If you read the HUb I linked in my first post, then you would understand the difference between Council & private car parks.
As a Council will not only own the car park, but also employ the CEO, then they have the power to issue an enforceable PCN.
If the Council were to sub-out the car park patrols to a PPC, then they would find that they would not win if they went to Court as both Judges in the 'VCS Ltd v. HMRC' case held in the Upper Tier Tax Tribunal stated that "No company or individual may act on behalf of the land owner to form a contract with 3rd party for use of that land".
Southend Unitary Authority found this out when they hired APCOA to run a camera car around the area photographing illegally-parked vehicles. They collected many fines until one motorist went to Court & the Judge stated the Council could not use evidence provided by a 3rd party in the process of issuing PCNs. Southend ended-up having to pay back every fine it had received payment for.
If you park on a private car park, then the same rules apply. If the managing agent (PPC) & the land owner are one & the same, then any Court case would be successful, but if the PPC were another unconnected company, any Court case would fail. The only exception to the rule being disabled parking bays & mother/toddler bays which have no legal existence in private parking.
Mind you, this doesn't stop the scum from trying their luck in Court. One comapany tried unsuccessfully to do a driver, so went after her husband for the same ticket. They failed again, however, the couple succeeded in their claim against the PPC and won just under £2k.
That's all well and good, but then that doesn't stop the 'scum' parking how they want because they know they can get away with it without even thinking about anyone else. And that's the real problem here, the land owner and the customers are the real ones losing out. Many times I've seen people parking in the local supermarket car park and then wandering off to the local leasure center.
That's all well and good, but then that doesn't stop the 'scum' parking how they want because they know they can get away with it without even thinking about anyone else. And that's the real problem here, the land owner and the customers are the real ones losing out. Many times I've seen people parking in the local supermarket car park and then wandering off to the local leasure center.
'Thats all very well and good!'
The call of someone with no credible arguement!
People who don't pay private PCCs are 'scum'...really, you have lived a sheltered life haven't you!
:D:D:D
I have concluded Mythica that you are on the wind up and shall treat your post as such from now on!!
People who don't pay private PCCs are 'scum'...really, you have lived a sheltered life haven't you!
:D:D:D
I have concluded Mythica that you are on the wind up and shall treat your post as such from now on!!
I'm sorry you want to laugh at one of my vaild arguments of idiots parking how they want just because the invoices have no legal standing. Clearly the land owners have a problem with people parking on their land so it is a valid argument.
I'm sorry you want to laugh at one of my vaild arguments of idiots parking how they want just because the invoices have no legal standing. Clearly the land owners have a problem with people parking on their land so it is a valid argument.
Unfortunately thats only your opinion based on what you believe it should be like and is, frankly, a minority opinion regardless of how 'loud' you try and shout on here! 'In your eyes' or simply stomping your feet claiming that your arguement is valid carries zero weight here!
Unfortunately thats only your opinion based on what you believe it should be like and is, frankly, a minority opinion regardless of how 'loud' you try and shout on here! 'In your eyes' or simply stomping your feet claiming that your arguement is valid carries zero weight here!
Of course it's my opinion, I said it, it's not going to be yours is it.
It's also kind of a fact too, if it wasn't fact, then land owners wouldn't need to try and 'protect' their land.
I'll think you find the majority of people who think people using car parks how they like and not using the facilties the land owner provides are idiots and are the ones spoiling it for everyone else.
Of course it's my opinion, I said it, it's not going to be yours is it.
It's also kind of a fact too, if it wasn't fact, then land owners would need to try and 'protect' their land.
I'll think you find the majority of people who think people using car parks how they like and not using the facilties the land owner provides are idiots and are the ones spoiling it for everyone else.
Thank you for your reply:) but when you are visiting an elderly relative who is very ill and probably wont be coming home from hospital or if they do they will require 24 hour care and you come back to your car 3 mins late as they bacme very upset and distressed when visiting time has ended and want one more cuddle and some lovely gentleman is waiting for you in his little Hi Vis jacket to issue you with a non enforceable fine, it does kind of get your back up.
but your opinion is valued and respected, thank you xxx
So when someone is ill you can go over the limit on parking times. :cool:
Funny when my mum was ill in hospital she was worth paying for an extra hour or two still not everyone is. :cool:
So when someone is ill you can go over the limit on parking times. :cool:
Funny when my mum was ill in hospital she was worth paying for an extra hour or two still not everyone is. :cool:
It would be great if we all had your 20/20 hindsight. I'm sure the OP would not have objected to paying an extra couple of quid for the next hour upon his/her return to their vehicle. What they shouldn't be receiving is a demand for £60 to £100 from the hospital / private parking company that bears no relationship to the loss incurred.
Maybe if you read it properly instead of trying to belittle my argument?
I think I've read and understood your posts perfectly!
I'm not trying to belittle your arguement, I'm saying you don't have an arguement! You argue that the law is wrong and that people who operate within the confines of that law (and use it to their advantage as the PCCs almost certainly would if they thought it would pay off) are 'scum' while contradicting yourself completely by saying people should follow rules. Rules that 'in your eyes' should have more standing than the law!
I'm just calling you on your pov, that isn't belittling anything! If I've still misunderstood anything let me know!
As I said previously, I think you're on the wind up in any case but I'll play along!
I think I've read and understood your posts perfectly!
I'm not trying to belittle your arguement, I'm saying you don't have an arguement! You argue that the law is wrong and that people who operate within the confines of that law (and use it to their advantage as the PCCs almost certainly would if they thought it would pay off) are 'scum' while contradicting yourself completely by saying people should follow rules. Rules that 'in your eyes' should have more standing than the law!
I'm just calling you on your pov, that isn't belittling anything! If I've still misunderstood anything let me know!
As I said previously, I think you're on the wind up in any case but I'll play along!
Quite clearly you haven't. Please go back and reread the post you quoted that you said made no sense. It makes perfect sense. You just never read it properly.
Quite clearly you haven't. Please go back and reread the post you quoted that you said made no sense. It makes perfect sense. You just never read it properly.
It makes perfect sense to you I have no doubt!
No Mythica, I'm not simply pinning my response down to a single post of yours, as well you know! I may have quoted one post (which I have fully understood btw) but my view of your arguement and every response to your comments are based on every comment you have made about the subject!
Bottom line is, your position is to berate and belittle the people who have operated within the law simply because you think the law needs changing while you advocate that everyone should follow a landowners rules and terms and conditions! Its a contradiction!
No Mythica, I'm not simply pinning my response down to a single post of yours, as well you know! I may have quoted one post (which I have fully understood btw) but my view of your arguement and every response to your comments are based on every comment you have made about the subject!
Bottom line is, your position is to berate and belittle the people who have operated within the law simply because you think the law needs changing while you advocate that everyone should follow a landowners rules and terms and conditions! Its a contradiction!
No you quoted me and pulled me up on a sentance that you thought didn't make sense, maybe you were thinking to much. The sentance makes perfect sense. People who park how they want and don't use the facilities the land owner is providing are spoiling it for everyone else. You can take in the whole argument if you want, but that sentance was written for a reason, the reason being that they are ruining it for everyone else.
... People who park how they want and don't use the facilities the land owner is providing are spoiling it for everyone else. ...
If the above was the only reason PPC tickets were issued, that might be a valid argument.
However, the PPC business model doesn't work like that. What actually happens, is that the PPC approaches the landowner, and says "we can sort out your parking problems, and it won't cost you a penny". In some cases, they even give a kickback of, say, £10 per paid ticket to the landowner.
So the landowner can wash his hands of it, and leave it all to the PPC. But now the PPC has spent money putting up signs, cameras, and maybe paying the wages of an attendant. So the only way they are are going to recoup that, and show a profit, is to issue as many tickets as possible, and that's exactly what they do. The majority of those tickets are given to genuine customers, who have perhaps overstayed while spending money in the shops, or parked slightly over the line, or not displayed their blue badge properly. The result, in many cases, is a flood of complaints to the retailers, and in some instances the end result is that the PPC gets kicked off the site (e.g. Parking Eye v Somerfield, Court of Appeal).
A similar situation occurs in blocks of flats, where for every ticket issued to a random intruder, there are twice that many issued to residents and their visitors.
I did a Freedom of Information request last year, to find the actual numbers for court claims. Out of approx 1.8 million private tickets issued, around 550,000 went unpaid. These resulted in just 845 court claims, of which only 49 proceeded to a contested hearing. The parking companies won 24 of these, the motorists successfully defended 25.
With the POFA coming in last October, we are starting to see more court claims being issued now that the PPCs no longer have to identify the driver, but in most cases those are seen off with a decent defence.
If the above was the only reason PPC tickets were issued, that might be a valid argument.
However, the PPC business model doesn't work like that. What actually happens, is that the PPC approaches the landowner, and says "we can sort out your parking problems, and it won't cost you a penny". In some cases, they even give a kickback of, say, £10 per paid ticket to the landowner.
So the landowner can wash his hands of it, and leave it all to the PPC. But now the PPC has spent money putting up signs, cameras, and maybe paying the wages of an attendant. So the only way they are are going to recoup that, and show a profit, is to issue as many tickets as possible, and that's exactly what they do. The majority of those tickets are given to genuine customers, who have perhaps overstayed while spending money in the shops, or parked slightly over the line, or not displayed their blue badge properly. The result, in many cases, is a flood of complaints to the retailers, and in some instances the end result is that the PPC gets kicked off the site (e.g. Parking Eye v Somerfield, Court of Appeal).
A similar situation occurs in blocks of flats, where for every ticket issued to a random intruder, there are twice that many issued to residents and their visitors.
I did a Freedom of Information request last year, to find the actual numbers for court claims. Out of approx 1.8 million private tickets issued, around 550,000 went unpaid. These resulted in just 845 court claims, of which only 49 proceeded to a contested hearing. The parking companies won 24 of these, the motorists successfully defended 25.
With the POFA coming in last October, we are starting to see more court claims being issued now that the PPCs no longer have to identify the driver, but in most cases those are seen off with a decent defence.
And that's exactly my point. The people who are parking willy nilly and wandering off else were are the ones spoiling it for the rest of the people who have overstayed for 3 minutes.
No you quoted me and pulled me up on a sentance that you thought didn't make sense, maybe you were thinking to much. The sentance makes perfect sense. People who park how they want and don't use the facilities the land owner is providing are spoiling it for everyone else. You can take in the whole argument if you want, but that sentance was written for a reason, the reason being that they are ruining it for everyone else.
I think I'm the best judge of what I meant or what I was responding to don't you?
The sentence may make grammatical sense, but makes not logical, legal or common sense! No one spoils anything for anyone if they decide not to pay a PCCs parking charge. There is no arguement other than your own opinion on how you think the world should be run!
The fact that you think people who decide to stand up to these PCCs are 'scum' speaks absolute volumes about you along with your ridiculous notion that the law is wrong but PCC rules and regs are right!
And that's exactly my point. The people who are parking willy nilly and wandering off else were are the ones spoiling it for the rest of the people who have overstayed for 3 minutes.
There you go again, what does that even mean and how does it relate to what you have quoted! It may make sense in your perverse little lalaland where you no doubt believe you should be hung drawn and quartered for walking on the cracks in the pavement but in the real world is, which thankfully actually exists, it has no meaning!!
Waht the hell is parking willy nilly?!?!?
By the way, those are rhetorical questions! You will know doubt come back with some bizarre logic that only you get and that I will continue to say 'Huh?' and this will never end so the floor is yours, have a good Easter!
There you go again, what does that even mean and how does it relate to what you have quoted! It may make sense in your perverse little lalaland where you no doubt believe you should be hung drawn and quartered for walking on the cracks in the pavement but in the real world is, which thankfully actually exists, it has no meaning!!
Waht the hell is parking willy nilly?!?!?
By the way, those are rhetorical questions! You will know doubt come back with some bizarre logic that only you get and that I will continue to say 'Huh?' and this will never end so the floor is yours, have a good Easter!
You know exactly what it means and we both know you do.
The shopping centre near me recently did a car parkinjg survey, to see what car parks are the busiest
So at the moment, your are allowed to park in the car park for 4 hours, any more than 4 hr, and you get a £60 fine, all right you dont need to pay the fine, but the t&c state, your on a private car park, and can only stay for 4 hrs
Sno now the shopping centre owners ar elooking at put up barriers, and you will have to pay to park, but only in certain sections, there even area where you can park for as long as you want, no fines issues
You wouldnt get fined if, you only parked for the time allowed
Merely stated fact sometimes truth annoys and clearly I was right. :cool:
Just pay correct fee simple if you see time getting close nip out and pay for extra time simple. :cool:
Nice, I'm glad you feel so happy with yourself for your nasty little comment.
Ill make sure to put plenty on the meter this weekend when we go and collect her belongings wouldn't want to put let less value on her life than you do on your mums.
Comments
That's all well and good, but then that doesn't stop the 'scum' parking how they want because they know they can get away with it without even thinking about anyone else. And that's the real problem here, the land owner and the customers are the real ones losing out. Many times I've seen people parking in the local supermarket car park and then wandering off to the local leasure center.
'Thats all very well and good!'
The call of someone with no credible arguement!
People who don't pay private PCCs are 'scum'...really, you have lived a sheltered life haven't you!
I have concluded Mythica that you are on the wind up and shall treat your post as such from now on!!
I'm sorry you want to laugh at one of my vaild arguments of idiots parking how they want just because the invoices have no legal standing. Clearly the land owners have a problem with people parking on their land so it is a valid argument.
Unfortunately thats only your opinion based on what you believe it should be like and is, frankly, a minority opinion regardless of how 'loud' you try and shout on here! 'In your eyes' or simply stomping your feet claiming that your arguement is valid carries zero weight here!
Of course it's my opinion, I said it, it's not going to be yours is it.
It's also kind of a fact too, if it wasn't fact, then land owners wouldn't need to try and 'protect' their land.
I'll think you find the majority of people who think people using car parks how they like and not using the facilties the land owner provides are idiots and are the ones spoiling it for everyone else.
BIB makes no sense!
Why doesn't it?
How do people who refuse pay the extortionate invoices ruin it for everyone else?
Maybe if you read it properly instead of trying to belittle my argument?
So when someone is ill you can go over the limit on parking times. :cool:
Funny when my mum was ill in hospital she was worth paying for an extra hour or two still not everyone is. :cool:
It would be great if we all had your 20/20 hindsight. I'm sure the OP would not have objected to paying an extra couple of quid for the next hour upon his/her return to their vehicle. What they shouldn't be receiving is a demand for £60 to £100 from the hospital / private parking company that bears no relationship to the loss incurred.
They altered visiting times for you, too? Magic!
I think I've read and understood your posts perfectly!
I'm not trying to belittle your arguement, I'm saying you don't have an arguement! You argue that the law is wrong and that people who operate within the confines of that law (and use it to their advantage as the PCCs almost certainly would if they thought it would pay off) are 'scum' while contradicting yourself completely by saying people should follow rules. Rules that 'in your eyes' should have more standing than the law!
I'm just calling you on your pov, that isn't belittling anything! If I've still misunderstood anything let me know!
As I said previously, I think you're on the wind up in any case but I'll play along!
I see what you did there, nice try
Quite clearly you haven't. Please go back and reread the post you quoted that you said made no sense. It makes perfect sense. You just never read it properly.
It makes perfect sense to you I have no doubt!
No Mythica, I'm not simply pinning my response down to a single post of yours, as well you know! I may have quoted one post (which I have fully understood btw) but my view of your arguement and every response to your comments are based on every comment you have made about the subject!
Bottom line is, your position is to berate and belittle the people who have operated within the law simply because you think the law needs changing while you advocate that everyone should follow a landowners rules and terms and conditions! Its a contradiction!
No you quoted me and pulled me up on a sentance that you thought didn't make sense, maybe you were thinking to much. The sentance makes perfect sense. People who park how they want and don't use the facilities the land owner is providing are spoiling it for everyone else. You can take in the whole argument if you want, but that sentance was written for a reason, the reason being that they are ruining it for everyone else.
However, the PPC business model doesn't work like that. What actually happens, is that the PPC approaches the landowner, and says "we can sort out your parking problems, and it won't cost you a penny". In some cases, they even give a kickback of, say, £10 per paid ticket to the landowner.
So the landowner can wash his hands of it, and leave it all to the PPC. But now the PPC has spent money putting up signs, cameras, and maybe paying the wages of an attendant. So the only way they are are going to recoup that, and show a profit, is to issue as many tickets as possible, and that's exactly what they do. The majority of those tickets are given to genuine customers, who have perhaps overstayed while spending money in the shops, or parked slightly over the line, or not displayed their blue badge properly. The result, in many cases, is a flood of complaints to the retailers, and in some instances the end result is that the PPC gets kicked off the site (e.g. Parking Eye v Somerfield, Court of Appeal).
A similar situation occurs in blocks of flats, where for every ticket issued to a random intruder, there are twice that many issued to residents and their visitors.
I did a Freedom of Information request last year, to find the actual numbers for court claims. Out of approx 1.8 million private tickets issued, around 550,000 went unpaid. These resulted in just 845 court claims, of which only 49 proceeded to a contested hearing. The parking companies won 24 of these, the motorists successfully defended 25.
With the POFA coming in last October, we are starting to see more court claims being issued now that the PPCs no longer have to identify the driver, but in most cases those are seen off with a decent defence.
And that's exactly my point. The people who are parking willy nilly and wandering off else were are the ones spoiling it for the rest of the people who have overstayed for 3 minutes.
I think I'm the best judge of what I meant or what I was responding to don't you?
The sentence may make grammatical sense, but makes not logical, legal or common sense! No one spoils anything for anyone if they decide not to pay a PCCs parking charge. There is no arguement other than your own opinion on how you think the world should be run!
The fact that you think people who decide to stand up to these PCCs are 'scum' speaks absolute volumes about you along with your ridiculous notion that the law is wrong but PCC rules and regs are right!
There you go again, what does that even mean and how does it relate to what you have quoted! It may make sense in your perverse little lalaland where you no doubt believe you should be hung drawn and quartered for walking on the cracks in the pavement but in the real world is, which thankfully actually exists, it has no meaning!!
Waht the hell is parking willy nilly?!?!?
By the way, those are rhetorical questions! You will know doubt come back with some bizarre logic that only you get and that I will continue to say 'Huh?' and this will never end so the floor is yours, have a good Easter!
You know exactly what it means and we both know you do.
Merely stated fact sometimes truth annoys and clearly I was right. :cool:
Just pay correct fee simple if you see time getting close nip out and pay for extra time simple. :cool:
So at the moment, your are allowed to park in the car park for 4 hours, any more than 4 hr, and you get a £60 fine, all right you dont need to pay the fine, but the t&c state, your on a private car park, and can only stay for 4 hrs
Sno now the shopping centre owners ar elooking at put up barriers, and you will have to pay to park, but only in certain sections, there even area where you can park for as long as you want, no fines issues
You wouldnt get fined if, you only parked for the time allowed
Nice, I'm glad you feel so happy with yourself for your nasty little comment.
Ill make sure to put plenty on the meter this weekend when we go and collect her belongings wouldn't want to put let less value on her life than you do on your mums.