Personally I don't agree that councils should automatically uphold any fines regarding to non-display, but luckily they do sometimes use their discretion. When it comes to a supermarket using a private agent to harass a customer, it's a whole different ball game. Your relationship with your local authority is not the same as that with a private company. Would you eat at a restaurant if you were given 1 hour to eat your meal and the government had granted them the power to fine people who forgot to shine their shoes? Would it be ok because you were 'not allowed to forget' to have shiny shoes at work?

Meteor have never ever done court and I'd rather cancel the cheque rather than have it cashed tomorrow when they read this thread.

And what happens when a disabled badge holder just forgets to display the badge, or it slips off the dashboard?

Absolutely. As for the SIA, self regulation is no regulation. I agree with the notion of proper regulation and maximum clamping fees. But then you still have the problem of having to pay and having little chance of a refund, even if they clearly breached the regs.

Under what lawful guidance would an appeals system have in order to make any kind of judgement whatsoever? There is no Traffic Management Act. There is no Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions. There is no Off Street Parking Order system. They'd be making decisions based on pretty photographs and nothing else. If you ignore a council adjudicators decision the council will send round bailiffs. If you ignore a private parking company 'adjudication' they'd be able to do sod all apart from make a county court claim.

Ok, what you're doing so far is fine. The judge should arrange a very short hearing where your dad can explain that he didn't receive any claim form. Also ask for further and better particulars that explain the legal basis of the claim and request that Trethowans submit in full the contract they are relying on. After all, how can you submit a defence when you don't know the contract they are stating has been breached? 5 words is atrocious. Finally, remember to ask for a refund on the court fee.

Who issued the parking ticket? A local authority or a private company?

That is a claim form. Have you had a 'GENERAL FORM OF JUDGEMENT'? If not, your dad just needs to defend the case from scratch. Or in this case, request better particulars, because at the moment we have Trethowan's usual **** take of 5 words.

That is a claim form. Have you had a 'GENERAL FORM OF JUDGEMENT'? If not, your dad just needs to defend the case from scratch. Or in this case, request better particulars, because at the moment we have Trethowan's usual **** take of 5 words.

Yes, I agree. But then again, most PPC charges are not related to lack of payment. Most are the equivalent of Tesco attempting to fine you if you bought the wine legitimately but couldn't find your receipt in your pocket afterwards.

Nobody here seems to grasp the difference between parking charges and contractual penalty clauses. No issue with it all being done properly, but looking at the wording of the bill, the status quo will remain. The bill just makes keepers 'liable' for an unenforceable contractual penalty, unrelated to loss incurred.

Minster didn't show up (what a surprise). So the judge heard the case in their absence.

Sounds like complete court incompetence, which isn't that unusual. Can we see the paperwork and can you tell us what court this is all being done through? Or have Trethowans judge gained a default judgement against the hire company and then just scribbled your dads name on there themselves and forwarded it to you? That would be highly unlawful.

Yep, send off the Acknowledgement of Service for now. Liverpool isn't necessarily the best court for PPC cases (a couple of clueless judges there). St. Helens or Birkenhead would be better. You can request the court as the defendant.

Sorry I haven't been able to help. My whole phone down went down last Monday in the BT power outage and BT Openreach are supposed to be coming round to fix it tomorrow. So I've only been able to check the forums occasionally through work and have had no access to email. I've replied to your PM this morning, but presumably it's too late. A decent judge should know contract law inside out anyway.

And they still haven't stated what they think they're owed and why. You can't just take a car and say "we'll let you know how much you owe us sometime in the next few weeks."

Well that's just bloody stupid. If you follow your life by such obviously arbitrary rules like a schoolboy, it's just being daft. But then you'd proclaim failing to act like that would amount to abuse! Just because 'most' people nip in for a pint of milk, shouldn't mean anybody else should have to suffer a tirade of threatening junk mail for having the audacity to poodle around trying on some clothes, looking at the electricals, doing some shopping and then finishing off with a brew in the cafe. I don't think anyone would agree with such an opinion - pay to park. But if you were in the legal position of owing a pound for overstaying, it becomes hard to justify paying it when instead of a request, you get hit with threats and abuse. If you bought a paper in a newsagent and accidentally gave him too little money, what would you do if when walking out the newsagent shouted "Give me £80 or else I'll find out you or your relative's address, send them threats and take you to court!" Would you give him the 20p, or throw the newspaper in his face and tell him to get stuffed?

Do you pay council tax? You would have been better using the council tax money to pay the parking fine and then talking to the council to make different arrangements for the tax. They tend to be accommodating over council tax, but there's no leeway with parking fines.

Got it in one. Just ignore.

Even if you go down that route, you're best off requesting an invoice for the correct amount instead of sending cheques. I wouldn't bother with this company though anyway - they've never ever taken anyone to court.

A lot of people park on the pavement to let traffic past, but still leave enough room for people to use the pavement. Of course, the whole plan unravels when wheelchair users need the pavement. I've parked on umpteen roads where my car has been the only one not on the pavement. I got a ticket for pavement parking when I was about 18 and the lesson has been learnt!

Will keep you updated.

Will be looking to hammering them on this next time in court. Breaches all sorts of OFT guidance as well. There is no explanation of what the alleged debt is for. It's just a tirade of threats.

This Visa's Debit Chargeback Scheme, not a credit card charge back related to Section 75. It's a voluntary scheme that Visa have implemented. You will likely get a refusal on the ground that you entered your PIN. I would put everything in writing to your bank and send the photos. Read Vine v Waltham Forest and quote it - this was the authoritative case which showed that consent was required when it comes to clamping. In your case consent wasn't possible on your side because the signage is so inadequate. If the bank doesn't co-operate you could ultimately issue a county court claim against them.

Ok, Euro are one of the safer PPC's to poke with a stick, so I would now respond and refute their CPR rubbish. Namely that it refers to the small claims track only and that it only refers to the disclosure and inspection of documents, whereas you obviously hold no documentation. After that you can ignore Euro and pursue Sainsbury's. As the landowner and the principle in this whole situation, they could be severally liable for the action of their agents and the harassment they commit. I've got one £250 demand against Sainsbury's underway at the moment.