AIBU to ignore 'Parking Charge Notice' from Parking Eye

[ComposHat]

Just before Christmas I was travelling from England to Scotland when we stopped at a service station for a break at a service station just over the border just before midnight.

When we returned to the car after a loo break and a cup of coffee, the car resolutely failed to start. After a call to the AA we were told that it would be a three hour wait until a patrol would get back to me.

Anyway the patrolman showed up after about three hours and got me us underway again, colder, grumpier but none the worse for wear.

All well and good, until I got a letter from a company called 'Parking Eye' trying to get me to pay £100 quid for overstaying the two hour free parking period (in a deserted car park at midnight in a broken down car) complete with two blurry pictures of my car's number plate. The driver (who may or may not have been me ;-) ) isn't visible in their cruddy shots.

Having scanned a few forums, the consensus seems to be to ignore these money grabbing chancers and deposit the letters they send straight into the dustbin. However I am by nature quite nervy, so am a bit worried about the consequences, equally I don't have a spare £100 lying around to hand over to these cowboys.

Has anyone had any experience in dealing with 'Parking Eye' or other Private Parking contractors and what did you do? Any help greatly appreciated.

[PRBunny]

Ivy - it doesn't matter if the law has changed so the private parking companies can go after the registered keeper of the car. The following principles still apply:

a) the private parking companies do not own the land they are asked to 'manage' meaning they have no legal standing to ticket your car
b) often the car parks are free, meaning the landowners haven't lost a penny. Department for Transport guidance states any request for recompense has to be reasonable.

The tickets private parking companies put on your cars are called speculative invoices. They base their business model on about 70% of people just paying up.

Other posters have said to ignore the tickets. That's my advice too. Only pay tickets issued by the council / proper traffic warden / police.

This is a hot topic at the moment in the PRBunny household as our estate is 'managed' (I use the term loosely) by a private parking company. They have ticketed my car twice, despite owning the freehold to my own space outside my house!!

It's incensed DH so much he is pretty much glued to the Money Saving Expert section covering this. There is also a thread on MSE where you can see what letters you will receive in the post from the various private parking companies.

[Wallison]

You don't have to own land in order to have a contratual right to provide (parking) services relating to it.

[PRBunny]

Wallison

Have you checked out the advice from MSE?

There is well-established case law to support what I am saying.

[mayorquimby]

But they are not seeking damages for breach of contract, otherwise they'd be going for the amount that should have been paid for parking etc.
They are trying to enforce a penalty clause which are unenforcable under contract law.
As you say they can still instigate proceedings etc. for breach of contract but the damages they'd be entitled to would be nowhere near the amounts that these private parking firms initially attempt to recover from people.

[Wallison]

There's a lot of eye-wash on MSE (and on this thread in fact) about this.

[Wallison]

^ As you say they can still instigate proceedings etc. for breach of contract but the damages they'd be entitled to would be nowhere near the amounts that these private parking firms initially attempt to recover from people.

Agreed. The amounts they are asking for are extortionate and the court may well reduce accordingly. But, do you really want to take the chance, if you do get as far as court proceedings with all the additional costs that will definitely entail if you lose?

[boomting]

They're utterly unenforceable. Ignore. We had one of these a few years ago. They kept sending letters that [tried to be] threatening. Unfortunately, ten letters down the line, they were still only saying that they "may consider starting legal action". Erm, yes, because may consider means it's highly likely to happen. Not.

Eventually, the letters just stopped.

[ComposHat]

But, do you really want to take the chance, if you do get as far as court proceedings with all the additional costs that will definitely entail if you lose?

Yes

Parking Eye have NEVER taken anyone to court.

[mayorquimby]

I'd fancy my chances.
You'd probably lose for a nominal amount (£5) if you happened to be the one in a thousand case they pursued.
They'd have to show damages which is far from guarenteed (I'd wager in 99% of cases there would be no damages) and I doubt many judges would actually award costs as it would either be in the small claims court or if at a higher court then the parking firm would have a hard time arguing they were entitled to their court costs when it was their initial attempt to extort money and enforce unenforcable contract clauses which necessitated the court visit.
I've gotten them in the past and ignored them because they don't really have a leg to stand on.

[ravenAK]

Ignore the buggers. They are about as likely to see you in court as they are to abseil in through your window with a box of Milk Tray for you.

[boomting]

www.moneysavingexpert.com/reclaim/private-parking-tickets

[PRBunny]

Then I would employ a no-win, no-fee barrister in my defence, rather than defend myself in court. And when I dig up the case law regarding the land ownership I will post it here.

Which private parking company do you work for, wallison?

[ComposHat]

Which private parking company do you work for, wallison?

That thought crossed my mind too.

[Wallison]

And you know this for a fact?

[ravenAK]

They have a couple of busy little stooges on MSE too. Must be a klaxon that goes off whenever a thread starts & whoever's stuffed their quota of envelopes gets let out to play on the forum...

[Wallison]

Oh I don't work for the buggers and think what they are doing is contemptible. But it's not illegal, and it's not unenforceable either.

[mayorquimby]

not sure who the 19:05 post is directed at or who you're questioning.
could you clarify please.
Too many people posting at once has confused me

[Wallison]

PRBunny - when I say court costs, I mean paying their costs if/when the people they sue lose. There was a poster upthread who it happened to - the parking company had employed a barrister, which they are entitled to do. Even if the original compensatory amount was reduced, that is pretty small beer compared to what you would be chinned for in barrister's fees for them.

[PRBunny]

I would agree about the klaxon.

I don't think anyone has said it was illegal. It's a bloody good way to make a lot of money very quickly.

But the tickets are unenforceable.

Wallison I was simply pondering out loud. Forgive me. But as you're one of the only (or is that the only?) dissenting voice(s) on this thread, I think it was worth pondering.

Thank you for answering the question.

[Wallison]

I was querying the claim that Parking Eye have never taken anyone to court.

[ravenAK]

No, no one said it's illegal.

Carol singing isn't illegal, but if I sing 'Away In A Manger' outside your front door & hand you an invoice when you open it to tell me to piss off, I'm going to struggle to enforce it.

The last thing these guys want is their day in court.

[Wallison]

^I don't think anyone has said it was illegal.

Errr ...

^ the private parking companies do not own the land they are asked to 'manage' meaning they have no legal standing to ticket your car

[mayorquimby]

"Even if the original compensatory amount was reduced, that is pretty small beer compared to what you would be chinned for in barrister's fees for them."

but the reality is that these guys know that it's far from a certainty that they'll be awarded costs by the court even if they are successful in their claim so they're not going to risk incurring that barrister fee themselves for the sake of the miniscule compensation they'll get.
Also unless they are somehow invested in the barristers and solicitors practices that they hire they gain nothing from being awarded costs. They're still going to end up with thei £5-30 compensation for breach of contract and nothing else, so there's no risk/reward ratio in it for them.

[PRBunny]

Wallison I understand about paying the other sides' costs if you lose. But Parking Eye and UKPC have never taken anyone to court. And private parking companies tend to use fear to get people to pay up. Hence the letters from debt recovery agents, 'solicitors' and threatening to send the bailiffs round. Which they can't do until any County Court proceedings have taken place and the parking company has won and any judgment then hasn't been paid.

My argument about land ownership still stands. I am just about to feed my baby so need to do that before finding the case law.

[mayorquimby]

In fairness that's different to being illegal.
Having no legal standing to enforce a contract doesn't mean that still trying to enforce it is illegal.
Just that you have no legal basis upon which to ground your claim.