parking on private land/Wilkinsons

[Wombats]

Re: parking on private land/Wilkinsons

I wonder how VCS will react to being reminded of the hammering they received from the Upper Tier Tribunal, Mystery?

Yes Bluebottle. For anyone unfamiliar with that 'hammering' you can read it here:

http://www.tribunals.gov.uk/financea...ces_v_hmrc.pdf

[McGinty]

Re: parking on private land/Wilkinsons

Got a result on this today-brill. Thanks M1 and others who helped. I have attached the decision and reasons for it as it may have a bearing on future appeals.
PARKING ON PRIVATE LAND APPEALS
PO Box 70748 London EC1P 1SN
0845 207 7700
enquiries@popla.org.uk
www.popla.org.uk
Parking on Private Land Appeals is administered by the Transport and Environment Committee of London Councils
Calls to Parking on Private Land Appeals may be recorded






30 June 2014

Reference 9061344031
Always quote in any communication with POPLA




James (Appellant)
-v-
Vehicle Control Services Limited (Operator)




The Operator issued parking charge notice number VC02917 arising
out of the presence at 15 Market Place, on 27 February 2014, of a
vehicle with registration mark KU07


The Appellant appealed against liability for the parking charge.


The Assessor has considered the evidence of both parties and has
determined that the appeal be allowed.


The Assessor’s reasons are as set out.


The Operator should now cancel the parking charge notice forthwith.

[McGinty]

Re: parking on private land/Wilkinsons

2 30 June 2014

Reasons for the Assessor’s Determination

On 27 February 2014, a parking charge notice was applied to a vehicle with
registration mark KU07YJZ for parking without displaying a valid parking
voucher/ permit.

The Operator’s case is that the terms and conditions for parking in the car
park are clearly displayed on numerous signs situated throughout the site.
They state that the signage states: “Valid Permit Holders.” They say that their
patrol officer observed the Appellant’s vehicle parked for 10 minutes without
having a valid permit on display before the issue of the parking charge
notice.

The Appellant has made a number of submissions, however, I will only
elaborate on the one submission that I am allowing this appeal on, and
namely that the parking charge notice is not a genuine pre-estimate of loss.

The Operator rejected the Appellant’s representations, as set out in the
correspondence they sent because, they state that a breach of the car park
conditions had occurred by parking without displaying a valid parking
voucher/ permit.

The Operator rejected the Appellant’s representations because they state
that by parking without displaying a valid parking voucher/ permit, the
Appellant has breached the terms and conditions of the parking contract.
They state that they have calculated this sum a genuine pre-estimate of loss
as they incur significant costs in ensuring compliance to the stated terms and
conditions and to follow up any breaches of these identified and these costs
must be read as a predicted charge or estimate prior to the breach. They
submit that some of these costs include parking charge creation and issue,
POPLA case management, pre-debt case preparation costs of maintenance
and the full costs incurred can be estimated in advance of any actual loss to
be a total of £166.69.

The Operator also cited recent case law to support their case. They state that
their liquidated damages clause is based on a genuine pre-estimate of loss
which include losses that could conceivably follow a breach, not necessarily
losses which are ‘actual’ or even likely to follow a breach. I find that the
Operator has not adequately shown how they have come to these costs and
they have not included figures representing such cots.

The parking charge must be an estimate of reasonable losses in order to be
enforceable. Accor

[McGinty]

Re: parking on private land/Wilkinsons

loss, and any heads claimed for must be in the reasonable contemplation of
the parties at the time of issue of the parking charge notice.

Although the Operator has sought to justify the amount of the parking charge
notice as being a genuine pre-estimate of loss, I am not satisfied that the
Operator has not sufficiently shown an initial loss or proved that the amount of
the parking charge notice is a genuine pre-estimate of loss.

Accordingly, I allow this appeal.

Aurela Qerimi
Assessor

[mystery1]

Re: parking on private land/Wilkinsons

:okay:

M1

[bizzybob]

Re: parking on private land/Wilkinsons

Excellent

[Philbert555]

Re: parking on private land/Wilkinsons

2 30 June 2014

Reasons for the Assessor’s Determination

On 27 February 2014, a parking charge notice was applied to a vehicle with
registration mark KU07YJZ for parking without displaying a valid parking
voucher/ permit.

The Operator’s case is that the terms and conditions for parking in the car
park are clearly displayed on numerous signs situated throughout the site.
They state that the signage states: “Valid Permit Holders.” They say that their
patrol officer observed the Appellant’s vehicle parked for 10 minutes without
having a valid permit on display before the issue of the parking charge
notice.

The Appellant has made a number of submissions, however, I will only
elaborate on the one submission that I am allowing this appeal on, and
namely that the parking charge notice is not a genuine pre-estimate of loss.

The Operator rejected the Appellant’s representations, as set out in the
correspondence they sent because, they state that a breach of the car park
conditions had occurred by parking without displaying a valid parking
voucher/ permit.

The Operator rejected the Appellant’s representations because they state
that by parking without displaying a valid parking voucher/ permit, the
Appellant has breached the terms and conditions of the parking contract.
They state that they have calculated this sum a genuine pre-estimate of loss
as they incur significant costs in ensuring compliance to the stated terms and
conditions and to follow up any breaches of these identified and these costs
must be read as a predicted charge or estimate prior to the breach. They
submit that some of these costs include parking charge creation and issue,
POPLA case management, pre-debt case preparation costs of maintenance
and the full costs incurred can be estimated in advance of any actual loss to
be a total of £166.69.

The Operator also cited recent case law to support their case. They state that
their liquidated damages clause is based on a genuine pre-estimate of loss
which include losses that could conceivably follow a breach, not necessarily
losses which are ‘actual’ or even likely to follow a breach. I find that the
Operator has not adequately shown how they have come to these costs and
they have not included figures representing such cots.

The parking charge must be an estimate of reasonable losses in order to be
enforceable. Accor

I am totally agree with you. You are 100% good here that the parking charge must be an calculate of reasonable losses in order to be enforceable.

[RICKY PRIOR(HELPLESSLIAR)]

Re: parking on private land/Wilkinsons

Here's a thought. when driving around for you own personal reasons, why not apply common courtesy and don't just park on someone else's land.......if it's not your land, think, accept and comply to the regulation. It is after all, not your land and reading your moan, I do hope you do get taken to court and lose. Then deliberately ignore the 14 day order, bleating as you go......then let the bailiffs decide if the PCN is not enforceable. Hopefully you will lose your car and selfish individuals like you will stop parking your unwelcome vehicle on people like mines land.

[bluebottle]

Re: parking on private land/Wilkinsons

Here's a thought. when driving around for you own personal reasons, why not apply common courtesy and don't just park on someone else's land.......if it's not your land, think, accept and comply to the regulation. It is after all, not your land and reading your moan, I do hope you do get taken to court and lose. Then deliberately ignore the 14 day order, bleating as you go......then let the bailiffs decide if the PCN is not enforceable. Hopefully you will lose your car and selfish individuals like you will stop parking your unwelcome vehicle on people like mines land.

I am not quite sure whether your post is simply a wind-up or you genuinely have an alarming lack of understanding and knowledge of the law. If you are the owner/occupier of private land and do not want people to park on it, then you need to put physical barriers to stop them, otherwise you are deemed to have made an Invitation to Encroach. Warning signs alone are not enough.

PCNs issued by local authorities are enforceable under legislation and can be enforced by certificated bailiffs, but only where an order has been issued by the Traffic Enforcement Centre at Northampton County Court. PCNs issued by private parking companies (PPCs) are not enforceable by bailiffs unless the PPC can obtain a CCJ against the driver or registered owner/keeper. However, Parliament has ensured PPCs have hoops to jump through before they can even think of issuing County Court proceedings. For your information, bailiffs cannot decide whether a PCN issued by a PPC is enforceable. That is for the PPCs to prove and courts to decide.

[des8]

Re: parking on private land/Wilkinsons

Here's a thought. when driving around for you own personal reasons, why not apply common courtesy and don't just park on someone else's land.......if it's not your land, think, accept and comply to the regulation. It is after all, not your land and reading your moan, I do hope you do get taken to court and lose. Then deliberately ignore the 14 day order, bleating as you go......then let the bailiffs decide if the PCN is not enforceable. Hopefully you will lose your car and selfish individuals like you will stop parking your unwelcome vehicle on people like mines land.

When landowners keep within the civil code, so will motorists

[Wombats]

Re: parking on private land/Wilkinsons

Here's a thought. when driving around for you own personal reasons, why not apply common courtesy and don't just park on someone else's land.......if it's not your land, think, accept and comply to the regulation. It is after all, not your land and reading your moan, I do hope you do get taken to court and lose. Then deliberately ignore the 14 day order, bleating as you go......then let the bailiffs decide if the PCN is not enforceable. Hopefully you will lose your car and selfish individuals like you will stop parking your unwelcome vehicle on people like mines land.

Hey Ricky,

Excellent post my friend. That has given me the best laugh I've had for quite some time. It really is appalling for us landowners to have all these peasants come and park on our land isn't it. Personally I think landmines are possibly the best solution, or possibly just a clay pigeon shoot across the entrance with some low flying clays, what! Especially if those darned bailiffs are coming on the land, no trespassers at all.

I shall change my coat of arms to read Mortis moriatur: populus terrae omnes advenae.

Let them bleat; let them moan; let them eat cake. We shall go on to the end. We shall fight them on the beaches, we shall fight in Wilkos, we shall fight them in Aldi, we shall fight in Tesco and Asda. We shall never surrender.

Well done that man, damn fine post!

Now I implore admin to encourage this excellent fellow to go forth and multiply elsewhere, and beware of trespassing on the private land that is Legal Beagles.

[bluebottle]

Re: parking on private land/Wilkinsons

Don't encourage him, Wombats!

[Wombats]

Re: parking on private land/Wilkinsons

Indeed not Bluebottle. I was 100% serious when I said, "Now I implore admin to encourage this excellent fellow to go forth and multiply elsewhere, and beware of trespassing on the private land that is Legal Beagles."

[bluebottle]

Re: parking on private land/Wilkinsons

Indeed not Bluebottle. I was 100% serious when I said, "Now I implore admin to encourage this excellent fellow to go forth and multiply elsewhere, and beware of trespassing on the private land that is Legal Beagles."

:okay:

[bizzybob]

Re: parking on private land/Wilkinsons

Here's a thought. when driving around for you own personal reasons, why not apply common courtesy and don't just park on someone else's land.......if it's not your land, think, accept and comply to the regulation. It is after all, not your land and reading your moan, I do hope you do get taken to court and lose. Then deliberately ignore the 14 day order, bleating as you go......then let the bailiffs decide if the PCN is not enforceable. Hopefully you will lose your car and selfish individuals like you will stop parking your unwelcome vehicle on people like mines land.

I would rather hang or flog them, and the bailiff too if he unlawfully ttakes third party property when he enforces the invoice with the default CCJ

As to the trespasser problem, farmers will let loose with a trusty Purdey at 'em with a shout of "Oi get orf my land"