Parkforce, wrong sign on carpark and ticket for pavement

[BenjiBoo]

Hi all,

 

I don't think this exact situation has been covered in the other threads that I've just spent hours reading.

 

I was slapped with a £60 Parkforce ticket for parking on the pavement at my place of work. On the entrance to the car park (which is barrier operated) there are signs that say "Wheel clamping in operation for not parking in the correct parking spaces. Release fee £25." There is no other signage of the Parkforce variety.

 

A year ago we were given parking permits with a document that says:

 

By displaying your windscreen permit, you are agreeing to the following terms and conditions (please also see the Car Parking Regulations document for full regulations, available on requestion):-

...

4. Vehicles must be parked in designated spaces and comply with campus parking restrictions. A fixed penalty system is in operation.

 

 

I've read other parkforce threads that say that having the Parkforce signage is necessary. Since the only warning I had was in this document, does this still count? Also, since there are signs in numerous places claiming the fines are £25, does this override the document that we received? Also, I've read that the fine should be proportionate to the crime committed, since I only parked on the pavement, what can they claim their loss was in monetary terms?

 

On a dishonest note, I was thinking of changing the address of where my car was registered before Parkforce obtain the details from the DVLA - anybody got any opinions about this? What about changing it to my address at work?

 

Any ideas anyone?

[pin1onu]

Hi all,

 

I don't think this exact situation has been covered in the other threads that I've just spent hours reading.

 

I was slapped with a £60 Parkforce ticket for parking on the pavement at my place of work. On the entrance to the car park (which is barrier operated) there are signs that say "Wheel clamping in operation for not parking in the correct parking spaces. Release fee £25." There is no other signage of the Parkforce variety.

 

The signage is so they comply with the Security Industry Act. It should give a phone number so that you can make payment. If the signs don't have this they are in breach of the act. If they then clamp they can be reported to the police.

 

A year ago we were given parking permits with a document that says:

 

By displaying your windscreen permit, you are agreeing to the following terms and conditions (please also see the Car Parking Regulations document for full regulations, available on requestion):-

...

4. Vehicles must be parked in designated spaces and comply with campus parking restrictions. A fixed penalty system is in operation.

 

 

I've read other parkforce threads that say that having the Parkforce signage is necessary. Since the only warning I had was in this document, does this still count? Also, since there are signs in numerous places claiming the fines are £25, does this override the document that we received? Also, I've read that the fine should be proportionate to the crime committed, since I only parked on the pavement, what can they claim their loss was in monetary terms?

 

 

When you were given your permit were you asked to sign anything? Have you had a look the full regulations? If so can you provide some details. It might also be useful to have a look at the "invoice" that Parkforce have given you.

 

Also do you have to pay for the permit? If so what does it cost you? The usual grounds for not paying because of not forming a contract may not apply in this case. However what may give grounds is whether the charge for the breach of the contract is excessive and therefore a Penalty Charge. Alternately if any of the terms in the "regulations" are unfair this may render the contract invalid.

On a dishonest note, I was thinking of changing the address of where my car was registered before Parkforce obtain the details from the DVLA - anybody got any opinions about this? What about changing it to my address at work?

 

Any ideas anyone?

 

I wouldn't bother changing your address. If you are worried about your employer releasing details of your address to Parkforce they will not be able to do this unless you specifically authorise them. If they do they are violating the Data Protection Act and you can make a complaint and claim for compensation.

 

Remember this is a civil case. The onus of proof is on Parkforce. You don't have to incriminate yourself. They will write to the registered keeper of the vehicle. You just write back acknowledging that you are the RK but they need to take the matter up with the driver. You are under no obligation to reveal who the driver was. They have to prove who the driver was.

[Bernie_the_Bolt]

I look at this differently.

 

I think that a valid contract is in place and one of the terms is an agreement to be clamped if in contravention of the contract terms, and further to being clamped to pay a £25 release fee (subject to clamping arrangements being legally compliant).

 

However, I read nothing that suggests a charge of £60 can be contractually imposed. The contractors took the wrong action here and for that reason I suggest it is unenforcable, even before getting onto the issue of unlawful penalties.

 

I also see little point denying who was the driver here. It's a workplace car park.

[BenjiBoo]

thanks for the reply pin1onu.

 

I'd rather pay a £25 fine than a £60 fine. The signs indicate a £25 fine. So that was really the root of my question about that. If the worst comes to the worst, can I just claim that I'll pay £25 only?

 

I pay £20 a month for the permit. They give out more permits than there is space in the car park which seems unreasonable to me. The car park is full of cars without permits also which is really annoying. I think I must have signed something to receive my parking permit, but I don't remember being given time to read any regulations.

 

I've copied out some of the rules and regulations that seem relevant:

 

5. Possession of a valid permit does not confer a right to a parking space.

8. In lined car parks, vehicles must park in designated parking places only. Vehicles must not be parked in areas hatched in yellow, on yellow lines, in locations where health and safety issues arise (e.g. blocking fire escape routes) or in such a way that cause obstruction of inconvenience to other users. Permits will be revoked for persistent non-compliance.

12. Application for/acceptance of a parking permit shall be deemed a legally binding acceptance of these Conditions.

15. Failure to comply with paring[sic] regulations may result in a fixed penalty charge.

 

Point 15 is the only reference to a fixed penalty charge. Can them spelling parking incorrectly be of any use to me? Also, I thought I read somewhere that the wording "fixed penalty charge" was reserved for real parking tickets? Is putting this in the regulations something I can use?

 

The invoice from Parkforce is the standard one which everyone receives. Although mine doesn't have a photo of my car printed on it, it has a sticker at the top right with the details of my car written in blue pen.

[Bernie_the_Bolt]

Point 15 is the only reference to a fixed penalty charge. Can them spelling parking incorrectly be of any use to me? Also, I thought I read somewhere that the wording "fixed penalty charge" was reserved for real parking tickets? Is putting this in the regulations something I can use?

 

But the signs in the car park say you will be clamped. That is the only fixed penalty available to them and they did not avail themselves of it.

[Barnsley Boy]

Agree with Bernie that there would appear to be nothing that allows Parkforce to make a charge of £60. There is in fact no figure stated for the "fixed penalty charge". There would appear to be a contract given that you have signed for the parking permit in accordance with stated terms and conditions. The remedy for parking in the wrong place is as condition 8 "Permits will be revoked for persistent non-compliance". I can't see any other remedy being upon to them. If the [sic] part of point 15 is correct then this a nonsense, the clause becomes gobbledegook and must be discounted. Given the presence of a written signed agreement for which consideration is given [£20 / month for the permit], the signs [implied agreement?] are surely not at all relevant.

 

Conclusion, although you may have signed an agreement, Parkforce's proposed charge is outside this agreement. They have no entitlement to your money.

[patdavies]

Also bearing in mind that what have been listed are contract terms, then 15 is unlawful as it attempts to impose a penalty - which cannot be done in a comsumer contract

[Bernie_the_Bolt]

Also bearing in mind that what have been listed are contract terms, then 15 is unlawful as it attempts to impose a penalty - which cannot be done in a comsumer contract

 

Does this qualify as a consumer contract? Genuine question. It doesn't seem to me to be what I would consider being offered in a consumer environment (being a work place car park).

[JOSH_IOU]

subscribing

[Barnsley Boy]

Does this qualify as a consumer contract? Genuine question. It doesn't seem to me to be what I would consider being offered in a consumer environment (being a work place car park).

 

Far be it from me to lock horns with you guys on legal points but:

 

Isn't the "Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts 1997" act all about unfair terms in general rather than specifically refering just to penalties.

 

If it isn't deemed to be a "consumer" contract, there is always the Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977. Finally, for any contract, penalties are unenforceable through case law - Dunlop.

 

Bit academic, the PPC is either Shot & Stabbed, Shot, Stabbed & Bludgeoned or merely just Shot. Game over in any event.

[patdavies]

Does this qualify as a consumer contract? Genuine question. It doesn't seem to me to be what I would consider being offered in a consumer environment (being a work place car park).

 

I don't think that the environment is that relevant.

 

The OP is certainly not signing the agreement and paying £20 as a business. He is signing it as a consumer - albeit with his employer as the 'retailer', and that the 'product' is for work use.

 

Imagine that the car park was actually owned by somebody other than his employer - if he signed the same deal with them, would he not be entering a consumer contract?

 

Just my thoughts.

[Bernie_the_Bolt]

Far be it from me to lock horns with you guys on legal points but:

 

Isn't the "Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts 1997" act all about unfair terms in general rather than specifically refering just to penalties.

 

If it isn't deemed to be a "consumer" contract, there is always the Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977. Finally, for any contract, penalties are unenforceable through case law - Dunlop.

 

Bit academic, the PPC is either Shot & Stabbed, Shot, Stabbed & Bludgeoned or merely just Shot. Game over in any event.

 

I don't think that the environment is that relevant.

 

The OP is certainly not signing the agreement and paying £20 as a business. He is signing it as a consumer - albeit with his employer as the 'retailer', and that the 'product' is for work use.

 

Imagine that the car park was actually owned by somebody other than his employer - if he signed the same deal with them, would he not be entering a consumer contract?

 

Just my thoughts.

 

I honestly don't know the answer.

 

I just think it is better to go through the thought process now rather than be ambushed with the issue at a later date.

 

Just getting all the ducks lined up!