Private parking charges - Supreme Court decision changes the law

[chaseracer]

I'd say no, because the legal position has only just been established.  But IANALSWTFWIK... 

[Guest Breadvan72]

The limitation period is six years from the date of the breach of contract.   Whether the companies will pursue old cases I have no idea.

[Guest Breadvan72]

I'd say no, because the legal position has only just been established.  But IANALSWTFWIK... 

 

 

The common law does not work like that.  The Court has explained what the doctrine of penalty means.  That doctrine as now explained can be applied to any case begun within the limitation period.  This is not like a statute, which does not have retrospective effect (unless that is expressly provided for). 

[Guest Breadvan72]

If the parking companies bother you, there is an easy way to avoid having to deal with them.  

[chaseracer]

The common law does not work like that.  The Court has explained what the doctrine of penalty means.  That doctrine as now explained can be applied to any case begun within the limitation period.  This is not like a statute, which does not have retrospective effect (unless that is expressly provided for). 

 

Thanks, Gerard.  That's what I meant to say...   

[Guest Breadvan72]

There is a world of difference between legal and moral

 

 

This trite observation is for the most part BS, but it's easy for people to trot it out in the time honoured pub expert manner.  The reality is that most of the legal rules of a developed society tend to track fairly closely to that society's ideas about moral behaviour.  NB I said most, not all.

[Taff]

Had three, paid none. Challenged two on reasonable grounds without a POPLA appeal and was let off. Ignored the third. They're welcome to come and argue the toss with me in person - although my landlord will need a new front door by the time I'm finished. £95 for a two minute over stay is ludicrous; the BPA make up rules for lip service and then ignore them (see also: insurance ombudsman). I struggle to take milquetoast organisations posing as 'moderators' seriously.

 

As a result, I tend to avoid PPC-controlled car parks like the plague.

 

Ive had two, one in McDs (appealed and found in my favour) and one recently in an Asda near work. The new signs appeared stating 3 hours max but no mention of a "no return before 2 hours" statement. So I was parked for an hour, left came back two hours later and stayed an hour or so before leaving. Total time parked, under the allotted three hours but over two visits (I'll add here, I wasn't shopping, I was seeing a customer). However, the bloke with the machine spotted my car being parked there at 10am and again at 3pm, assumed I has been there all day and issued the invoice. A polite letter asking them to check their ANPR go that once canned

 

Being that my details are freely available to them via a numberplate that can be misread, incorrectly input or cloned - suicide?

 

False number plates are your friend. Or move house and don't tell Doovla.

[dugong]

This trite observation is for the most part BS, but it's easy for people to trot it out in the time honoured pub expert manner.  The reality is that most of the legal rules of a developed society tend to track fairly closely to that society's ideas about moral behaviour.  NB I said most, not all.

If I trot out the 'lawful trumps legal' missive, can I get a do-over?

[Guest Breadvan72]

You can get a slap in the fizzer with a ten day old haddock if you like.

 

 

PHACKTOID:  There is no difference between lawful and legal.  There is difference between unlawful and illegal.  FOTL wibblists, take note!  We did have one of those here once, ISTR, but I think he went away.  

[wuvvum]

This trite observation is for the most part BS, but it's easy for people to trot it out in the time honoured pub expert manner.  The reality is that most of the legal rules of a developed society tend to track fairly closely to that society's ideas about moral behaviour.  NB I said most, not all.

I reckon it happens quite a bit.  Especially since society's morals currently seem to be evolving a great deal faster than the law (or statutes at least).  Lord Denning, God rest him, made a bit of a name for himself through bending the letter of the law to fit what he felt was morally right.

[Guest Breadvan72]

Sometimes the law leads, rather than follows, as it did with race and sex and disability and sexual orientation discrimination*. Society needed a bit of a nudge to stop behaving in a cunty fashion. Usually, society leads and the law follows.  Denning was capricious and socially conservative, and had his favourites and those he didn't like.  He was way too down on trade unions, didn't take equality law seriously, but was ahead of his time on contract law.

 

 

 * Religious discrimination law is arguably a step backwards, and in any event is intellectually dishonest as it was really introduced to stop people being mean to assorted brown people who are not an ethnic group but who are the object of hatred from the Mail and its followers.  Yes, those dudes.    Better just to say "for this purpose we are going to pretend that being Muslim is the same as being brown, so boggo race discrim rules apply.  Now shut up".  On the other side of the argument, and the channel, the French pretended to ban crucifixes and Stars of David but we all know that they were really aiming at bits of cloth on some people's heads, and we know which people.  Age discrimination law?  That one is complicated, and arguably Canute like. 

[Skizzer]

Denning was capricious and socially conservative..., but was ahead of his time on contract law.

 

Indeed, not least with regard to car parks.  We have Lord Denning to thank for the fact that car parks now have to display their terms and conditions where you can read them before you park rather than after (or rather, before you take a ticket from the machine) - here he is in Thornton v Shoe Lane Parking:

 

"The customer pays his money and gets a ticket [with the terms printed on the back]. He cannot refuse it. He cannot get his money back. He may protest to the machine, even swear at it. But it will remain unmoved. He is committed beyond recall. He was committed at the very moment when he put his money into the machine... The customer is bound by those terms as long as they are sufficiently brought to his notice before-hand, but not otherwise."

 

This was in 1970.  There's nothing new about people grumbling at car park operators.

[dugong]

I wouldn't worry about it, we've previously established that PPCs are reasonable and even-handed so it's not like they'll all immediately be printing absolutely thousands of mail merge letters for cases they closed years ago in order that they can basically ask for some free money. These are beloved national brands who trade on their fantastic reputation, not a captive market who are unable to control who owns often the only place you can feasibly - and legally - park.

 

I'm not putting a sarcasm tag on that, figure it out yourself.

Aside from the massive DPA breach that Hirst outlined (chancers with rented PO boxes = legitimate business), I ain't buying the 'wounded and starving landlords' angle. 99% of the BPA's raison d'etre is money. I begrudge the manner in how it makes its green, Supreme Court ruling or no.

 

Cars are going to get forced out of most city centres in the next five years anyway, so we might as well get used to it.

[fatharris]

Serious question for the Breadmeister, will this mean potentially mean Parking Eye etc can now go back to the penalties that were binned in previous years and have a big cash collection bonanza for Christmas ?

 

Very possibly, as I received a letter today from a ticket I received back in Sept '14, informing that my debt has been sold on to another collection company.

 

Now my arse is twitching slightly, as a CCJ doesn't look good during a mortgage application, but £150 to these shit-peddling twats is also a nasty taste to leave in the mouth.

[Guest Breadvan72]

Parking Eye makes a profit of about seven per cent.  It's hardly Al Capone.   Don't want to be treated like a cunt?  Don 't behave like a cunt.  It's not hard!. 

[Junkman]

Parking Eye makes a profit of about seven per cent.  It's hardly Al Capone.

 

I wonder how you know Al Capone's profit margins.

Considering your looks and love for Italian chod, I probably don't want to know.

[Matt]

My mother got a letter today regarding a ticket she got some time ago too.

[Guest Breadvan72]

I'm not up to speed with the stunning business logic under which a company trading at a profit and not facing insolvency or Rover styleee shenanigans ceases trading and lays off its workforce.

 

As an alternative to a profitable company with no reason to shut up shop shutting up shop, people could stop being twats and then there wouldn't be a shop.

[dugong]

Parking Eye makes a profit of about seven per cent.  It's hardly Al Capone.   Don't want to be treated like a cunt?  Don 't behave like a cunt.  It's not hard!.

Them first.

[Guest Breadvan72]

If it's to be a cunt-off, the problem is that Cunt Ltd has the edge over Mr Cunt.  Sorry, that's just how it is. 

[dugong]

Well, being profitable and operating under current laws is automatically a benefit to society, I'm sure there's absolutely no historical examples whatsoever that can be cited to argue against that.

 

How wrong I was for viewing the case of parking offences as something that comes in many shades of grey, when it's really all black and white.

Wonder how much money the DVLA get to keep from selling details off to these shitehawks? It must be raking it in after closing all those regional offices.

[Guest Breadvan72]

If you live on Planet Tinfoil, then everything is tinfoil.

[dugong]

I'm blind. Reflections.

[Lacquer Peel]

Companies and government organisations never lie*.

[Guest Breadvan72]

I wonder what people who think that this is a big deal would do if something actually important happened?  The world is full of tyranny and injustice, but people get exercised about a company trying to get some cash off

(a) a bunch of people who are too stupid to read a sign,
another bunch of people who see the sign but say fuck that, I am entitled, and  
c ) a few people who are little old grannies or plumb unlucky because kidnapped by space aliens for just long enough to miss the deadline.

 

ZOMG Magna Carta ZOMG human rights ZOMG worse than bankers snorting coke off Hitler's bum crack while setting fire to puppies.

[dugong]

The small battles first.

[Inspector Morose]

While the large injustices go largely ignored.

[Guest Breadvan72]

Pastor Niemoller says

 

"First they came for the selfish cunt parkers, and I said nothing, because I was not a selfish cunt parker ....

 

(And then I thought, fuck them, they are selfish cunts.  Like I could give a shit if some selfish cunt company grabs all their cash.  Is Strictly on yet?)

[Junkman]

Well, if it is legal what those parking fine fascists are doing, I'm all for the combinded surround-company-headquarters/Molotov-cocktail method.

When are we going?

[Skizzer]

When are we going?

 

And where are we going to park?