Walkley Dave Posted May 16, 2012 Share Posted May 16, 2012 Which he can do by hiring a company to press the suit on his behalf. Of course he can. The problem is that there is no money in it! Private companies or landowners can due for damage if they can prove you have caused some - but they are no more allowed to "fine" people than anyone else. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Walkley Dave Posted May 16, 2012 Share Posted May 16, 2012 i am a bit confused over all this does this only apply to companies like excel etc or does it mean that if i dont pay in one of the council run car parks, a meter on the road or in an NCP car park I dont have to pay any fine they give me as the company issuing the fine is not the land owner? If that is the case then no one needs to pay for parking ever!!! maybe some one can enlighten me NCP - Excel - Town and Country Parking - Parking Eye etc pretend to be car park management companies and issue speculative invoices misleadingly referred to as "fines". Councils and police and traffic wardens can and do issue fines. Ignore the private companies and after checking the fine is correct - pay the second. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fake Posted May 16, 2012 Share Posted May 16, 2012 It would be, yes, but a Tribunal hearing a VAT appeal has no jurisdiction on matters such as tort [trespass] or contract. True it is about VAT but the tribunal have cited point 5 so that must have a legal grounding and shows that no contract is being made with them by parking up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
V.Rossi Posted May 16, 2012 Share Posted May 16, 2012 NCP - Excel - Town and Country Parking - Parking Eye etc pretend to be car park management companies and issue speculative invoices misleadingly referred to as "fines". Councils and police and traffic wardens can and do issue fines. Ignore the private companies and after checking the fine is correct - pay the second. Funny, I thought NCP were the land owners, therefore have every right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Walkley Dave Posted May 16, 2012 Share Posted May 16, 2012 You can think what you like but the fact remains private companies cannot issue so-called fines any more than you or I can. If NCP are a landowner - unlikely but certainly possible - they can sue you for their losses and they would do this by taking you to court for breach of contract - you agreed to pay a sum of money and failed to do so. They can sue for that. This is also possible but unlikely since it would be heard in what is known as the Small Claims Court for which you cannot charge costs. In a free car park - like a supermarket - they can sue for what they lost. Nothing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeffrey Shaw Posted May 17, 2012 Share Posted May 17, 2012 True it is about VAT but the tribunal have cited point 5 so that must have a legal grounding and shows that no contract is being made with them by parking up. Yes, so far as VAT is concerned. However, it's not binding on a County Court etc. if- for example- an aggrieved motorist sues the parking company or vice-versa. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eckolad Posted May 21, 2012 Share Posted May 21, 2012 Copied from MSE http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.php?t=3970319&page=5 Just posted on CAG:- Before District Judge Mcllwaine sitting at S!!!!horpe county court, S!!!!horpe Court Centre, Laneham Street, Sc unthorpe, North Lincolnshire, DN15 6JY. Upon hearing the authorised officer of the Claimant company and the Defendant in person And upon the Claimant having issued proceedings in their own name And upon it being conceded that contrary to the British Parking Association Code of Practice contrary to same, the Claimant has no contractual authority to issue enforcement proceedings before the County Court either in the Claimants name as in this matter or the name of the land owner IT IS ORDERED THAT 1) The claim is struck out. 2) The order of District Judge Stephenson dated 3rd March 2012 is rescinded and the Claimant shall pay to the Defendant the s um of £42.50 w ithin 21 days of today. 3) The managing director for the Claimant named as Mr Simon Renshaw Smith is ordered to file at Court by 4.00pm on 29th June 2012, a statement containing an explanation as to the manifest discrepancy namely the bringing of an action in contract and the tort of trespass in the companies name with no lawful contractual assignment of authority to do so. 4) A copy of this order shall be served on the British Parking Association for information. Dated 16 May 2012 See what happens when you start criticising judges? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChrisT70 Posted May 21, 2012 Share Posted May 21, 2012 please mods make this a sticky! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
monkey104 Posted May 21, 2012 Share Posted May 21, 2012 Ooh makes me want to park on excel controlled property just to get a ticket so I can tell em to "RAM IT" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PeteMorris Posted May 21, 2012 Share Posted May 21, 2012 Copied from MSE http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.php?t=3970319&page=5 Just posted on CAG:- Before District Judge Mcllwaine sitting at S!!!!horpe county court, S!!!!horpe Court Centre, Laneham Street, Sc unthorpe, North Lincolnshire, DN15 6JY. Upon hearing the authorised officer of the Claimant company and the Defendant in person And upon the Claimant having issued proceedings in their own name And upon it being conceded that contrary to the British Parking Association Code of Practice contrary to same, the Claimant has no contractual authority to issue enforcement proceedings before the County Court either in the Claimants name as in this matter or the name of the land owner IT IS ORDERED THAT 1) The claim is struck out. 2) The order of District Judge Stephenson dated 3rd March 2012 is rescinded and the Claimant shall pay to the Defendant the s um of £42.50 w ithin 21 days of today. 3) The managing director for the Claimant named as Mr Simon Renshaw Smith is ordered to file at Court by 4.00pm on 29th June 2012, a statement containing an explanation as to the manifest discrepancy namely the bringing of an action in contract and the tort of trespass in the companies name with no lawful contractual assignment of authority to do so. 4) A copy of this order shall be served on the British Parking Association for information. Dated 16 May 2012 See what happens when you start criticising judges? I might be reading it wrong, or got the wrong end of the stick. But isn't the judge in effect saying that Excel have screwed up in applying to court in their name? Would it not be feasible for them to enforce parking restrictions in the name of whoever the landowner was? (providing of course that their 'contract' says this, which in this case it didn't). They may well do this in future and catch a good few people, having sewn up the loophole the judge has pointed out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.