[Closed] Is this one of those parking tickets you can just ignore??

Yup

don't even acknowledge it

[url= http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/parking-traffic-offences/146700-parking-contravention-athena-anpr.html ]There may be some useful advice here[/url]

£90 jesus how about an little £2 for the hour extra he stayed. tell them to f off

Cheers Barry. I've had a good read of that thankyou.

So, do I send the standard letter as you linked to in that thread, or just blank them?

blANK THEM

Totally ignore them
It's just a speculative invoice for services they claim you've had

Do not reply

Do not open any future mail they send you

They will get increasingly aggressive and then drop it - but only if you read their letter 🙂

Plenty of help on Google

LOL @ the website they link to for some credability
What a meaningless pile of poop

[url= http://www.britishparking.co.uk/forum_signup.php ]Ive just signed up for their forum :)[/url]

I really hate these type of shysters

I would consider making a complaint to the Information Commissioner about the DVLA selling on your data too. Dodgy if you ask me and way outwith the spirit of the DPA. If we all complained they might stop doing it.

I just got one of those from homebase. 75 quid. I was planning to ring them and kindly tell them to f-off. I think I'll just ignore it though...

You spent two and a half hours in Lidls? 😮

I may be missing something here, but aren't rear number plates yellow? In that second picture, it's clearly white, like the front.

?

Two and a half hours to pick some dodgy cycle shoes and shorts? You're a worse shopper than my wife.

Wife got one last year for 2hrs 10 mins in Aldi (I know). I ignored the letter similar to yours and subsequent letter from so called debt collection agency (with same address). Not received anything since October.
So just ignore it.

Peter. I have actually had a parking company done for this. they are in breach of over 5 acts. Now all the can claim is consequnetial loss of th ecost of parking so £3 their claim would never stand up. But the big issue is HOW did they get your address, through the DVLA, now they are registered for the prevention of crime, parking on private property is a cival matter so they have breached their use of information! if they chase you they are further breaking acts, I can send you the full list. Oh any they have a po box address, thats illegal they mush show their full address. As I say I can send you a good 5 acts they are breaking, they cannot charge you anyting other than the cost of the original parking. Its a joke and companys make millions out of this scam. The ones who tried it on me got a nice hefty fine for their efforts. Shove it the bin. If they ever sent a debt collector you can have them done for harrasment, they cannot get a bailiff only a court can do that!!

These things are governed by standard contract law. Assuming they followed the rules on placing the signage in the correct places around the restricted parking area then the person who parked the car has legally entered into a contract with the parking company and in fact IS liable for the charge. By parking there you have by default agreed to their terms.

However, the important distinction is that the contract exists between the person who parked the car, which is not always the registered keeper of the car. If they have proof of the person who parked the car, for example photographic evidence of you sat behind the wheel in the parking place, then you are on dodgy ground by ignoring it. However, if they don't have any proof of who actually parked th ecar then there is nothing they can do apart from send you one scary sounding letter after another.

If you get a phone call from them or anyone representing them then make sure you talk in the third person regarding the parking. eg.. 'The car was parked...' or 'The person who parked the car was not aware of the restrictions.' NEVER give yourself away by saying 'I parked the car' or 'I had no idea it was a restricted parking zone'. If you do that you've just given them the evidence they need to prove it was you as you effectively just confessed.

I had one of these last year and I just kept returning their letters with a note to take up the non-payment of their invoice with the person who parked the vehicle.

And remember.... Unlike criminal law regarding traffic offences, you are not obliged under civil law (which covers contract law and these invoices) to give the identity of the person who did park the car, no matter how threatening they become.

Best thing is to just ignore it and all the subsequent scary letters.. I got one that said their bailiffs would be calling to gain legal entry to my premises to assess my ability to pay the fine. Quite scary, unless you know it's total bluff and utter bollocks.

No matter what they say or call it, it's an invoice from a private company and it is NOT a fine. As an invoice you are perfectly entitled to choose not to pay it. they can try and take you to small claims court but unless they can prove you parked the car they have no case at all.

I would consider making a complaint to the Information Commissioner about the DVLA selling on your data too. Dodgy if you ask me and way outwith the spirit of the DPA. If we all complained they might stop doing it.

As a registered company you can purchase the registered owner data on any vehicle for £2.50. they aren't breaching any data protection laws by contacting the registered owner directly, If they made that information public they would be.

As to wether or not that whole arrangement is morally right is another matter, but they aren't breaking any laws or rules.

These companies are scum.

Agree with the other posts. These companies are scum. They rely on most people just paying up. Don't do it.

Hold your nerve, ignore all of their demands and they'll give up. It might last a few months, and their letters might sound initially threatening, but hold your nerve. You can make contact with them, but it won't change their course of action.

The only reason to contact them is that if they instruct a debt collection agency, you can legitimately claim that the charge is in dispute. A debt collection agency cannot pursue a claim that is in dispute, and that is where the trail will run dry. If you do, post everything recorded delivery. They hate the certainty with which you can prove that they received your letter.

It can be disconcerting since you will never get anything official saying that the charge has been dropped, but eventually the lack of them pursuing it further will be enough.

Legally, if they didn't tell you the penalty for parking there (which even if they did doesn't matter), all that they can claim from you is any direct cost associated with the inconvenience you might have caused to them in issuing the ticket, or the direct costs that they incurred because your car was in their car park. Both of these sums will be insignificant that it just won't be worth their effort pursuing you through the courts.

Good luck. Power to the people!

Why not just cover your rear plate with a piece of card that says 'F*** you' when you leave? Once on the public road, stop and remove it.

daveatextremistsdotcouk - Member

Why not just cover your rear plate with a piece of card that says 'F*** you' when you leave? Once on the public road, stop and remove it.

That's not actually a bad idea, you know. Is it an offence to cover your rear numberplate in a private car park? Would certainly scupper these money-grabbing shysters.

Regulations are fair enough, to prevent people from using a car park unreasonably, but £90 is out of order. It's about time there was legislation to restrict the amount these companies are allowed to charge.

You shop at Lidl....
[img] [/img]

😉

Hmmmm, welcome to Britain. It's rubbish.

Ignore, ignore, ignore.

I got one, and my biggest mistake was replying to them, they wouldn't leave me alone then. Eventually got the message when my solicitor gave them a ring.

All that non-addressed junk mail you lot get, put it in an envelope, address it to their PO box (no stamp) and send it on.
That'll keep their claims officers busy - sorting through what's genuine or not. And should give them a headache in paying for the letters to eh?

Would this work?

Though I realise this has really nothing to do with the letters you're about to ignore...

This may be an unpopular thing to say but...

1) the legal principle is sound: there was a contract between the driver and the landowner when the driver parked there which included liquidated damages. The driver breached the contract. The driver is are liable to pay the damages.

1a) the internet forum advice you get that says "this is all totally illegal, it's a scam, it's a fraud etc" is wrong.

1b) although I understand that in E&W law the amount of the liquidated damages has to be "reasonable" (this was the bank charges issue, wasn't it?)

2) the "how did the DVLA get my address" is a total non-starter of a complaint. you're allowed to access DVLA info to prepare or launch litigation, legal claim etc.

3) the real question is how far they can be bothered to chase this as a contractual dispute so that you can compare the likely risk (of being successfully sued and hit for higher costs) against the likely reward (not paying the forty five quid). Unfortunately, no-one except the parking companies knows if and how often they actually bother suing anyone for this.

They rarely ever get to court as the only way they can successfully win a case is if they can prove you parked the car. That requires evidence that they very rarely get. No proof that it was you who parked the car (registered owner is not proof) no case. Simples.

Offer to pay for parking (to reimburse any loss) to the land owner / car park operator based upon local car park charges of £whatever they actually are / hour and leave it at that.
They can only seek what they are out of pocket by, ie the money you ought to have paid for staying over their time allowance.
Don't ignore.

1) the legal principle is sound: there was a contract between the driver and the landowner when the driver parked there which included liquidated damages. The driver breached the contract. The driver is are liable to pay the damages.

But it's still speculative - they don't know who the driver was

IGNORE.
DO NOT ...reply OR engage in any dialogue.
They will send you approx 10 letters, each with more legal fees on.
When they realise that you are not replying they cut their losses and give up.

If you have dialogue with them then they will persist for much longer as they know you are concerned and are more likely to pay.

Ignore

I've got a shoebox full of private parking tickets totalling about £18k.

Never paid a penny and never responded to any of them.

As above, do not acknowledge or question. The only time I'd pay up is if it was a council enforcing etc.

I love all the indignation. It is of course every persons right to drive onto someone else's property and park there. So were you shopping there for all that time or did you just abuse the free parking? I hope you won't object if I park across your driveway sometime if that just happens to be convenient for me and saves me a bit of money. Of course I won't do it if your car is on the driveway. And if you object you can always take civil action against me. I have to warn you though that I shall ignore your letters and threats. You'll get bored soon enough and give up and I'll drive off into the sunset with my righteous indignation intact. 🙂

So in short yes I think you can ignore it.

Thanks for the replies everyone, especially Mark, that makes a lot of sense even though the beginning of your reply didn't sound good! 😉

They rarely ever get to court as the only way they can successfully win a case is if they can prove you parked the car. That requires evidence that they very rarely get. No proof that it was you who parked the car (registered owner is not proof) no case. Simples.

The registered owner, who's name and address I blanked out, didn't park the car anyway. I won't say who it was.... 😀

Yup had this too
Ignore (even when you get the debt collector letter)

as someone above said in civil law they can only claim for consequential loss. £90 is more than the consequential loss would amount to. infact i'm pretty sure that if you could demonstrate there are always empty spaces in their car park you could argue, in court, successfully that their consequential losses are nil.

avdave2 my girlfriends Dad took long in Tesco's. He received a big 'fine' and paid it. His transgression? He parked in a disabled bay, displayed his badge ...went shopping in Tesco's then decided to have a cup of tea in their cafe.

Would they listen? Would they ****.

Re: the photo above. I received one of those from a Council in London for an illegal U-turn outside BBC/White City- you could actually see the car on the edge of its springs/a rear wheel lifting on the two photos as I spun the wheel at speed 😆

[url= http://www.chad.co.uk/news/Judge-says-Excel-parking-fines.3903396.jp ]They do sometimes go to court[/url]

[url= http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.html?t=812129 ]More help here[/url]

Mark - Resident Grumpy
These things are governed by standard contract law. Assuming they followed the rules on placing the signage in the correct places around the restricted parking area then the person who parked the car has legally entered into a contract with the parking company and in fact IS liable for the charge.

Not quite correct, a contract needs to be balanced and agreed by both parties, you cannot agree to a contract when a. you have to be already on their land to read said contract, even then you have not agreed to it, as it is unbalanced! just a few of my points on where they fail

1) Sections 82 to 84 of the Companies Act 2006, if a PCN or any correspondence from a Private Parking company does not have their registered address and Co Number they are in Breech, most use a PO Box so they are illegal.

2) Data Protection Act, most Private parking companies are registered to process information for the prevention of Crime, parking is a Civil matter so they are breaking the DPA by processing your information.(I mean to process an invoice / bill) getting your address is not illegal sending an invoice is as they are not registered to use information in this way!

3) Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977 & Statutory Instrument 1999 No. 2083. Basically as you have not had pre-sight of their T&C’s or had any influence their terms are biast and unfair, you are already in the car park before you can read them. Their T&Cs wont hold any substance.

4) The Civil Enforcement of Parking Contraventions (England) Representations and Appeals Regulations 2007 si 2007 No 3482. A PCn must include details to appeal to an adjudicator, most will only give their own address, they are not adjudicators and as such they do not comply with the regulations

5) section 40 of the Administration of Justice act, by contacting you or sending a debt collector they are in breech for harassment, if the PCn states charges will apply or they can legally charge you they are also in breech. Also if a PCN stages any legal right, or portrays to be from an authority they are illegal.

6) If a parking fee is £4 and you don’t pay it, they can only claim consequential losses of £4… most companies say you owe £50-150…………… this is utter rubbish. They can only claim the lost earning.

7) If you stay in a car park for too long, i.e. service station, take a motorway (you have seen the signs, take a break don’t drive tired) well if your knackered and fall asleep for too long and overstay their free time, you cannot be of sound mind and body to held liable to any contract because you were too tired! + they would have to give you the t&c’s on the motorway before you exit the motorway so you have pre-sight.

8) They have to prove you were the driver, the owner / keeper of the vehicle cannot be liable, this is their burden and for them to prove

9) They have to prove you were the driver and did park for the entire duration, if its 2 hours free and they say you stopped for 3 hours, they need to prove your car did not move then come back, i.e park for 1 hours come back after and hour and park again!

10) They must prove that you did park the vehicle, most CCTV footage is rubbish and wont identify any driver, however Most Parking Companies delete CCTV and Photos after 21 days.

My last bit of advice, Your own Terms & Conditions!! They are as legal as theirs!

Send them your own terms & conditions for contact, basically say to them any correspondence from them will be chargeable at £150 each letter or email for admin costs, any visits to your house charged at £200 per visit, at the end of the day it is your private address so your terms are as valid as theirs and we all know that means not at all in a court of law!

If you dont want to have fun, just ignore them. Im my case against CP Plus who work for moto Services I had them done by the information commissioner and by companies house, they work illegally and work on fear, they also work on the basis of never going to court and just hope 1 in 10 pay up the daft fee. this site is great, it has lawyers on there who are trying to get these companies regulated and stop them from ripping the majority of innocent motorists off

http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showforum=30

have fun!

Talkemada - Member
That's not actually a bad idea, you know. Is it an offence to cover your rear numberplate in a private car park? Would certainly scupper these money-grabbing shysters.

Regulations are fair enough, to prevent people from using a car park unreasonably, but £90 is out of order. It's about time there was legislation to restrict the amount these companies are allowed to charge.

If the car park has markings, such as bays or give ways, then even if it is private land road laws still apply, so you need insurance, MOT, driving licence, number plates etc. Got told this a few years ago when my wifes car was hit in a car park, and the other guy drove off (sadly whilst wifeys car was unattended). Cops told us if we could get other vehicle details then the other guy had failed to stop, and they'd take action. Sadly "all" the CCTV cameras in that particular car park happened to be pointing in the other direction.

Well hora if he was in Tescos as a customer then of course he should never have paid it and should have made a claim for harassment. His indignation is fully justified and I trust that he has written to Tescos to let them know that he has transferred his business elsewhere.

I'm not advocating ever paying these "fines" what I'm pointing out is the laughable indignation of those who are caught. Where have I seen this before, ah yes, that was it, it was those MP's exercising their rights to expenses.

Guess what, were all the same, we all want something for nothing.

Nobody (well, not many people anyway) objects to paying for car parking, or for a 'tap on the shoulder' fine if you are absent minded enough to forget. The issue here is the disproportionate, blatant rip-off level of the charge.

To be fair I park in Manchester every day and witnessed an argument between a private parking attendant and his boss. Basically the guy was refusing to ticket cars on the quays because the ticket machine had been faulty for months and only worked intermittently. The call centre number only worked after 8am but the car park opens at 7am so the boss was trying to ticket everyone who didnt have a ticket or a ref number written in the window. The lad stood his ground and refused to issue tickets because it was 'wrong' dont know if he still has a job though. 😯

Spankmonkey: don't take this the wrong way but your post is exactly the sort of unhelpful cut & paste guff that you find on bulletin boards.

Not quite correct, a contract needs to be balanced and agreed by both parties, you cannot agree to a contract when a. you have to be already on their land to read said contract, even then you have not agreed to it, as it is unbalanced! just a few of my points on where they fail

There is no requirement for a contract to be "balanced": the court won't interfere with a bargain made under normal circumstances by normal people.

You accept the terms and conditions offered by the company by remaining parked in the car park. Contract formation in car parks has been done to death a million times - Shoe Lane Parking is the classic case on this. There are requirements for the display of the terms i.e. so they're reasonably obvious, but that depends on the facts on the day.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thornton_v_Shoe_Lane_Parking_Ltd

1) Sections 82 to 84 of the Companies Act 2006, if a PCN or any correspondence from a Private Parking company does not have their registered address and Co Number they are in Breech, most use a PO Box so they are illegal.

If you read the letter posted, the registered address is printed in the bottom left hand corner.

2) Data Protection Act, most Private parking companies are registered to process information for the prevention of Crime, parking is a Civil matter so they are breaking the DPA by processing your information.(I mean to process an invoice / bill) getting your address is not illegal sending an invoice is as they are not registered to use information in this way!

This doesn't represent the DPA accurately, and in any case Athena is registered for purposes 1 to 9.
http://www.ico.gov.uk/ESDWebPages/DoSearch.asp?reg=4443410

3) Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977 & Statutory Instrument 1999 No. 2083. Basically as you have not had pre-sight of their T&C’s or had any influence their terms are biast and unfair, you are already in the car park before you can read them. Their T&Cs wont hold any substance.

As above.

4) The Civil Enforcement of Parking Contraventions (England) Representations and Appeals Regulations 2007 si 2007 No 3482. A PCn must include details to appeal to an adjudicator, most will only give their own address, they are not adjudicators and as such they do not comply with the regulations

A PCN (as discussed in those Regulations) is a Penalty Charge Notice (issued by/on behalf of local government) which takes its force from statute; the letter is a Parking Charge Notice (issued by a private party) that takes it force from contract law.
http://www.opsi.gov.uk/si/si2007/uksi_20073482_en_1

I can't be bothered to go through the rest, but 95% of what you've said is barrack lawyering that's based on deliberate or inept misunderstanding of the real position.

When parking and land use are such big and basic industries, and the world is knee-deep in lawyers, does anyone really think that it's so difficult to set up a legal regime to stop people parking on your land for longer than you let them? The legal mechanisms are all in place - the only real question is whether the supermarket company can be bothered pursuing it to the courts or whether they just say "sod it" and make off with the money that people send after the first 2-3 letters. My feeling is that it's the latter - but the only people that really know are the parking management companies themselves, because they are the only ones who know how many demands they make and how many lawsuits they file.

Registered address thing above: bugger - bottom right hand corner, not left hand corner, obviously. I'm not wearing my wellies so I can't remember L&R, apparently...

They rarely ever get to court as the only way they can successfully win a case is if they can prove you parked the car. That requires evidence that they very rarely get. No proof that it was you who parked the car (registered owner is not proof) no case. Simples.

I can't find it in the English legislation (it's probably in the Supreme Court Act or civil procedure rules or somewhere), but you can get the court to make an order against the owner for preliminary discovery to establish the identity of the driver. As to whether anyone actually bothers doing this, I have no idea, but the legal mechanism is certainly there.

Also: damages wouldn't necessarily be limited to the 3 quid (or whatever) parking, esp if they've already been agreed in the contract as liquidated damages of 100 quid or whatever. The loss covered isn't limited to the parking cost but also the e.g. profit lost by the 5 people who showed up and couldn't park, so didn't shop at the supermarket. And the whole point of having liquidated damages is that both parties agree in advance what a breach is going to cost so you don't have to go about proving it every time.

Well hora if he was in Tescos as a customer then of course he should never have paid it and should have made a claim for harassment. His indignation is fully justified and I trust that he has written to Tescos to let them know that he has transferred his business elsewhere.

They didnt reply to him. He worried like crazy and decided to pay up.
I've never been a fan of Tescos and although this isn't directly their fault (third party acting on)- I still wouldnt go near the donkey-raping bumholes.

My Mrs has got a ticket from Parkforce (or Wilsea Services) as they are known. I am contesting it on 2 basic points.

1) Wifeys car but she genuinely wasn't driving it. (Its insured for 3 named drivers and a further 5 have access to it under cover of their own insurance
2) The ticket is titled Penalty Charge Notice, which is in breach of their own trade associations rules.

I would have paid the ticket grudgingly, however the fact that they are passing their bumpf off as a legally enforcable parking ticket, (which it isn't, it is an invoice) is quite simply wrong. The whole principle is based on contract law and basically works on the basis of the 3 main parts of a contract. Offer Acceptance and Consideration. By token of that fact their invoice is to the driver who is the person who has accepted their offer of parking at £XXXX. My wife who most definately wasn't driving isn't therefore liable to pay, but the driver is. I don't beleive there is any legal requirement for an owner to pass on details of who was driving their vehilce at nay given time. There is however a criminal law equivalent. These people use that to threaten and intimidate people into paying or "fessing up". In my book that is in itself illegal, and is I believe demanding money with menaces.

Berm..

Yes indeed., If they use the word penalty and not 'Parking' then that's a good case to have a go at them. Just remember to not give away any clue or details as to who actually parked the car.

and..

I can't find it in the English legislation (it's probably in the Supreme Court Act or civil procedure rules or somewhere), but you can get the court to make an order against the owner for preliminary discovery to establish the identity of the driver.

That's true only for parking offences that come under local authority control as they have (as has been stated above) legal powers to enforce tickets. But private companies operate under contract law and there is no power under civil contract law that can force you to disclose the identity of the person who parked the vehicle. Contract law is strictly a case of the company having to prove their case. You, however, do not.

I love these threads where we all talk as if we are lawyers 🙂 Do you think there's a solicitors forum somewhere full of discussion about the benefits of XTR over XT rear mechs?
🙂

Incidentally, I would just add that we don't actually know who was driving the vehicle beyond the fact it might have been my son, daughter or their respective partners. All of whom have permission to do so. We found the ticket in the boot.

Ha ha, we got one of these last year (car reg'd to mrs tyred but she wasn't driving) and I sought advice here as well - good to see the same moral indignation going on! 🙂

We wrote two short letters - one to the ticket issuer to state clearly that the registered keeper did not park the car, and once to the 'debt collection agency' to state that the 'debt' was in dispute. No more correspondence after that. Mrs tyred is of a nervous disposition about things like this, so didn't want to just blank it completely.

Think we got something like eight letters from the issuer, the 'debt collectors' and a so-called firm of solicitors, each one more "no, we really mean it this time, we really really do" than the last.

Mrs tyred got the fright of her life several months later when a jury duty letter arrived for her - the OHMS stamp on the envelope had her convinced she was off to jail. So funny.

I think the upshot of it all is that, by the letter of the law, they could take you to court over it but it wouldn't be worth their while. As others have said, they rely on a percentage of people getting scared by the quasi-official appearance and language used in the ticket and subsequent correspondence and paying what is essentially an unsolicited invoice.

konabunny - Member
Spankmonkey: don't take this the wrong way but your post is exactly the sort of unhelpful cut & paste guff that you find on bulletin boards.

After my defence against the company in question companies house upheld my complaint and did them for using a PO box address and not disclosing their full registered address, they got done also for using the phrase "penalty charge notice" as they are not legal able to issue a charge (only the council / police can). Also the ICO confirmed they did not have a legal right to send me a bill as they were registered for "Crime Prevention and Prosecution of Offenders". Parking is a civil matter, it is not a crime when it comes to private parking. Doing me for a civil matter was against their registered use, and most private parking companies are in the same boat and are registered the same! issuing you an invoice for a civil matter is not within most of their registered terms. So the ICo did them as well, not bad 3 epic fails that 95% of private parking companies do on a daily basis, problem is no body ever questions or fights back!

I will leave this as this, how many private parking instances ever go to court? 0.01% or perhaps 1, I have spoken to a few solicitors about this and none of them could think of a case that was won by a private parking company. If however you want to pay the scam these lot try, well thats up to you!

I always pay my dues and pay for parking, if however I slip up and overstay, i would be ok with paying the original charge £2-3 or whatever, however I will never pay a joke of £120 or whatever, its bordering on sick. that said any car park which is free for 2-3 hours technically made no loss at all, in my case the car park was empty so they lost nothing! had I left the next car would have parked for free... see?!?!

Proofs in the pudding, little old me vs one of the largest national parking companies. Them done on 3 counts.

im off to tesco now, whats their cctv like 🙂

Mark - I'm not exactly sure I am looking in the right place for this one, as I was not sure where to start in English law, but the power I (thought I) am talking about is not specific to parking tickets or criminal law, but a generic common law power.

It looks like it's called "third party discovery" in English law. I think the (a?) guiding case is Norwich Pharmacal Company & Ors v Customs And Excise [1973] UKHL 6 [url= http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKHL/1973/6.html ]linky on Bailii[/url].

Discovery as a remedy in equity has a very long history. The chief occasion for its being ordered was to assist a party in an existing litigation. But this was extended at an early date to assist a person who contemplated litigation against the person from whom discovery was sought, if for various reasons it was just and necessary that he should have discovery at that stage. Such discovery might disclose the identity of others who might be joined as defendants with the person from whom discovery was sought. Indeed in some cases it would seem that the main object in seeking discovery was to find the identity of possible other defendants. It is not clear to me whether in all these cases the plaintiff had to undertake in some way to proceed against the person from whom he sought discovery if he found on discovery being ordered that it would suit him better to drop his complaint against that person and concentrate on his cause of action against those whose identity was disclosed by the discovery.

But that was '73, so maybe it's been codified or changed or something since then, so who knows? (Well, I am sure someone knows, but t'ain't me).

Spank: great that you got them to get lost - but with all due respect, most of what you said initially was either wrong or irrelevant to the OP's situation. The problem with legal advice on BBs (including what I am saying right here!) is that it gets garbled, misinterpreted, or misunderstood.

I can definitely believe that plenty of parking companies don't follow the law with consequences that are fatal to their claim and agree with you that the crucial factor is probably whether the parking companies can ever be bothered to go the whole distance. But this is very different from the whole "ohhh, it's all a scam, all illegal, none of it has any force" line that gets trotted out.

Also, "I have spoken to a few solicitors about this and none of them could think of a case that was won by a private parking company" is useful to some extent but not others. IIRC (and I am more than willing to be corrected by someone who knows) litigation indices in England and Wales are not a matter of public record, so one can't e.g. search how many suits company X filed last year and how many (if any) were won. And equally 90%+ of all litigation is settled out of court. And of course they probably can't be bothered going the whole way for the sake of 100 quid or whatever anyway - all of which means counting won or lost cases isn't a totally useful guide.

None of that is to say necessarily that the best thing to do is pay up...as numerous people's experiences here have shown.

Nice to see my thread is still going. 🙂

UPDATE:
We're still ignoring it.

Who on this thread actually IS a lawyer?

I've had carnal knowledge of one, does that count?

Who on this thread actually IS a lawyer?