So the supreme court has agreed with both the crown and the appeal court in the case of parking eye vs beavis
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-essex-34721126
https://www.supremecourt.uk/cases/uksc-2015-0116.html
In summary, this was the test case as to whether parking charges such as overstaying had to relate to actual losses to be reasonable and proportionate, and the judgement very clearly concludes they do not.
Given the general attitude towards parking in this forum, I doubt this will go down well, but for believers in property rights it is good to see that people don't just have the right to park wherever they want provided they don't believe it is a problem.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-essex-34721126
https://www.supremecourt.uk/cases/uksc-2015-0116.html
In summary, this was the test case as to whether parking charges such as overstaying had to relate to actual losses to be reasonable and proportionate, and the judgement very clearly concludes they do not.
Given the general attitude towards parking in this forum, I doubt this will go down well, but for believers in property rights it is good to see that people don't just have the right to park wherever they want provided they don't believe it is a problem.