Not if I could show that it isn't malicious or made up but I genuinely believe there is a case. At most you can get back your costs.
Either way I would win until you get a stay. My win isn't suddenly legal.
Am I liable to pay a fine
- Thread starter lunar
- Start date
Not if I could show that it isn't malicious or made up but I genuinely believe there is a case. At most you can get back your costs.
Either way I would win until you get a stay. My win isn't suddenly legal.
I'm not arguing the point. I know I am right, and perhaps you should ask yourself why that might be.
Well you are wrong if you think that anything but a minority of these charges are enforceable against an actual defence.
I give you a few hundred case studies here. I don't believe any defence created within the subforum has lost.
http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/forumdisplay.php?f=163
By the way the subforum has lawyers who know the the subject matter well. You are free to start a debate.
I'd be happy to.
Honestly I can' believe this thread is still going. Everyone knows if it's not from the council then just bin it as no one will come chasing.
All these random odd examples are from repeated misuse or some similar issue. A parking ticket here or there is nothing to worry about.
I've thrown plenty away, no one's come chasing me or anyone else I know. You keep with your reality TV examples though.
It's exactly the same as parking in a disabled bay in a supermarket car park. They can post a fake PCN fine but they'll never chase.
I think this is the worst advice you could possibly give.
Anyone receiving an invoice- seek help from places like pepipoo/ moneysavingexpert/ consumeractiongroup.
Don't moan when you receive a letter before action and subsequently a claim form from the courts.
Someone else who thoght the charges were unenforceable so ignored them.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...-24000-ignoring-notices-warning-a7665346.html
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...-24000-ignoring-notices-warning-a7665346.html
Is this anything like the OP?
I thought you were alluding the fact you might work in law.
There are a very limited set of circumstances where a defence should be treated carefully. One is where a pre-existing contractual relationship exists.
If your tenancy agreement or leasehold agreement says you must abide by parking rules subject to charges, then you have agreed to this contract (subject to you agreeing to any variation on the lease if this came afterwards). Let me know how this is relevant to the OP.
The OP is also in London and not Scotland. The laws are very different.
Last edited:
Check Bailiff forums. Once bailiffs come on the scene they charge you the fee for them recovering the money. If you pay the council direct the order that gave necessity for the bailiff involvement becomes void.
Jason or Mark1960 on there are best placed to go through the legal aspect. They know the stuff inside out better than any solicitor (and no they are not freeman on the land stuff)
Too many goody two shoes around here.
The principle is the same, do not simply ignore official demands for money. You may get away with it but there again you may not and the law is quite clear in regards to such matters. Advice to bin these demands is irresponsible in the extreme.
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 29 Mar 2003
- Posts
- 57,626
- Location
- Stoke on Trent
Here's a very famous recent one - http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...iff-indigo-park-services-150000-a7845126.html
Since that case the staff at our Trust have been warned they must pay because private firm APCOA could do the same.
As soon as a parking company can reasonably show your actions were accepting the contract then you are in a difficult place. As you've mentioned that is a pretty well known case.
So where you have a pre-existing relationship as well as communication and/or warnings then you can't use the defence that you weren't knowingly accepting any contract.
In most cases where people receive one off tickets at a specific location (as in the OP), the reality is that they have never read any contract never mind be sued for breach of that contract.
In the OPs case, do we really think that the OP accepted a contract where they would pay £90 for going over 10 minutes of parking? Of course not, they probably didn't even know about such a charge until the letter came through the door. They can't accept a contract they know little to nothing about and contract law is written to protect against that.
Last edited:
Depends whose rules...
Soldato
- Joined
- 13 Jul 2004
- Posts
- 20,344
- Location
- Stanley Hotel, Colorado
There is a difference between contract law a company makes and the actual law you must follow. The problem is proving they are wrong might involve court costs which is more then most want to pay or risk paying, they need to fine a lawyer or someone well armed to defend themselves. They then may be able to prove its exploitative and not in line with various consumer protection laws.
Pay the fine but fly a pirate flag over the store as warning to all others, writing a letter to a local newspaper to point out their robber baron ways.
The fact you were looking after children in traffic imo puts you in the right and the shop cannot be allowed to continue operating with such conditions, for public safety. Refer the matter to the council etc.
Pay the fine but fly a pirate flag over the store as warning to all others, writing a letter to a local newspaper to point out their robber baron ways.
The fact you were looking after children in traffic imo puts you in the right and the shop cannot be allowed to continue operating with such conditions, for public safety. Refer the matter to the council etc.
you need to read the rest of the thread as this isn't the case
You are correct.
I was unaware that the time limit was 10 minutes. All the other stores of the same name have displayed a sign whuch states 90 minutes free parking.
the time limit isn't 10 minutes... why are you struggling so much to understand this?