Home

   Log in or Register



Insurance Quotes
forums Campsite Search Comp Directory tips virtual brochure Profile
Tent and Awning Reviews Competitions Caravans and Motorhomes For Sale Shopping Diary Contact Us

Advertisement

Message Forums

Welcome Guest Register Login Search The Forum Posts Since Last Visit
 Reception - All Forums
  Life in General
Share   Post on X / Twitter  Share on Facebook  Email  Printer Friendly Version Print
Subject Topic: cwdc56768
Page:  1  2 Post Reply Post New Topic
06/11/2015 at 1:02pm
 Location: Worcestershire
 Outfit: Buccaneer Cruiser
View iank01's Profile View Profile   Reply to iank01 Reply   Quote iank01 Quote  
Joined: 30/6/2004

Diamond Member
Diamond Member

Forum Posts:   3995

Site Reviews Total: 4
Site Reviews 2024: 0  
Site Reviews 2023: 0  
Site Reviews 2022: 0  
Site Reviews 2021: 1  
Site Reviews 2020: 0  
Site Reviews 2019: 0  
Site Reviews 2018: 0  
Site Nights 2024: 0
Site Nights 2023: 0
Site Nights 2022: 0
Site Nights 2021: 10
Site Nights 2020: 0
Site Nights 2019: 0
Site Nights 2018: 0

Quote: Originally posted by Opensauce on 06/11/2015
As pointed out in the other thread, the case changes nothing. The Judge in this case decided the charge was fair & reasonable, had the charge been 200 he might have decided differently. The case does not set a precedent & anybody is still free to refuse to pay a charge that they consider is not fair & reasonable & the PPC can take them to court for the money if they wish.

Its actually a good decision by the judge because he was hardly going to rule that nobody could charge anything for parking because then we would have parking anarchy & by not defining a figure that was 'fair & reasonable' anybody is still able to challenge a PPC right up to the Supreme Court if they wish.




It is the amount being charged for overstaying that is unreasonable and contrary to the Unfair Terms Act.


06/11/2015 at 1:14pm
 Location: 
 Outfit: 
View Opensauce's Profile View Profile   Reply to Opensauce Reply   Quote Opensauce Quote  
Joined: 25/1/2010

Diamond Member
Diamond Member

Forum Posts:   4530

Site Reviews Total: 13
Site Reviews 2024: 0  
Site Reviews 2023: 0  
Site Reviews 2022: 0  
Site Reviews 2021: 0  
Site Reviews 2020: 0  
Site Reviews 2019: 0  
Site Reviews 2018: 0  
Site Nights 2024: 0
Site Nights 2023: 0
Site Nights 2022: 0
Site Nights 2021: 0
Site Nights 2020: 0
Site Nights 2019: 0
Site Nights 2018: 0

You answer illustrates perfectly why this will never resolved satisfactorily because there is no clear definition of the amount. If one argues that any amount at all is unfair then one will never win because no court is ever going to rule that no charge of any sort can ever be levied for parking.

If anybody believes they have been incorrectly charged for whatever reason, be it anything from incorrect signage to just an unreasonable amount charged for the time overstayed then they are still free to fight the PPC in court if it is taken that far.


06/11/2015 at 1:38pm
 Location: Keswick
 Outfit: Bailey
View cwdc56768's Profile View Profile   Reply to cwdc56768 Reply   Quote cwdc56768 Quote  
Joined: 11/12/2009

Diamond Member
Diamond Member

Forum Posts:   3150

Site Reviews Total: 8
Site Reviews 2024: 0  
Site Reviews 2023: 0  
Site Reviews 2022: 0  
Site Reviews 2021: 0  
Site Reviews 2020: 0  
Site Reviews 2019: 0  
Site Reviews 2018: 0  
Site Nights 2024: 0
Site Nights 2023: 0
Site Nights 2022: 0
Site Nights 2021: 0
Site Nights 2020: 0
Site Nights 2019: 0
Site Nights 2018: 0

The Court determined that the charge did not offend the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regs. It merely agreed that in the circumstances of this case that 85 was reasonable. The circumstances being that it was a private car park where retailers needed to encourage a turnover of vehicles to ensure sufficient parking spaces were always available for their customers to come along and spend their money. No car parking and folk won't turn up and then shops close etc etc.

Book a holiday and then don't turn up without advance warning and you lose your deposit and which can be more than 85. That's a similar issue that we have accepted for years. I just lost the best part of 1000 because we had to cancel a holiday at the last minute due to my wife being hospitalised. That's life!

The court also took the view that motorists know that, in this day and age, if they commit a parking infringement somewhere in the region of 85 is charged.

There have been suggestions that this decision will enable other business to charge an arm and a leg for some infringement, but I am not convinced.

The "damages" still have to be proportionate. We can be shocked that 85 is considered proportionate but we are where we are.

Pressure should be brought to bear on the Government which is looking at the possibility of regulating the industry for it to do just that. If it does then I dare say that it will fix the charge at 85 or whatever the average Council parking charge is. Regulation should also include for one strike and you are out. One breach of a licence to operate and your licence is cancelled. That would stop one of the main bugbears of the industry - those who cheat or trick motorists.



-------------
If you're not on a fell your wasting your feet and for 2014 it's.......Feb Castleton Mar North Yors Moors; Apr Sutton on Sea; May Thirsk; Jun Clapham/Riverside (Lakes); July Wharfedale; August Crakehall; Sept Knaresborough; Oct Wirral Park/Clitheroe    


06/11/2015 at 1:48pm
 Location: Worcestershire
 Outfit: Buccaneer Cruiser
View iank01's Profile View Profile   Reply to iank01 Reply   Quote iank01 Quote  
Joined: 30/6/2004

Diamond Member
Diamond Member

Forum Posts:   3995

Site Reviews Total: 4
Site Reviews 2024: 0  
Site Reviews 2023: 0  
Site Reviews 2022: 0  
Site Reviews 2021: 1  
Site Reviews 2020: 0  
Site Reviews 2019: 0  
Site Reviews 2018: 0  
Site Nights 2024: 0
Site Nights 2023: 0
Site Nights 2022: 0
Site Nights 2021: 10
Site Nights 2020: 0
Site Nights 2019: 0
Site Nights 2018: 0

Quote: Originally posted by cwdc56768 on 06/11/2015
The Court determined that the charge did not offend the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regs. It merely agreed that in the circumstances of this case that 85 was reasonable. The circumstances being that it was a private car park where retailers needed to encourage a turnover of vehicles to ensure sufficient parking spaces were always available for their customers to come along and spend their money. No car parking and folk won't turn up and then shops close etc etc.



As above that would seem to indicate that if the car park was half full most of the day then the amount of 85 is unreasonable at the time the invoice was issued?
However as you state a lot depends on the circumstances and invoices can still be challenged.
Either way it seems that the judges have opened the door for other businesses to abuse the ruling for their own financial gain as the judges effectively over ruled the Unfair Terms Act.


06/11/2015 at 2:52pm
 Location: Keswick
 Outfit: Bailey
View cwdc56768's Profile View Profile   Reply to cwdc56768 Reply   Quote cwdc56768 Quote  
Joined: 11/12/2009

Diamond Member
Diamond Member

Forum Posts:   3150

Site Reviews Total: 8
Site Reviews 2024: 0  
Site Reviews 2023: 0  
Site Reviews 2022: 0  
Site Reviews 2021: 0  
Site Reviews 2020: 0  
Site Reviews 2019: 0  
Site Reviews 2018: 0  
Site Nights 2024: 0
Site Nights 2023: 0
Site Nights 2022: 0
Site Nights 2021: 0
Site Nights 2020: 0
Site Nights 2019: 0
Site Nights 2018: 0

As above that would seem to indicate that if the car park was half full most of the day then the amount of 85 is unreasonable at the time the invoice was issued?

No - what the Court decided was that the parking management model implemented by PE was to load the costs of management plus profit on to those who breach the Ts and Cs. It was claimed in court that about 98% of motorists abide by the rules. So those who don't get charged the 85. It's not about loss when a car park is half empty.

The business model was designed in part as a deterrent to ensure that car parking space was available by encouraging motorists not to stay too long. The model also provided 2 hours free parking. if you are going to have that benefit there needs to be an incentive to leave otherwise folk would stay for free all day.

The decision leaned heavily on a similar decision over high charges reached two years ago but no one has been complaining about that case. Further a few years back high bank charges were approved through the courts even where they were imposed as a deterrent against breaking Ts and Cs.

The fact that it is PE perhaps clouds some views as to just what the case decided and that the decision is not that much different from similar decisions over the years.



-------------
If you're not on a fell your wasting your feet and for 2014 it's.......Feb Castleton Mar North Yors Moors; Apr Sutton on Sea; May Thirsk; Jun Clapham/Riverside (Lakes); July Wharfedale; August Crakehall; Sept Knaresborough; Oct Wirral Park/Clitheroe    


Advertisement



06/11/2015 at 4:01pm
 Location: Milton Keynes
 Outfit: Bailey Alliance 66-2 Motorhome
View David Klyne's Profile View Profile   Reply to David Klyne Reply   Quote David Klyne Quote  
Joined: 13/2/2004

Diamond Member
Diamond Member

Forum Posts:   9574

Site Reviews Total: 257
Site Reviews 2024: 1  
Site Reviews 2023: 6  
Site Reviews 2022: 15 
Site Reviews 2021: 7  
Site Reviews 2020: 1  
Site Reviews 2019: 16 
Site Reviews 2018: 15 
Site Nights 2024: 3
Site Nights 2023: 22
Site Nights 2022: 62
Site Nights 2021: 33
Site Nights 2020: 4
Site Nights 2019: 56
Site Nights 2018: 15

Just out of interest, is it right that this case has gone as far as it can? I am sure I read somewhere that it couldn't forward to the European Court of Justice. If this is correct, why is this?

David


06/11/2015 at 4:08pm
 Location: Ramsbottom Lancashire
 Outfit: Abbey Safari 520 Kuga 150 Titanium
View orion50's Profile View Profile   Reply to orion50 Reply   Quote orion50 Quote  
Joined: 28/8/2006

Silver Member
Silver Member

Forum Posts:   141

Site Reviews Total: 1
Site Reviews 2024: 0  
Site Reviews 2023: 0  
Site Reviews 2022: 0  
Site Reviews 2021: 0  
Site Reviews 2020: 0  
Site Reviews 2019: 0  
Site Reviews 2018: 0  
Site Nights 2024: 0
Site Nights 2023: 0
Site Nights 2022: 0
Site Nights 2021: 0
Site Nights 2020: 0
Site Nights 2019: 0
Site Nights 2018: 0

David Klyne & Phil back in post now that is like the good old times

Cheers


06/11/2015 at 4:09pm
 Location: Keswick
 Outfit: Bailey
View cwdc56768's Profile View Profile   Reply to cwdc56768 Reply   Quote cwdc56768 Quote  
Joined: 11/12/2009

Diamond Member
Diamond Member

Forum Posts:   3150

Site Reviews Total: 8
Site Reviews 2024: 0  
Site Reviews 2023: 0  
Site Reviews 2022: 0  
Site Reviews 2021: 0  
Site Reviews 2020: 0  
Site Reviews 2019: 0  
Site Reviews 2018: 0  
Site Nights 2024: 0
Site Nights 2023: 0
Site Nights 2022: 0
Site Nights 2021: 0
Site Nights 2020: 0
Site Nights 2019: 0
Site Nights 2018: 0

Yes it halts here. There will be no appeal further up the judicial chain.

-------------
If you're not on a fell your wasting your feet and for 2014 it's.......Feb Castleton Mar North Yors Moors; Apr Sutton on Sea; May Thirsk; Jun Clapham/Riverside (Lakes); July Wharfedale; August Crakehall; Sept Knaresborough; Oct Wirral Park/Clitheroe    


06/11/2015 at 4:15pm
 Location: Keswick
 Outfit: Bailey
View cwdc56768's Profile View Profile   Reply to cwdc56768 Reply   Quote cwdc56768 Quote  
Joined: 11/12/2009

Diamond Member
Diamond Member

Forum Posts:   3150

Site Reviews Total: 8
Site Reviews 2024: 0  
Site Reviews 2023: 0  
Site Reviews 2022: 0  
Site Reviews 2021: 0  
Site Reviews 2020: 0  
Site Reviews 2019: 0  
Site Reviews 2018: 0  
Site Nights 2024: 0
Site Nights 2023: 0
Site Nights 2022: 0
Site Nights 2021: 0
Site Nights 2020: 0
Site Nights 2019: 0
Site Nights 2018: 0

Interesting that I assisted a person with a defence to a PE claim (which has been stayed pending the Beavis outcome)and in the Beavis Judgment a Judge confirmed that our defence was valid.

You see you need to read a judgment on the basis of what help can it provide rather than as a critique of the Judges.

Pending the case coming to a hearing I won't say on a public forum just what it is.

Bingo!

-------------
If you're not on a fell your wasting your feet and for 2014 it's.......Feb Castleton Mar North Yors Moors; Apr Sutton on Sea; May Thirsk; Jun Clapham/Riverside (Lakes); July Wharfedale; August Crakehall; Sept Knaresborough; Oct Wirral Park/Clitheroe    


06/11/2015 at 4:59pm
 Location: 
 Outfit: 
View Bill Terry's Profile View Profile   Reply to Bill Terry Reply   Quote Bill Terry Quote  
Joined: 19/5/2006

Diamond Member
Diamond Member

Forum Posts:   2197

Site Reviews Total: 2
Site Reviews 2024: 0  
Site Reviews 2023: 0  
Site Reviews 2022: 0  
Site Reviews 2021: 0  
Site Reviews 2020: 0  
Site Reviews 2019: 0  
Site Reviews 2018: 0  
Site Nights 2024: 0
Site Nights 2023: 0
Site Nights 2022: 0
Site Nights 2021: 0
Site Nights 2020: 0
Site Nights 2019: 0
Site Nights 2018: 0

Quote: Originally posted by jeff juke on 05/11/2015
Quote: Originally posted by Bill Terry on 05/11/2015Not seen him around for a good while,anyone any info?



Bill did you have to encourage him



I knew Phil could not resist coming out the wood work

Just nice to see you bob in and out.

-------------
Roughing it in style at Calloose caravan and camping holiday park nr St Ives.(seasonal pitch)
Its not a hangover, its wine flu!


nant mill.N/Wales
just dont go there.


Advertisement



06/11/2015 at 5:17pm
 Location: 
 Outfit: 
View Opensauce's Profile View Profile   Reply to Opensauce Reply   Quote Opensauce Quote  
Joined: 25/1/2010

Diamond Member
Diamond Member

Forum Posts:   4530

Site Reviews Total: 13
Site Reviews 2024: 0  
Site Reviews 2023: 0  
Site Reviews 2022: 0  
Site Reviews 2021: 0  
Site Reviews 2020: 0  
Site Reviews 2019: 0  
Site Reviews 2018: 0  
Site Nights 2024: 0
Site Nights 2023: 0
Site Nights 2022: 0
Site Nights 2021: 0
Site Nights 2020: 0
Site Nights 2019: 0
Site Nights 2018: 0

Has the Beavis case changed anything though? All it ruled was that the charge of 85 of overstaying by an hour was reasonable. If one checks random local council websites one will see that excess parking charges range around 60-80 with 50% reduction for payment within 14 days so not much behind PPCs.


06/11/2015 at 6:09pm
 Location: Keswick
 Outfit: Bailey
View cwdc56768's Profile View Profile   Reply to cwdc56768 Reply   Quote cwdc56768 Quote  
Joined: 11/12/2009

Diamond Member
Diamond Member

Forum Posts:   3150

Site Reviews Total: 8
Site Reviews 2024: 0  
Site Reviews 2023: 0  
Site Reviews 2022: 0  
Site Reviews 2021: 0  
Site Reviews 2020: 0  
Site Reviews 2019: 0  
Site Reviews 2018: 0  
Site Nights 2024: 0
Site Nights 2023: 0
Site Nights 2022: 0
Site Nights 2021: 0
Site Nights 2020: 0
Site Nights 2019: 0
Site Nights 2018: 0

The only thing that it has changed now is peoples perception of what is right and what is wrong. Everyone thought that 85 was too much for a couple of minutes overstay. The Court has said "well no that's what a Council charges isn't it? You you can pay 50 instead if you pay within 14 days.

Mourino slags off a ref and gets fined 40,000 and we all agree that's fine (unless you are a Chelsea fan)

Using your mobile whilst driving is a 100 fine and that's fine. Ok there is a hint of danger here but its still breaking Ts and Cs. Incidentally the Government is proposing to up that to 200.

I posted a few posts earlier that in the Beavis case the Court followed a decision from 2 years back.

Nothing has changed - don't forget that I said this would happen back in 2013 - it just takes time to come though the system. As the Court in Beavis commented the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 set this up.









-------------
If you're not on a fell your wasting your feet and for 2014 it's.......Feb Castleton Mar North Yors Moors; Apr Sutton on Sea; May Thirsk; Jun Clapham/Riverside (Lakes); July Wharfedale; August Crakehall; Sept Knaresborough; Oct Wirral Park/Clitheroe    


06/11/2015 at 7:39pm
 Location: 
 Outfit: 
View Opensauce's Profile View Profile   Reply to Opensauce Reply   Quote Opensauce Quote  
Joined: 25/1/2010

Diamond Member
Diamond Member

Forum Posts:   4530

Site Reviews Total: 13
Site Reviews 2024: 0  
Site Reviews 2023: 0  
Site Reviews 2022: 0  
Site Reviews 2021: 0  
Site Reviews 2020: 0  
Site Reviews 2019: 0  
Site Reviews 2018: 0  
Site Nights 2024: 0
Site Nights 2023: 0
Site Nights 2022: 0
Site Nights 2021: 0
Site Nights 2020: 0
Site Nights 2019: 0
Site Nights 2018: 0

I think the problem all along has been that everything has been lumped in together as 'unfair parking charges' when every case is different & has to be looked at separately.

The(for want of a better phrase)'anti parking charge movement' has always shot itself in the foot by it's failure to define clear goals & aims. It was obvious from the start the Beavis case, far from being the test case some believed it would be was just an individual case & any judgement would always relate just to that case & no other.



In order to post a reply you will need to register, or if already registered please log in here

  Prev       Next

Jump To Page:  1  2

Quick Links - All Forums - Life in General - Top of Page

Printer Friendly Version Printable version      Share   Post on X / Twitter  Share on Facebook  Email


Latest News, Discounts and Competitions  see all...














2772 Visitors online !

Free UKCampsite.co.uk Window Sticker  -  Recommend to Friend  -  Add a Missing Campsite

[Message Forums]  [Caravan Sites & Camping]  [Company Listings]  [Features / Advice]  [Virtual Brochure]  [Shop!]
[Reception]  [Competitions]  [Caravans & Motorhomes For Sale]  [Event Diary]  [Contact Us]  [Tent Reviews



Please note we are not responsible for the content of external sites & any reviews represent the author's personal view only. Please report any error here. You may view our privacy and cookie policy and terms and conditions here. All copyrights & other intellectual property rights in the design and content of this web site are reserved to the UKCampsite.co.uk © 1999 - 2024


Advertisement



Advertisement



Advertisement