Parkig ticket, Lewes train Station.

[brightonbaz]

You appear to be wasting your breath ladyseagull.......I was tempted to post about this and the modus operandi of PPC's but then thought better of it

 

[Muzzy]

I have to say I am very confused.... The op received a deserved but unlucky PCN in a controlled/privately policed car park that is owned by a rail company, and it is suggested that he just completely ignore it and just live on happily ever after.... Why the hell would anyone pay to park there in the first place?

I'm with LB on this one! Ignore at your peril? NO NO NO, I would advise that you follow this through because I cannot believe that a major company would employ a mickey mouse company to enforce it's policies...

I will speak to a couple of the wardens in Lewes that I know and ask them if they are aware of how the station is usually policed in regards to parking!

 

[brunswick]

no one has to pay a parking ticket the name in block capitals is not you......send the form off, fill it in, but DO NOT sign it - it will end up in the bin.

once you sign you enter into a corporate contract. if you dont sign the traffic ACT has no authority over you.

they will scare you, and most get flustered and pay.

 

[Westdene Seagull]

No they're not. They are part of the same company as the one that runs the railway and operates the car park.

Are you really saying that the owner of a car park has no right to charge for using it? Or to chase up non-payers?

If so, you must be very STUPID. Your version of "the law" would simply result in station car parks being closed. Who would benefit from that?

I use Lewes station car park regularly. The last time was on Friday. When I use it, I want to find a parking place. If everyone followed the advice of LadySeagull that you can get away with not paying because the company that is contracted to manage the car park is operating a scam - and you can therefore get away with not paying - the outcome would be that Lewes station car park would be full of freeloaders. People who want to use the car park because it is convenient if you need to get a train would have to look elsewhere. In the case of Lewes, this involves driving around already congested streets, looking for an available space that, if you can find one, is likely to be a very long way from the station.

She and her ilk are spreading irresponsible, ignorant nonsense, based on an obsessive belief that car park owners are behaving unreasonably. Station car parks are an essential part of a system of national transport infrastructure that EVERYONE in the community benefits from being well managed. As I say, I'm a regular - and satisfied - customer. It's a well-managed car park and I want it to stay like that. The opinionated purveyors of the "It's all a scam" myth seem intent on wrecking what works well. As I say, that is STUPID.

What a couple of idiotic posts.

This is an invoice from a private parking company and so falls under contract law. In this country a company is not allowed to penalise or fine an individual. What they can do is sue for their loss if someone breaks that contract. In this case the landowner has lost ZERO, NOTHING, ZILCH. What are they going to sue for ?

The PPC in this case are attempting to issue a punitive penalty which they are not allowed to do.

To the OP - IGONRE, IGNORE, and IGNORE again any correspondence you get. Some will get quite nasty but they WILL go away after around six letters.

Regards whether these companies are scammers ?? Well most try and hide their company addresses when they sign up to Nominet ( against the contract ), many do not pay VAT on the "fines" that are paid ( a criminal act and at least one has been convicted ), many use bullying tactics including physical and verbal assault ( a criminal act and many have had their employees convicted ) and ALL of them use threats in their letters that are false and mis-leading ( potentially a criminal act ). So are they scammers - in any reasonable persons view I would say so.

For the record, I do not condone parking and not paying the monies due for PARKING - what I object to are the "fines" such as this example of £50 when the person has made every reasonable attempt to stick to the "contract".

 

[Westdene Seagull]

No they're not. They are part of the same company as the one that runs the railway and operates the car park.

Are you really saying that the owner of a car park has no right to charge for using it? Or to chase up non-payers?

If so, you must be very STUPID. Your version of "the law" would simply result in station car parks being closed. Who would benefit from that?

Brilliantly put, and I completely agree. Anyone who tells anybody to just "ignore" anything is giving really poor advice. You should never just ignore a parking ticket, as it is in this case. You certainly shouldn't ignore and follow up letters. It's terrible and irresponsible advice. There is an appeals process, you go through that if the ticket is unjust and contest it properly, you don't just stamp your foot and claim the company to be fraudsters and you have no need to pay any attention to it.

It's not poor advice - it's advice that works. The reason I know - because I've ignored TWO invoices from G24, a PPC, so far.

 

[mune ni kamome]

Very poor advice to ignore this. Immature bravado. You may well get away with it but if you are older, have a house and family and the usual mortgage debts, credit cards etc the last thing you need are letters threatening to take you to court ratcheting up the pressure. People who pay are not saddoes who deserve to be parted from their money. My mother is 80 and got one. Do you seriously think my advice to her should be to ignore letter after letter gradually threatening worse punishments, if so you need to grow up a bit.

 

[happypig]

Advice given to me by a barrister acquaintance was to ignore the initial request for payment. If they follow it up with a letter, then send a reply to them stating "I am the registered owner. I was not in charge of the vehicle at the time claimed".
Any dispute they have is with the person who parked the vehicle and (unlike speeding cameras) there is no legal obligation for the registered keeper to furnish the name of the driver at the time.

From a moral point of view, I would not condone parking without paying.

 

[LadySeagull]

Very poor advice to ignore this. Immature bravado. You may well get away with it but if you are older, have a house and family and the usual mortgage debts, credit cards etc the last thing you need are letters threatening to take you to court ratcheting up the pressure. People who pay are not saddoes who deserve to be parted from their money. My mother is 80 and got one. Do you seriously think my advice to her should be to ignore letter after letter gradually threatening worse punishments, if so you need to grow up a bit.

Yes I do suggest she ignores them, if she can cope with just playing snap with the predictable letters (see below, it does work - but with other vulnerable people I appreciate you need to take a different approach to brush them off. But you don't pay them!!) It is the correct advice to ignore any fake PCN from a private parking firm. Whatever the circumstances.

And FYI I am older, have a house and family and mortgage and credit cards. And I have ignored a fake PCN - I laughed at it because I already knew about this scam from Watchdog and MoneysavingExpert. Same as Ben'sGrandad and Westdene Seagull are trying to tell you, but I guess you don't want to hear that your Mum has been scammed.

Ignoring the letters is just like ignoring phishing emails, surely you wouldn't advise an elderly person to send money by Western Union to Nigeria just because they were scared of what some emails said? But that's the same thing as telling them to send some of their pension to a private parking company because of what some letters said...

And recently I have helped TWO elderly people, one in her eighties, to deal with a fake PCN and no, they did not pay it.

In the case of an elderly man I explained that it was a scam and gave him the Watchdog link etc and a printout of the whole letter-chain of threats, so he could just play 'PPC snap' with each letter as it arrived. He did so and NOTHING else happened, of course - except he felt very empowered and relieved to know how to handle the unfair & extortionate charge. There is no threat to your credit rating when a scammer claims you owe them money, they cannot just 'apply for a CCJ' and they cannot send the boys round! It's just a mail scam, nothing more and nothing less.

In the case of the elderly woman, she too was in her eighties and got a fake PCN from G24 (the PPC Westdene Seagull ignored) when shopping at Dunelm Mill for the heinous 'crime' of overstaying by 12 minutes. Her neighbour alerted me to it and asked for advice and in her case I suggested that a relative go into Dunelm Mill and complain. Nothing wrong with complaining - but not 'appealing' - to the occupier and telling them the tactics of their 'parking agent' have upset a customer and will stop her and her family from shopping there ever again (taking receipts helps). In that case, of course Dunelm Mill said they would deal with it and they did. The PPC has to listen to the company that contracted them so complaints like this can work if the letters would be hard for the vulnerable person to cope with.

The only reason I did not suggest the 'complain' tactic to this OP on this thread is because IGNORE is the usual advice and it works, and in the case of a railway, complaining that they have lost your custom is not likely to have any effect. Same goes for, say, getting a bogus PCN at Motorway Services from CP Plus - ignoring is the best advice because, like with railways, complaining to Motorway Services will fall on deaf ears and there's no point giving the PPC written info by actually believing the rubbish that there's an 'appeals process' just because the fake PCN says there is.

And me too, as I have said till I am blue in the face: from a moral point of view, I would not condone parking without paying. And I have NOT condoned that.

 

[Lord Bracknell]

No one is suggesting that the original poster pays any more than he has paid already. He is being recommended to contact Meteor and supply the evidence that he did pay to park. LadySeagull is advising that there is no point in doing this, because it is all a scam, and that he should front it out until the bitter end.

As I say, my experience of Meteor is that they behave like responsible car park managers, not scammers. If you have already paid to park, and you provide the evidence, they will accept this.

 

[LadySeagull]

And my experience of dealing with people posting on pepipoo and MSE (moneysavingexpert) forums is different. Here are just 2 recent Meteor efforts:

Meteor parking charge notice from Brighton Station - FightBack Forums (Meteor took cash, issued no ticket then sent threatograms for payment of an extortionate penalty)

Meteor Parking, Brighton - is this a deliberate scam? - MoneySavingExpert.com Forums (Meteor covered the P&D machines, then issued the usual threats to anyone who parked there).

In fact in both those cases the posters have complained to the Railway, so maybe if the OP prefers to try that instead of just ignoring the whole thing, then that may work.

And if the OP does decide to try Meteor's sham appeals process, just make sure that there's no reference to who was driving the car. No need to give them info they do not have, so you'd say 'the car was parked...the driver placed the P&D ticket on the dashboard and was surprised to find this Parking Charge. Please cancel now you know that the driver paid in full' (enclose copy of P&D ticket, keep the original).

It's very, very rare for this to work though which is why it's known to be, generally, a waste of time and is not recommended on MSE, it gives false hope to most people when they need to know that it's a con. Many people are perfectly happy to ignore the threatograms and play snap with them as they match the pictures on MSE.

 

[Lord Bracknell]

One of the features of car parking charges at Lewes station is that it is a flat charge for a whole day, not a graduated charge based on how long you have parked.

The "classic scam" that no doubt troubles LadySeagull and her friends is to claim "overstaying" as the basis for a further payment. This isn't the case here.

 

[LadySeagull]

Yep, overstaying claims (false or true) are a common example. Often in a free car park so no further payment due anyway, and a penalty cannot be levied either as they are not a Local Authority so there's no statute allowing a private firm to issue a fine. PPCs rely on contract law - but it does not allow a penalty clause.

Then there's 'displaying a Blue Badge upside down' even though the scheme does not even apply on private land due to the Equality Act covering anyone who meets the definition of disabled.

Then you name it, any old excuse...akin to 'parking on a crack in the pavement'...etc. Anything that hoodwinks people into thinking they have a parking ticket when they do not. Anything for any PPC to keep the money rolling in to buy their next horse or yacht. There are some very rich fat cat PPC owners out there, with lifestyles funded by the ignorance of what is often the most vulnerable members the British Public.

 

[e77]

If you do take the 'ignore them and they go away' route, which in all reality will probably work, be aware that some parking companies keep a list of cars that have outstanding 'fines' against them and clamp them if you use their car park again.

Not to say it would happen in this instance, but does happen.

 

[Westdene Seagull]

Very poor advice to ignore this. Immature bravado. You may well get away with it but if you are older, have a house and family and the usual mortgage debts, credit cards etc the last thing you need are letters threatening to take you to court ratcheting up the pressure. People who pay are not saddoes who deserve to be parted from their money. My mother is 80 and got one. Do you seriously think my advice to her should be to ignore letter after letter gradually threatening worse punishments, if so you need to grow up a bit.

I'm not sure what age has to do with it ( and I'm no spring chicken ). Ignoring a PPC "ticket" will have not affect on your ability to get mortgages or credit.

Yes your mother should ignore the unenforceable threats and don't just take our word for it, take the word of the solicitor who was on Watchdog - unless of course he's immature and full of bravado ?

 

[BensGrandad]

I have taken advice from Peppipoo and as such do not pay charges levied against me at private car parks like supermarkets etc. I decided to go my own way on a couple of such occassions and wrote to the company telling them that I would invoice them for any reply that I had to write to them. I duly, after many letters from them replied and charged them via invoice £25 per reply. I also told them that I would add interest at the same rate at the most expensive credit cards for any balance outstanding at 1st of each calendar month and the after 6 months will take action against them in the small claims court. End product is they owe me £200 instead pf the £70 they wanted my daughter in law to pay. They have stopped writing to me and on 1st April I will lodge a claim at Haywards Heath County Court. Great fun playing them at their own game even if they dont have to pay but I am hopeful.

 

[Westdene Seagull]

The "classic scam" that no doubt troubles LadySeagull and her friends is to claim "overstaying" as the basis for a further payment. This isn't the case here.

Indeed, the case here is someone who has paid being threatened with an illegal penalty. That is not allowed and the "appeals" process is anything but independent.

 

[Westdene Seagull]

and clamp them if you use their car park again.

Which is illegal !!!!! Once again it comes back to many PPCs being scammers.

 

[Westdene Seagull]

I have taken advice from Peppipoo and as such do not pay charges levied against me at private car parks like supermarkets etc. I decided to go my own way on a couple of such occassions and wrote to the company telling them that I would invoice them for any reply that I had to write to them. I duly, after many letters from them replied and charged them via invoice £25 per reply. I also told them that I would add interest at the same rate at the most expensive credit cards for any balance outstanding at 1st of each calendar month and the after 6 months will take action against them in the small claims court. End product is they owe me £200 instead pf the £70 they wanted my daughter in law to pay. They have stopped writing to me and on 1st April I will lodge a claim at Haywards Heath County Court. Great fun playing them at their own game even if they dont have to pay but I am hopeful.

I agree with invoicing them but don't you need a credit licence to charge interest ?

 

[e77]

Which is illegal !!!!! Once again it comes back to many PPCs being scammers.

The whole (or at least most of it) industry is rotten.

Pity though, as private land owners should be able to decide who can park on their land.

 

[BensGrandad]

I agree with invoicing them but don't you need a credit licence to charge interest ?

I am not sure about that as I hadnt considered it but I am sure that if a registrar granted in my favour he would wipe out that part from the debt not the entire debt.