isn't enforceable, despite what you are trying to say.

 

I'm not here to debate the rights and wrongs of parking where you shouldn't - but trying to extort £85 is not the answer.

 

£85 is NOT a fair and reasonable "charge" for the use of the parking space, and as the OP suggests that he/she didn't read the signs, they didn't enter into a contract to pay such a "charge".

[Filthy Monkey]

You state that the signs were plain to see when you returned to the vehicle, Yet you obviously chose to ignore them when you parked. What right did you have to park there in the first place? Just because it was a pub car park does not give you that right, unless you are going straight in to the said pub as a customer. The sooner people stop being selfish and park in authorised parking spaces the better. You got what you deserved in my opinion. Yes I know there are rogue clamping outfits out there, but customer parking is what it means....parking for customers, even if there is no sign saying so, common courtesy says a shop/pub car park is meant for customer use only.

 

...and you think an £85 charge is a fair penalty for this? Sounds like you could be in the wrong company here. Creating an open car park and inviting the public to park it it makes it public access. Just because somebody sticks a ticket on the car, attempting to extort money from the driver, doesn't make it a fair charge. Laws have been created to protect the public in this instance for a very good reason. It sounds to me like you are suggesting the extortion is an acceptable crime in this case.

 

Jampot, stop trying to wriggle out of it, the poster said "they were plain to see" Nobody is saying they were 2" signs. He parked on private land and got caught, therefore I don't see the problem.

 

So would you just happily roll over and pay it?

[Guest tlusnoc]

I am not saying £85 is fair or otherwise, what I am saying is that he had no right to use the car park if he didn't intend to use the public house. As for inviting the public to park on it therefore it makes it public access, that is nonsense, the car park is for use of patrons of said public house. The sooner people realise they can't just park where they please the better. Therefore if someone gets clamped/ticketed etc. then I have no sypmathy for them as long as the signs are prominent and make it clear what will happen.

[Filthy Monkey]

I don't see anything in the OPs posts suggesting that he parked in the car park and didn't use the public house. It may be the case that that is exactly what happened, but for the moment you are jumping to conclusions, which, funnily enough, is exactly how the OP got into this position in the first place. So, if there happens to be something, somewhere in this site stating that by using this site you accept that you will pay £85 for jumping to conclusions, will you pay up? Please send me your address by PM, please.

[Guest tlusnoc]

FM grow up and stop being so pedantic.

[Filthy Monkey]

Good comeback!! It's not being pedantic, it's showing how pointless your argument is. If you are quite happy to pay these [problem] artists then do so, but do not come on here and try to convince people that the actions of these companies are justified simply because somebody did not pay full attention to where they were parking. These companies cause people a lot of distress and anguish and that simply cannot be justified.

 

You appear to be very helpful in other areas of this site, including the banking forum, but your tone on the parking forum, in various threads, is aggressive, unpleasant and often ill-informed - Example 1 , Example 2 , Example 3

 

This forum is about helping people, not about making them feel stupid.

[Guest tlusnoc]

FM, can only get your 1st example to load, and with regard to that one, I stand my ground as that really was ridiculous to think you could park on yellow lines just because you want to nip in the bank. As for my posts being aggressive & unpleasant they are not meant to be. They may be straight to the point, but not in my opinion aggressive.

[jampot]

How does the parking warden know that the person has used the pub? Pubs don't even issue receipts!!!

 

There is a pub near me that has a Pay & Display car park, as their spaces were continually filled by people visiting nearby offices (my workplace) and at least this allows a warden to know who has bought a ticket - but even so, it still isn't an infallible system. If you present your ticket in the pub, and purchase something, you get your money back - which seems fair enough.

 

But to be issued a ticket by a warden, on behalf of a pub, without them knowing whether you've been in (or not) is just a joke.

 

Besides, the signs are usually VERY ambiguous. "Parking for customers only". Customers of who? Which customers? How about if you once bought a packet of crisps at the pub in 1976? You're still a customer.

 

Sorry, no... I don't agree with the entrapment of people in this way. If you own a car park which is open to abuse, there are other ways of dealing with it.

[paulok]

Hello everyone,can i just say about my parking experiance at the pub that on driving on to this little car park (room for 10 season ticket holders and untarmaced)with broken off doors on one of the three garages which where not being used.The pubic PAY car park to the pub was on the otherside of the pub fence unknown to me untill my return.Anyway! if i am stupid, ignorant and everything else i still look forward to getting this letter asking me to pay £85.The reason for the fight i will be putting up is due solely to the confidence given to me by the good peaple of this site, and had the fine been FARE buy the way which it is not it would have been paid.kind regards Paul.