# Parking fine/ notice!



## chasper (Apr 20, 2008)

A woman has been ordered by a sheriff to pay a private parking company £24,500 in unpaid charges.Carly Mackie ignored hundreds of parking tickets for leaving her car at Dundee's Waterfront without a permit, claiming they were unenforceable.
Ms Mackie said that she had a right to park in the area as she was living there at the time.
Sheriff George Way said the charges were from a "valid contract" and she was liable for them.
Vehicle Control Services (VCS) took the 28-year-old to court last year after she failed to pay £18,500 in private parking notices.
She had been living at a flat with her stepfather, who was a tenant and had a garage at the property.
Sheriff Way said Ms Mackie had parked outside the garage and would not accept the offer of a parking permit for a space nearby for £40 per month.
*'Entirely misdirected'*

In a written judgement, Sheriff Way said: "She admits she parked without a permit, on the property that the pursuers were contracted to protect. 
"She had no better right or title to do so than any other interloper or stranger no matter what her belief might be." 
*What does the law say?*

Parking tickets issued by private companies in private car parks are not fines, they can be classed as parking charge notices.
This is different from Penalty Charge Notices which are issued by council traffic wardens and the police. These are regulated fines, backed by legislation.
Private landowners and car parking firms do not have the power to issue Penalty Charge Notices
However, by parking in a restricted private area, a motorist can be considered to be agreeing to a contract with the landowner or car park operator, provided there is adequate signage warning of the charge. 
Failing to pay can be seen as a breach of contract and the car parking firm can take the motorist to court to recover their losses.
The sheriff said Ms Mackie had "entirely misdirected herself" on both the law and "the contractual chain" in the case.
He said: "The defender is bound by that contract and incurred the parking charge on each occasion.
"The defender refused to pay the parking charges not because she was unaware of the parking scheme or the terms of the notices or the financial consequences of parking at any time, but because she did not believe that the charges were valid in law.
"The parking charges flow from a valid contract between the pursuers and the defender and she is liable for them."
From the section Tayside and Central Scotland

 
 





*C*


----------



## raynipper (Aug 4, 2008)

I know it's across the border but the UK used to be a nice place to live some time ago. All I see and read are problems.

Ray.


----------



## Penquin (Oct 15, 2007)

Ouch, but that confirms what I have always said about NOT ignoring such things, contest yes, but do not simply ignore....

£24,500 is one heck of a lump, I wonder what the court would have said if she simply wrote the car off, bit of course, it is too late now and presumably if unpaid the High Court Enforcement Officers can seize her property to cover the debt.....

Ouch.....


----------



## barryd (May 9, 2008)

I Think you used to be able to ignore them but the rules changed as a pay off for clamping being made illegal I think and the private company can pursue the owner of the vehicle. There are still ways to get around them but ignoring them is not as easy as it once was. This all seems a bit extreme though.


----------



## autostratus (May 9, 2005)

Once the total amount "owed" reached a certain figure I suppose the parking company thought it well worth the effort and expense of a court case.
I've no sympathy with this woman.
It was not a casual mistake or an emergency, she was just putting two fingers up and ultimately paid the price.


----------



## cabby (May 14, 2005)

I am still being chased about one of those PCN's. I did not position the vehicle within the marked bay. I thought that in a disabled bay the cross hatching was part of the parking bay when loading and unloading when one needs the space to do so.I think I am about to get a solicitors letter next.


----------



## autostratus (May 9, 2005)

cabby said:


> I am still being chased about one of those PCN's. I did not position the vehicle within the marked bay. I thought that in a disabled bay the cross hatching was part of the parking bay when loading and unloading when one needs the space to do so.I think I am about to get a solicitors letter next.


I sympathise with you.
It's not always easy to get perfectly square particularly if you're trying to hurry because of a watching driver who questions your need for a disabled bay.
I try always to reverse into the bay as it's easier get out later if the area is busy.


----------



## Pudsey_Bear (Sep 25, 2008)

Not being a legal Eagle, I would have thought the would have to prove their losses if "Failing to pay can be seen as a breach of contract and the car parking firm can take the motorist to court to recover their losses." was correct.


----------



## GMJ (Jun 24, 2014)

cabby said:


> I am still being chased about one of those PCN's. I did not position the vehicle within the marked bay. I thought that in a disabled bay the cross hatching was part of the parking bay when loading and unloading when one needs the space to do so.I think I am about to get a solicitors letter next.


Cabby - check out this site for some help with this...

http://www.pepipoo.com/

It is very well thought of amongst the motoring fraternity I converse with.

Graham :smile2:


----------

