Parking Charge in a Waitrose Car Park

[orge]

I've had a scan through some relevant threads on this board and it's clear that it's unlikely these charges are legally enforceable. However, I have a problem in that the car was company registered and I do not wish them to receive a stream of threatening mail (even if it's all bluster). Given these details, what would be the best way to a "quick" resolution?

 

Parked in Waitrose Car Park, which is free, but exceeded the 2 hour limit.

Charge was £40, or £20 if paid in 14 days.

I genuinely did not see any signage, although I have since realised that there was a sign on the store itself - I will return and check if there are others.

The ticket was issued by Britannia Parking.

 

It seems the most reliable defence is to ask them to prove who the driver was - I doubt they have photographic/cctv evidence. However, this means they will be chasing my company.

 

Alternatively, I could admit being the driver, but question their proof that I had entered into a contract with the land owner and that the charges are not penalties. To me, this still seems like a substantial defence and it would mean they were less likely to enter into a correspondence with my employer.

 

I have to admit, it is tempting to pay the £20, as this is not a substantial sum for peace of mind, but I'm aware that these companies rely on the "average" victim caving in easily to their demands. I really don't want to take part in that, but I also don't want the embarassment of having a DCA chasing my employer...

 

Any suggestions?

 

Cheers,

 

James

[Tau]

You could possibly have a word with whoever pays the tickets and tell them not to pay as its an invoice and not a legally enfoceable penalty charge and have a look on this website for reasons why they shouldnt pay.

You have nothing to lose

[Sidewinder]

You could possibly have a word with whoever pays the tickets and tell them not to pay as its an invoice and not a legally enfoceable penalty charge and have a look on this website for reasons why they shouldnt pay.

You have nothing to lose

 

Seconded - any alleged contract is with the driver of the vehicle, not the registered keeper. Speak to the Company Secretary and prepare the following for them to reply to any letter which comes their way:-

 

Sir,

 

With regard to your recent letter, reference xxxxxxxxxxxx, kindly note that any alleged agreement to pay your invoice exists between yourselves and the driver of the vehicle, not the registered keeper, which in this case is a company. Kindly direct any future correspondence to the person driving the car on the day in question. Regrettably we are unable to provide you with further details as to whom that might have been.

 

Yours faithfully,

 

 

Should do the trick!

[Zamzara]

Seconded - any alleged contract is with the driver of the vehicle, not the registered keeper. Speak to the Company Secretary and prepare the following for them to reply to any letter which comes their way:-

 

Sir,

 

With regard to your recent letter, reference xxxxxxxxxxxx, kindly note that any alleged agreement to pay your invoice exists between yourselves and the driver of the vehicle, not the registered keeper, which in this case is a company. Kindly direct any future correspondence to the person driving the car on the day in question. Regrettably we are unable to provide you with further details as to whom that might have been.

 

Yours faithfully,

 

 

Should do the trick!

 

That's good if the company agrees. If they don't feel comfortable with it, having them name the driver wouldn't be the end of the world either, as the signs are not clear and the charge is a penalty, so still plenty of other reasons not to pay.

[orge]

Thanks for the replies, I'm going to see if I can persuade the company to respond initially with the letter above - if they continue to pursue it then I will initiate correspondence of my own. At this stage, I also think it might be worth involving the store manager.

 

My sister works for John Lewis and she did note that the partnership is very customer focussed. I imagine they might feel that further pursuit of this matter may be worth less to them than the loss of a customer...

 

Thanks again,

 

James

[Rob S]

The other thing to factor on is what is the loss to the company by you exceeding their 2 hour limit? As it is a free car park they have not lost any revenue by you parking for longer than you should have. if they go to court they can only claim for the actual damages incurred.............which is zero,zip, nada, zilch, bugger all!!:grin: