Brit_Stops Posted November 10, 2011 Share Posted November 10, 2011 Motorhomes don't always fit neatly into allocated parking spaces, so I thought you might like to know that if you come out of your stocking-up trip to the supermarket and find a "parking charge notice" ticket on your windscreen, you should simply ignore it. There is more information, including case studies,at the PePiPoo site, here Steve (Apologies if this is old news) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brit_Stops Posted November 10, 2011 Author Share Posted November 10, 2011 Ooh, that link's a bit funny! Sorry! The site is http://www.pepipoo.com The stickies on the parking forum are good, and there's a link to a youtube clip of Watchdog on the same subject. Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikemoss Posted November 11, 2011 Share Posted November 11, 2011 Thanks BritStops, useful advice. I collected one of these 'fines' in a railway station car park (no, not in the motorhome!) and very official it looked in it's little sticky bag. The only other advice I'd add is to studiously ignore the whelter of correspondence that might follow in its wake. They can find the registered keeper of the vehicle, but can't proceed unless they know the name of the driver. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest 1footinthegrave Posted November 11, 2011 Share Posted November 11, 2011 Had a run in with "Parking eye" whatever you do, do NOT respond in any way to there "scary" looking demands. Don't even think of appealing either. Just bin their letters, they will eventually give up. Their threats have no basis in law. You may also want to ask your MP why a private "Dick Turpin" organization can have access to information from the DVLA. I thought we had the data protection act ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dawki Posted November 11, 2011 Share Posted November 11, 2011 we have just been through this after my daughter parked in a empty shop car-park late one night to wait for her boyfriend to finish work in the pub across the road. after many letters etc which we ignored, they seemed to have stopped now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nowtelse2do Posted November 11, 2011 Share Posted November 11, 2011 1footinthegrave - 2011-11-11 9:49 AM You may also want to ask your MP why a private "Dick Turpin" organization can have access to information from the DVLA. I thought we had the data protection act ! Would you belive that the DVLA recieve a fee for giving out that info. Dave Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
747 Posted November 11, 2011 Share Posted November 11, 2011 As has already been said, ignore all correspondence and it will go away. WRONG!!!!!! If the car park is covered by ANPR cameras then you had better not use it again, otherwise you will be clamped. Unless you change your number plate. :'( Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brit_Stops Posted November 11, 2011 Author Share Posted November 11, 2011 747 - 2011-11-11 3:15 PM If the car park is covered by ANPR cameras then you had better not use it again, otherwise you will be clamped. But happily not for very much longer at all, as a new bill will prevent clampers from operating on private land. It's due to come into being this month, if the bbc are to be believed. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-10993473 Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mel B Posted November 11, 2011 Share Posted November 11, 2011 I can confirm that the ban on clamping on private land will definitely be coming in shortly - we've got a problem at work as, despite spending a lot of money getting our security etc staff officially trained and licenced to be allowed by clamp, the b*ggers have now decided to ban it!!! *-) They are now looking to bring in an external company to manage the parking and issue fixed penalty type notices for offenders ... not sure who or what the legal position will be, fortunately I'll have left before they get their act together!!! :-D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mel B Posted November 11, 2011 Share Posted November 11, 2011 Thanks for the link to the site, I've registered and also responded to an interesting thread about parking near to a university and what the university parking attendants can and cannot do near the site ... so hopefully that will help out that person!!! :-D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
747 Posted November 11, 2011 Share Posted November 11, 2011 Brit_Stops - 2011-11-11 5:59 PM 747 - 2011-11-11 3:15 PM If the car park is covered by ANPR cameras then you had better not use it again, otherwise you will be clamped. But happily not for very much longer at all, as a new bill will prevent clampers from operating on private land. It's due to come into being this month, if the bbc are to be believed. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-10993473 Steve That is indeed good news for motorists but it might raise a few legal points. If we leave the brazen cowboys out of the equation with their obnoxious tactics (and good riddance to them). Technically you have committed an offence by overstaying a time limit which has been displayed in a parking area. You broke a contract by not paying a fine for doing so. The law is changing but an offence has been committed prior to that change. These companies will still be managing car parks after the Law has changed. They may have some legal right if you return to the property where an offence was committed, not necessarily clamping a vehicle but they have a lawful right to be reimbursed. The companies concerned did not follow up offenders as it was not worth their while doing so (this is the argument on many forums). We will have to wait and see as these companies did not clamp vehicles anyway on most parking areas (Motorway services, Supermarket car parks etc.). Time will tell. :-D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nowtelse2do Posted November 11, 2011 Share Posted November 11, 2011 Not sure if this is 100% correct but as far as I'm aware you only need to reimburse the amount lost to the company that owned the property, ie. if a parking charge of say £2 a hour or part hour was the rate, and you overstayed an hour or so then that is all they could be reimbursed because that is only the amount that they have lost. Also it is not a criminal offence it's a civil one. Only bonafide authorities (councils etc) and the police can issue fines. Dave Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brit_Stops Posted November 11, 2011 Author Share Posted November 11, 2011 Yes, the parking "violation" is a civil, not a criminal offence. However clamping cars on private land after the change in the law will be a criminal offence. I don't think the parking companies would have any other redress than the courts if a driver returned to the car park who was ignoring their (often excessive) demands. Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest 1footinthegrave Posted November 11, 2011 Share Posted November 11, 2011 The irony is you see signs saying tiredness kills take a break, we did just that and we both nodded off on Delamere service area after paying good money to them for a bite and a drink, we were logged coming on and leaving by ANR cameras for a duration of 2 hrs 18 minutes and got an £80 "fine" through the post a couple of years ago. I mean what's that all about. Needless to say we never stay anywhere where these systems are in place. And no I did not pay it, but I wrote to my MP to protest, his reply was quite frankly useless. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
esdave Posted November 12, 2011 Share Posted November 12, 2011 write across any, official or private N.C.R.T.S ie no contract return to sender ,dont put a stamp on ,post office charges them, see T.P.U.C.org , lots of info they dont want you to know and it all works. Dave Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.