Sainsbury's Parking Ticket
- Thread starter GeForce
- Start date
But I am disagreeing, as I state above, so where next?
Drive to Sainsburys and test it?
Have an eye test?
Get an optician to make a judgement call?
Go to court for a judgement?
You say tomato I say, erm, egg.
Oh...
Then the point is quite clearly that the sign allegedly "prohibits" the driver from leaving the vehicle, meaning that the driver cannot read the full terms and conditions that would form an alleged contract, a reasonable person would not agree to be bound by a contract under such conditions.
The driver could park elsewhere and read the terms based on the big writing and then make an informed decision. I refer you to my earlier point, until you or someone tests your assumptions it's conjecture and conjecture I disagree with
Associate
- Joined
- 18 Mar 2004
- Posts
- 143
- Location
- Fife
Its a charge not a fine big difference. Do a google on euro parks.
Thanks all. I'll wait for the NTK or whatever to arrive in the post and then decide where to go. I'm strongly tempted at this point to appeal on the grounds of £60 being an unreasonable amount to request for quite literally 60 seconds of infraction.
The driver could park elsewhere and read the terms based on the big writing and then make an informed decision. I refer you to my earlier point, until you or someone tests your assumptions it's conjecture and conjecture I disagree with
For me it is not conjecture but opinion, I do have some grounding in such matters. However I am not a lawyer and at no point in the thread have I advised as to a course of action that should be taken by the OP as far as I remember.
There is legal precedent for unlawful penalties in contracts, Dunlop Vs The New Motor & Tyre Co. iirc is one that is often quoted.
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 21 Nov 2004
- Posts
- 47,235
Shred.
A little bit of knowledge as they say, not least where the law is concerned...
I am certainly no legal expert, neither would I claim to be, but you and I debating stuff we don't have all the facts for is not where a legal argument would start from and therefore it is conjecture or opinion without all the facts, so summation with lots of bits missing.
Quoting legal history again bares little value when we don't have a full detail of the facts for this event. In simple terms we both have opinions that differ and debating the merits of whose is best is a fruitless exercise until someone picks up the reins are proves or disproves our views, which is unlikely to happen I suspect.
To be fair the OP has not even got the *invoice* yet and may never receive one. All that has happened here is the normal workings of an internet forum. If conjecture, or opinion or otherwise was not posted then there would be nothing to read.
Some opinions are and will be better than others it is up to the reader to judge.
All facts.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 13 May 2003
- Posts
- 34,593
- Location
- Warwickshire
GUYZ CAN WE STOP THE CONJEKJA PLS!!! After all this is the internet, where everything should either be scientific fact or professional legal advice.
All that Housey's really saying is that he's too rich to bother fighting any small charges, forgetting perhaps that people such as the OP are not the same person as him.
All that Housey's really saying is that he's too rich to bother fighting any small charges, forgetting perhaps that people such as the OP are not the same person as him.
In fairness to him I don't think he's saying that at all. Let's be honest, this is OCUK, so I suspect £60 is hardly a life changing sum of money for most of us. Personally, I fight them because the sheer amount I accumulate makes it worthwhile, but I can see why some wouldn't bother.
Housey is saying that if you know you shouldn't have parked there you should pay up: I personally disagree but I can completely see where he's coming from. My dad shares the same view and gets increasingly annoyed when all my appeal letters come through the door
Not quite. I am certainly not rich, but some battles are worth fighting and some are not and some battles have merit and some don't. Where you sit on that is down to the individual and as the OP said £60 to him is a lot of money, which I fully appreciate. If he feels he has a case and feels that strongly about fighting it go for it, I wish him the very best, but I don't think he'll get anywhere, that is my point.
In fairness to him I don't think he's saying that at all. Let's be honest, this is OCUK, so I suspect £60 is hardly a life changing sum of money for most of us. Personally, I fight them because the sheer amount I accumulate makes it worthwhile, but I can see why some wouldn't bother.
Housey is saying that if you know you shouldn't have parked there you should pay up: I personally disagree but I can completely see where he's coming from. My dad shares the same view and gets increasingly annoyed when all my appeal letters come through the door
SON?
Not quite. I am certainly not rich, but some battles are worth fighting and some are not and some battles have merit and some don't. Where you sit on that is down to the individual and as the OP said £60 to him is a lot of money, which I fully appreciate. If he feels he has a case and feels that strongly about fighting it go for it, I wish him the very best, but I don't think he'll get anywhere, that is my point.
BiB
If the OP choses not to pay it is the PPC that needs a case as it is the PPC that would need to prove the alleged debt in the small claims track of the county court. To do this they either need to prove that a contract was formed or that they have a claim in tort for damages. My opinion is that they can do neither.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 13 May 2003
- Posts
- 34,593
- Location
- Warwickshire
You might not think it, but that's exactly what he said, in this very thread:
The point I was making geekman, is that £60 might not be 'small change' to everyone, despite your bizarre assumption that everyone on OcUK couldn't care less about £60!? There are all sorts on here, would have thought you'd have noticed that by now.
geekman said:
Yeah I know, but he hasn't really said why you should pay up. If he's playing the moral / do the right thing for the poor little corporations card, then most people sort of grew out of that when they learnt about the real world. I'm going to go out on a limb here and wonder if Housey always plays by these 'pay up when you **** up' rules in all of his business dealings
.Did you miss the "to me" bit in that point? By that alone you should be able to see I appreciate that is not the case for everyone...
