Excel/VCS lose in Court (+ Tribunal)

[Walkley Dave 10]

Information on other forums suggests that Flint Bishop might not be doing as well financially as they would like, thus they are taking this on.

 

I think the first time they take someone to court and lose they are likely to see what grubby little business they have got themselves involved in. Alternatively it may just be another Threat-O-Gram.

[MC1970 10]

The best advice you can get is to ignore and then to ignore everything except properly stamped court papers. You are likely to get those delivered by Lord Lucan riding Shergar.

 

Newlyn act both as debt collectors (toothless with no more powers than you and I) and Court Bailiffs. Anecdotally it is believed they sometimes confuse the two issues.

 

Court Bailiffs only knock on doors after you have been taken to court, the court finds against you, you fail to pay the fine and the court appoints bailiffs. So don't confuse them with debt collectors (even though Newlyn might).

 

The Parking Charge Notice is clearly a fine. Private companies cannot issue fines.

 

Any telephone callers (might happen) or door knockers (much less likely but remotely possible) should be told to refer the matter back to their client and that should they then continue to press you they are harassing you. Then put the telephone down or shut the door.

 

So IF it was to go as far as court would I just pay what was owed or do you argue it out ? Even though I was parked without displaying a permit in a permit only parking bay .... what would my defence be ? Just wondering so I can prepare myself

[Eckolad 10]

So IF it was to go as far as court would I just pay what was owed or do you argue it out ? Even though I was parked without displaying a permit in a permit only parking bay .... what would my defence be ? Just wondering so I can prepare myself

 

You are worrying over nothing.

 

It won't happen.

[Walkley Dave 10]

Indeed - what he said.

[Walkley Dave 10]

Alternatively you could fairly easily put a letter together from some of the posts in this forum and complain to the Solicitor's Regulatory Authority.

 

The relevant bit is section 11.8.

 

http://www.sra.org.uk/solicitors/handbook/code/part5/content.page

[Penistone999 10]

Comedy story for you all.

 

I brought a claim against Newlyn for illegally clamping my client's car (and causing her injury as a result - long story that I can't go into for confidentiality reasons.). The entire case, after they decided to contest it to trial has cost them well over £20k.

 

I took great pleasure in it I can tell you.

 

Fantastic....... Good on you.

[Penistone999 10]

So IF it was to go as far as court would I just pay what was owed or do you argue it out ? Even though I was parked without displaying a permit in a permit only parking bay .... what would my defence be ? Just wondering so I can prepare myself

 

It will NEVER go to court. The clampers will threaten to take you to court in order to scare you into paying up, but its all hot air and bluster . Just ignore then . The invoices are worthless. Just another form of begging letter.

[Moosey 10]

So IF it was to go as far as court would I just pay what was owed or do you argue it out ? Even though I was parked without displaying a permit in a permit only parking bay .... what would my defence be ? Just wondering so I can prepare myself

 

Hokay...time for another boring law lecture from me.

 

Two methods that parking companies can try to enforce these invoices - breach of contract and trespass.

 

Firstly, breach of contract - this is often missed as a defence, but there is no valid contract to breach. A contract requires agreement (offer and acceptance), consideration, and an intention to create legal relations.

 

Offer and acceptance, they could argue by conduct - fair enough. Intent to create legal relations, again, they could argue.

 

The problem they'll face in this, and all free car park cases, is consideration. Each party to a contract must provide, or be expected to provide, some consideration which is of some value. By consideration, we generally mean money. So, if I contract with you to repair my drive, my consideration is that I will pay, yours is the services in repairing. Both have value.

 

Where is the consideration in a free car park? They provide a service, yes. What do you provide. It's a free car park, so nothing. My understanding of this situation is that it's a free car park, so what consideration have any of the users to give?

 

No consideration - no valid contract.

 

Trespass - civil tort, the remedy for which is damages. The point of damages - to put the person wronged in the situation they were in pre-tort, and to compensate for any loss. No one has to pay for this car park, it's not a shop (there are further arguments there), and no one gains, so what's the loss? Nothing. Therefore, no damages.

 

There are loads more arguments, but those are the main two you would need in any defence, not that they'd issue proceedings of course.

 

Interestingly, someone with the username Excel Parking PM'd me on here asking me to stop advising people about the law, and telling me I was wrong. I pointed out my 15 years as a lawyer, and they didn't respond. Shame really. Wish I'd kept that message.

[Jeffrey Shaw 90]

A good analysis, Moosey; I agree.

[Eckolad 10]

Moosey lucky you for getting their attention!!

 

Obviously didn't like people getting told the truth....

[Penistone999 10]

.

 

Interestingly, someone with the username Excel Parking PM'd me on here asking me to stop advising people about the law, and telling me I was wrong. I pointed out my 15 years as a lawyer, and they didn't respond. Shame really. Wish I'd kept that message.

 

But hardly surprising though ,seeing as their invoices are basically begging letters.

[MC1970 10]

Thanks for all your advice Guys I will front it out then and resist my temptation to park there everyday if this is the case :hihi: