Scrollbar Is Jumping Too Many Pages On...
Technology0 min ago
Parking Charge Notice
I have received a Parking Charge Notice demanding £ 100 ( reduced to £ 60 pounds , if paid within 14 days ) from Defence Systems ltd ( T/A Park Watch )
This is for ' Not Parked Wholly Within Bay ' on a shopping centre car park .
Am I legally required to pay - is it enforceable ?
What's likely to happen if I don't pay ?
This is for ' Not Parked Wholly Within Bay ' on a shopping centre car park .
Am I legally required to pay - is it enforceable ?
What's likely to happen if I don't pay ?
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by Bazile. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
10cs: "The annoying thing about these parking fines is that the government is betraying its' position, and breaching the Data Protection Act by disclosing peoples' personal information to private companies." - err no! anyone can access DVLA data if they have a reasonable need for it. Even you can if say someone parked on your drive for example.
10cs... the only alternatives I can see would be worse
eg make everyone pay in advance and then claim a refund if they dont overstay or break any rules they sign up to, or make everyone have to provide proof of address or sign a form agreeing to let the company access there DVLA record before they are allowed in the carpark.
In 40 years driving I never got one of these so am happy with the current way DVLA provide adress details.... I can see minor concerns but on balance its a small price to pay to ensure people dont abuse parking spaces
eg make everyone pay in advance and then claim a refund if they dont overstay or break any rules they sign up to, or make everyone have to provide proof of address or sign a form agreeing to let the company access there DVLA record before they are allowed in the carpark.
In 40 years driving I never got one of these so am happy with the current way DVLA provide adress details.... I can see minor concerns but on balance its a small price to pay to ensure people dont abuse parking spaces
Yes, I agree Corby, unless other cars made it necessary, which might be more difficult to prove. My "evidence" included a picture of the punctured car in situ but they still demanded a copy of the tyre Company's receipt before agreeing. I also "gently hinted" I might charge the new tyre to them as the puncture occurred on premises under their control so I guess they decided not to be unbending. The fact that I had paid up conditionally possibly made a difference too.
He said, "The car park is 'free' and at the time there were lots of empty spaces"
Not sure what is meant by "'free'" but if there were plenty spaces it shouldn't have been that hard to park within the lines.
I once parked in Northampton railway station and getting out the car I coukd open the door only a wee bit, put out one leg, wrap the other leg around it, turn my body the wrong way and then unwind to get out.
All that and worrying I'd miss my train.
Not sure what is meant by "'free'" but if there were plenty spaces it shouldn't have been that hard to park within the lines.
I once parked in Northampton railway station and getting out the car I coukd open the door only a wee bit, put out one leg, wrap the other leg around it, turn my body the wrong way and then unwind to get out.
All that and worrying I'd miss my train.
//No NJ. Insurance is a legal requirement.//
It is not a legal requirement for insurers to recover their costs. It's just something they like to do as part of their business. Similarly parking companies seek to do likewise. Don't get me wrong, I'm not defending private car parking companies. But your belief that the DVLA should withhold information on the basis you suggest doesn't stand up. The idea of vehicles having registration numbers is so that the Registered Keeper can be contacted by anybody who has a reason for doing so. The law specifically provides for it. You may not agree with the business model of private parking companies but, in the main, they operate legitimately. There is a separate argument regarding whether the sums they seek are reasonable (and I happen to believe that usually they are not). But to deny them the opportunity based on "Data Protection" is unreasonable.
It is not a legal requirement for insurers to recover their costs. It's just something they like to do as part of their business. Similarly parking companies seek to do likewise. Don't get me wrong, I'm not defending private car parking companies. But your belief that the DVLA should withhold information on the basis you suggest doesn't stand up. The idea of vehicles having registration numbers is so that the Registered Keeper can be contacted by anybody who has a reason for doing so. The law specifically provides for it. You may not agree with the business model of private parking companies but, in the main, they operate legitimately. There is a separate argument regarding whether the sums they seek are reasonable (and I happen to believe that usually they are not). But to deny them the opportunity based on "Data Protection" is unreasonable.
NJ @ 14.54:
//The idea of vehicles having registration numbers is so that the Registered Keeper can be contacted by anybody who has a reason for doing so.//
Thanks for that, NJ. You make it sound so, so simple for the ordinary person (anybody, as you put it) to retrieve that information. I still don't agree that personal information should be available from the govt for a fee. In these days of so-called data protection, it seems like a big contradiction to me.
//The idea of vehicles having registration numbers is so that the Registered Keeper can be contacted by anybody who has a reason for doing so.//
Thanks for that, NJ. You make it sound so, so simple for the ordinary person (anybody, as you put it) to retrieve that information. I still don't agree that personal information should be available from the govt for a fee. In these days of so-called data protection, it seems like a big contradiction to me.
//I still don't agree that personal information should be available from the govt for a fee.//
I didn't think the fee was the dealbreaker, 10CS. In your first post you didn't mention the fee at all. I suspected your objection was simply that the government was allowing private companies to find out who was responsible for a particular vehicle.
But surely that is precisely the reason why vehicle carry registration marks. Private car park operators run legitimate businesses. They buy or rent land and let people park on it for a fee. If their customers break the regulations by (say) not paying the correct fee, their contracts say they are entitled to levy a surcharge and the only way they can do that is by tracing the person responsible for the vehicle. It's no different to someone parking on your driveway without your permission. By your reasoning, if that happened, you would not be entitled to contact the keeper of the car.
I didn't think the fee was the dealbreaker, 10CS. In your first post you didn't mention the fee at all. I suspected your objection was simply that the government was allowing private companies to find out who was responsible for a particular vehicle.
But surely that is precisely the reason why vehicle carry registration marks. Private car park operators run legitimate businesses. They buy or rent land and let people park on it for a fee. If their customers break the regulations by (say) not paying the correct fee, their contracts say they are entitled to levy a surcharge and the only way they can do that is by tracing the person responsible for the vehicle. It's no different to someone parking on your driveway without your permission. By your reasoning, if that happened, you would not be entitled to contact the keeper of the car.
Without any pictorial evidence I’d say ignore it.
Alternatively when it’s happened to me in the past I’ve written to the company and asked them for a copy of said picture and to let me know which Court and the date of the hearing that we’ll be attending.
They’ve never replied.
With another I gave them the name of my colleague and the driver on the day I loaned them my car and informed them that the person had subsequently returned to Poland, it was mischief on my part.
They didn’t bother either.
Alternatively when it’s happened to me in the past I’ve written to the company and asked them for a copy of said picture and to let me know which Court and the date of the hearing that we’ll be attending.
They’ve never replied.
With another I gave them the name of my colleague and the driver on the day I loaned them my car and informed them that the person had subsequently returned to Poland, it was mischief on my part.
They didn’t bother either.
//With another I gave them the name of my colleague and the driver on the day I loaned them my car and informed them that the person had subsequently returned to Poland,//
Don't do that if your car is detected speeding, Fatticus. You may find yourself on the wrong end of a "Perverting the course of Justice" charge and, if convicted, the result is always jail time:
https:/
https:/
The police tend to be sceptical when a person not in the UK is nominated as the driver. Private parking companies are a little less fussed.
Don't do that if your car is detected speeding, Fatticus. You may find yourself on the wrong end of a "Perverting the course of Justice" charge and, if convicted, the result is always jail time:
https:/
https:/
The police tend to be sceptical when a person not in the UK is nominated as the driver. Private parking companies are a little less fussed.
New Judge,
//Don't do that if your car is detected speeding, Fatticus. You may find yourself on the wrong end of a "Perverting the course of Justice" charge and, if convicted, the result is always jail time//
Oh I agree…..if it’s an official fine from either a constabulary or local council I’d pay immediately without question.
There’s an awful lot more leeway and room for manoeuvre with parking companies though.
To me they’re nothing more than vermin.
Will try to charge you for parking over a line but they’re not liable should your car be damaged?
What sort of service are they providing?
I know that goes for council car parks etc but if the private companies are going to use spurious reasons then I’ll thwart them any way I can.
That said, I make 90% of my journeys by bike anyway.
//Don't do that if your car is detected speeding, Fatticus. You may find yourself on the wrong end of a "Perverting the course of Justice" charge and, if convicted, the result is always jail time//
Oh I agree…..if it’s an official fine from either a constabulary or local council I’d pay immediately without question.
There’s an awful lot more leeway and room for manoeuvre with parking companies though.
To me they’re nothing more than vermin.
Will try to charge you for parking over a line but they’re not liable should your car be damaged?
What sort of service are they providing?
I know that goes for council car parks etc but if the private companies are going to use spurious reasons then I’ll thwart them any way I can.
That said, I make 90% of my journeys by bike anyway.
Latest Posts
Good Morning Boxing Day Birds!
ChatterBank3 mins ago
How it Works22 mins ago
Road rules25 mins ago
Am I Right To Be Feeling This Way?
Family Life30 mins ago
Editor's Blog57 mins ago
