Exceeds marked bay area - really?
- Thread starter danielanthony
- Start date
It's the two spaces the rear is encroaching upon which people are counting.
Associate
- Joined
- 6 Nov 2002
- Posts
- 1,210
and here come the idiots
Just saying the risk is there, that's all. All it takes is one misjudgement and it all ends in whippy claims.
Perhaps you missed the picture where the rear of his vehicle is in two parking spaces behind the parking space which I assume the OP intended to occupy.
- Joined
- 22 Sep 2007
- Posts
- 2,184
- Location
- Abingdon
Yeah I don't normally park like this, in 18 years of driving I've never received an enforcement notice like this before and I don't intend to again. A bit of light ribbing from randoms on the internet has helped me see that, to some people, my overhanging boot is almost a crime against humanity and that I should squeeze my family into a Fiat 500 rather than the barge I currently have.
I have done a bit of research too and ultimately the 'fine' is based on an assumed contract between yourself and the parking company, and is based on losses incurred by your actions. Other than parking like a twit on this occasion, there are other cars in all the spaces around me and so I haven't actually caused them any loss.
Associate
- Joined
- 16 Mar 2009
- Posts
- 1,917
I can see both sides of this argument, however I don't believe a "parking charge" by parking companies is enforcable. Only official council ones etc. I may be wrong.
There's your case then. No loss of income because all spaces were occupied. I would send one letter recorded, then not bother doing anything else. Not worth fretting over.
- Joined
- 22 Sep 2007
- Posts
- 2,184
- Location
- Abingdon
Unfortunately things have changed and these notices can no longer be ignored.
However, luckily most of these enforcement companies do not follow the proper legal process or try and claim for losses incurred by your actions (which is the case here as I had paid for my parking ticket, parking outside of the lines means that they could not sell adjacent spaces, thus causing them loss).
I think that's the way to go. You can't argue that you were properly parked, as you obviously were not, but you can argue that it's a punitive fine for damages/losses that never happened because their own picture clearly shows two cars parked in the spaces behind. Ergo, no losses.
Sure, those two cars may be tiny clown cars and may be overhanging in the front because of your car, but the picture doesn't show that, nor how many people had to go past those spots because they saw your car overhanging and decided they wouldn't fit.
Write a letter quoting the legislation you've found regarding fines can only be issued based on loss of income. Then use the evidence provided by them to show that even though your car was slightly over the bay, other cars were still able to park there and thus not incurring any loss of income to the parking company.
Whether they decide to pursue it any further is up to them. But based on that point alone, I can't see any court making much of a fuss over it. And the parking company will likely see this and drop the fine.
These companies only work using scare tactics. They assume you'll just roll over and accept what's coming.
Whether they decide to pursue it any further is up to them. But based on that point alone, I can't see any court making much of a fuss over it. And the parking company will likely see this and drop the fine.
These companies only work using scare tactics. They assume you'll just roll over and accept what's coming.
Soldato
- Joined
- 20 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 12,013
- Location
- Derby
This 100% a guy that works in one of our other buildings paid a £60 fine to one of these companies when he was parked slightly over in the next parking space in sainsburys car park that was pretty empty at 8.30am. What an idiot..
A fair fine IMO.
Imagine an overhanging 5 series parked exactly like you are where that Seat Leon is. The rear bumper would intersect your drivers seat.
What if another estate car wanted to park where the Seat is? Do you have any consideration for the front of his car or do you honestly think you can eat his space because you have a BMW?
Imagine an overhanging 5 series parked exactly like you are where that Seat Leon is. The rear bumper would intersect your drivers seat.
HAHAHA how selfish are you mate?
What if another estate car wanted to park where the Seat is? Do you have any consideration for the front of his car or do you honestly think you can eat his space because you have a BMW?
- Joined
- 22 Sep 2007
- Posts
- 2,184
- Location
- Abingdon
I think if you actually read the posts I acknowledge that my parking on this occasion isn't great but does an overhanging boot warrant a £100 fine?
Oh, and could you tell me what car you drive? I like to judge your value as a person based upon what car you have, hopefully not one of those smelly French ones
Oh, and could you tell me what car you drive? I like to judge your value as a person based upon what car you have, hopefully not one of those smelly French ones
You're the one who said your car needs to be safer than other cars. I was hoping it's because of the badge, now you've just made it seem like its pure selfishness now.
- Joined
- 22 Sep 2007
- Posts
- 2,184
- Location
- Abingdon
Safer? I think I said it was parked on a corner and if I'd parked much further forward it would get in the way of other cars trying to turn into that corner. And yes, I would like my car not to get damaged, not because its a BMW, but because its my car. I would have had the same attitude when driving my old Vauxhall Insignia, Peugeot 306 or '79 reg orange Fiesta (although someone did sit on the bonnet and left a bum-shaped dent).
![[TW]Fox](/data/man-of-honor/2009.png){kind=avatar}
If thats what you think you've missed the point. You've reduced two of the spaces behind you to such a size that they would only accommodate small hatchbacks. Had the Panda or Leon left and somebody came along in another 5 Series it wouldn't have gone into those spaces as you are overhanging significantly into it.
The point is that it's fairly crap parking and it's difficult to see how you can argue otherwise. It's nothing to do with thinking you need a smaller car. I drive exactly the same car as you and I still think its crap parking, they are quite large but you need to overhang the front not the rear of the space to avoid obstructing others.
This bit, however, is completely true. I can't personally see how it's enforceable.
It doesn't mean it's not a handy parking lesson though
- Joined
- 22 Sep 2007
- Posts
- 2,184
- Location
- Abingdon
[TW]Fox;27211945 said:This bit, however, is completely true. I can't personally see how it's enforceable.
It doesn't mean it's not a handy parking lesson though
I'll be ticking the parking camera option on the next one, might just pay for itself!
I think a lot of people slating the OP have never tried to park a large car in a car park with small spaces. Usually, you've just got to choose whether or not you want to be sticking out at the front, or encroach on the space behind like the OP, and just accept the fact that a lot of sad/jealous people are going to feel personally insulted by your actions.
I'm afraid I have no desire to drive around for ages trying to find a car park with sensibly sized spaces, so on occasion the back of my car will end up in another space like the OP's. I'd much rather it get bumped gently by someone parking than scraped all down the front/side by someone driving around the car park who hasn't noticed that the front of my car is sticking out more than the other cars.
I'm afraid I have no desire to drive around for ages trying to find a car park with sensibly sized spaces, so on occasion the back of my car will end up in another space like the OP's. I'd much rather it get bumped gently by someone parking than scraped all down the front/side by someone driving around the car park who hasn't noticed that the front of my car is sticking out more than the other cars.
