Parking fines from private company
Discussion
I had a similar issue a while back but parking in a regular spot at a retail park. I didn't know there was a time limit of 2 hours, and I had gone into a coffee shop there to meet a friend for a lengthy catch-up. Ended up with a £60 fine.
I think MoneySavingExpert.com has a huge section on this with the headline being it is not enforceable. HOWEVER, there was recently a case where a private company took someone to court and won. Now all private companies are banging on about this as it gives them a bit more weight.
Whether it was enforcable or not, I just paid it. After two weeks of several emails, some research I was just sick of the thing and sick of the s
tty company hanging over me.
Sometimes you have to pick your battles.
I think MoneySavingExpert.com has a huge section on this with the headline being it is not enforceable. HOWEVER, there was recently a case where a private company took someone to court and won. Now all private companies are banging on about this as it gives them a bit more weight.
Whether it was enforcable or not, I just paid it. After two weeks of several emails, some research I was just sick of the thing and sick of the s
tty company hanging over me. Sometimes you have to pick your battles.
bad company said:
Agree about disabled parking spaces, I’d never park in one of those. I’m always tempted to use the parent & child places though.
You don’t have kids then?When you have one or two children in car seats who cannot walk, those spaces are useful as the trolleys with built in seats are within visual distance of the car. Which means your kids aren’t left unattended.
I’m actually in favour of placing them and those trolleys away from the entrance to discourage people with older children that can walk unaided, or even teenagers, from abusing them.
In answer to the legal question, it is contractual with the terms of usage. So, even if you do take the moral low ground, you are still liable.
bobbybee said:
That's what I was thinking too. Nice to see I'm not mad in thinking so.
Also, "they" shouldn't be allowed to obtain keeper details from the DVLA, as they aren't the law.
But they are allowed to in law. It seems that for someone using to make technical argument you are making a while load of nonsense up. In fact your whole premise is painfully incorrect.Also, "they" shouldn't be allowed to obtain keeper details from the DVLA, as they aren't the law.
In the case of supermarkets and similar then I'd expect them to provide adequate signage setting out the consequences of parking inappropriately. That's the contract. I doubt they'd get away with one or two signs in a car park for 100s of cars. All a bit academic personally. I'm grateful I don't need a disabled bay and I park as far from the entrance to the outlet as possible as a rule. I'd regard a parent and child space as extremely high risk in terms of picking up damage so the further away from me the better.
I've never heard a credible and checkable account of anyone being prosecuted for parking in the wrong bay in an outlet car park, only overstays.
I've never heard a credible and checkable account of anyone being prosecuted for parking in the wrong bay in an outlet car park, only overstays.
Tye Green said:
...more details on pepipoo web site
That hasn't worked for many months so they moved to http://ftla.ukTommo87 said:
bad company said:
Agree about disabled parking spaces, I’d never park in one of those. I’m always tempted to use the parent & child places though.
You don’t have kids then?When you have one or two children in car seats who cannot walk, those spaces are useful as the trolleys with built in seats are within visual distance of the car. Which means your kids aren’t left unattended.
I’m actually in favour of placing them and those trolleys away from the entrance to discourage people with older children that can walk unaided, or even teenagers, from abusing them.
In answer to the legal question, it is contractual with the terms of usage. So, even if you do take the moral low ground, you are still liable.
BertBert said:
bobbybee said:
That's what I was thinking too. Nice to see I'm not mad in thinking so.
Also, "they" shouldn't be allowed to obtain keeper details from the DVLA, as they aren't the law.
But they are allowed to in law. It seems that for someone using to make technical argument you are making a while load of nonsense up. In fact your whole premise is painfully incorrect.Also, "they" shouldn't be allowed to obtain keeper details from the DVLA, as they aren't the law.
omniflow said:
Tommo87 said:
bad company said:
Agree about disabled parking spaces, I’d never park in one of those. I’m always tempted to use the parent & child places though.
You don’t have kids then?When you have one or two children in car seats who cannot walk, those spaces are useful as the trolleys with built in seats are within visual distance of the car. Which means your kids aren’t left unattended.
I’m actually in favour of placing them and those trolleys away from the entrance to discourage people with older children that can walk unaided, or even teenagers, from abusing them.
In answer to the legal question, it is contractual with the terms of usage. So, even if you do take the moral low ground, you are still liable.
That’s about as likely as finding a virgin in a maternity ward.
Tommo87 said:
I do like your optimism that the ONLY space free in the entire car park could ever be right by the front door.
That’s about as likely as finding a virgin in a maternity ward.
Hmmmmm....That’s about as likely as finding a virgin in a maternity ward.
In my experience the parent and child spaces aren't always right by the front door. The 2 car parks where I have regularly experienced a complete lack of spaces are the M&S car park in Muswell Hill and the Waitrose car park in Chesham. Having repeatedly driven round these car parks multiple times looking for a space, I would have no hesitation using a parent and child space if one were to be free. For me it's just about being able to actually park the car and do my shopping, it has nothing to do with how far I need to walk once I've managed to park.
Your experience may vary.
WrekinCrew said:
BertBert said:
bobbybee said:
That's what I was thinking too. Nice to see I'm not mad in thinking so.
Also, "they" shouldn't be allowed to obtain keeper details from the DVLA, as they aren't the law.
But they are allowed to in law. It seems that for someone using to make technical argument you are making a while load of nonsense up. In fact your whole premise is painfully incorrect.Also, "they" shouldn't be allowed to obtain keeper details from the DVLA, as they aren't the law.
bobbybee said:
Ok, OK unbunch those panties!
Anyone can make up whatever rules they want, but can they be enforced legally was my question.
As to parking there whether you should or shouldn't is down to (as I stated) the individual's moral compass.
I certainly did not say I do it, or have any sort of importance complex.
BTW my father was disabled too, before he passed away recently. So what's your point?
Don't be so quick to judge other people's circumstances. Numbnuts
The answer is yes and no. PCN's are an invoice under contract law. As with any contract there must be offer, acceptance and consideration. So put a big sign next to a disabled parking bay saying it you park there and your not displaying a disabled badge you will be charged £60. Then the invoice is likely enforceable. If the sign says no parking unless you display a disabled badge, £60 penalty, then likely not enforceable.Anyone can make up whatever rules they want, but can they be enforced legally was my question.
As to parking there whether you should or shouldn't is down to (as I stated) the individual's moral compass.
I certainly did not say I do it, or have any sort of importance complex.
BTW my father was disabled too, before he passed away recently. So what's your point?
Don't be so quick to judge other people's circumstances. Numbnuts
KungFuPanda said:
Yep I think it was a trade off between the government and the private parking companies. The government took away the right to clamp but gave them the ability to use the DVLA database to chase registered keepers.
No. Parking companies have always been able to obtain keeper details if they met certain requirements. The trade of was to create keeper liability for the invoice provided certain requirements where met.Mrr T said:
KungFuPanda said:
Yep I think it was a trade off between the government and the private parking companies. The government took away the right to clamp but gave them the ability to use the DVLA database to chase registered keepers.
No. Parking companies have always been able to obtain keeper details if they met certain requirements. The trade of was to create keeper liability for the invoice provided certain requirements where met.in the absence of driver identification and a correctly worded NTK the parking company's only recourse is to try and bully the keeper into paying the invoice.
Responder.First said:
They can issue a penalty charge for parking a disable bay without a valid badge.
The parent and child bays are much harder to enforce but if there is a Parking op maybe if they have no children with them.
Most don't have staffing as they just fit ANPR and charge you for the overstay element.
(While I'm not interested in parking in either..) I do not think they can charge in either of those circumstances.The parent and child bays are much harder to enforce but if there is a Parking op maybe if they have no children with them.
Most don't have staffing as they just fit ANPR and charge you for the overstay element.
bobbybee said:
Also, for either type of space. Is it not discriminatory against able bodied or childless people not being allowed to park there? Not so inclusive of everyone no matter what is it?
Discriminating against people is fine as long as they don't tick one of the "protected characteristics" boxes (which, to my mind, is discriminatory in itself, but that's a whole separate conversation) so you wouldn't be able to make that stick.pork911 said:
Responder.First said:
They can issue a penalty charge for parking a disable bay without a valid badge.
The parent and child bays are much harder to enforce but if there is a Parking op maybe if they have no children with them.
Most don't have staffing as they just fit ANPR and charge you for the overstay element.
(While I'm not interested in parking in either..) I do not think they can charge in either of those circumstances.The parent and child bays are much harder to enforce but if there is a Parking op maybe if they have no children with them.
Most don't have staffing as they just fit ANPR and charge you for the overstay element.
Should. I certainly hope and court would throw out a claim.
Parking in a child bay would require evidence but if there was cctv showing you parking with no child no reason it would not be enforceable. Difficult to argue the child got left at home or slipped down the back of the seat.
Mrr T said:
Depending on the wording of the sign and it's clearly visible they certainly can. I would hope in a disabled bay if you just forget your badge or it fell from visibility. The parking company would accept an appeal, not confident on that, but that the independent appeal d
Should. I certainly hope and court would throw out a claim.
Parking in a child bay would require evidence but if there was cctv showing you parking with no child no reason it would not be enforceable. Difficult to argue the child got left at home or slipped down the back of the seat.
It was tied up in the boot.Should. I certainly hope and court would throw out a claim.
Parking in a child bay would require evidence but if there was cctv showing you parking with no child no reason it would not be enforceable. Difficult to argue the child got left at home or slipped down the back of the seat.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff