PCN, You may be ticketed. |
PCN, You may be ticketed. |
Sun, 10 Jun 2018 - 16:54
Post
#1
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 838 Joined: 7 Jun 2010 From: planet earth Member No.: 38,027 |
As previously discussed on here my team do a 24/7 on call emergency rota .
Our new oncall emergency pass now reads ; Emergency paking after 18:00 till 6am monday to friday. 24 hours parking weekends n bank holidays. If parked to attend outside these hours you MAY be ticketed. So basically whatever the pco feels like on any given day ,very presumptuous and erroneous . Your feeling and opinions please. This post has been edited by mashman36: Sun, 10 Jun 2018 - 19:44 |
|
|
Advertisement |
Sun, 10 Jun 2018 - 16:54
Post
#
|
Advertise here! |
|
|
|
Fri, 15 Jun 2018 - 11:23
Post
#21
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 25,726 Joined: 28 Jun 2010 From: Area 51 Member No.: 38,559 |
Wouldn't 'may' get a ticket (you may get one, you may not) be an ambiguous contract term which should be interpreted in favour of the consumer? So 'you may not' is the 'correct' interpretation? I realise this is a wild and crazy hypothesis, and am happy for it to be ripped apart. Parking Contract Terms will be in the car park, "May" on the permit is simply a warning. |
|
|
Fri, 15 Jun 2018 - 17:18
Post
#22
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 33,610 Joined: 2 Apr 2008 From: Not in the UK Member No.: 18,483 |
Wouldn't 'may' get a ticket (you may get one, you may not) be an ambiguous contract term which should be interpreted in favour of the consumer? So 'you may not' is the 'correct' interpretation? I realise this is a wild and crazy hypothesis, and am happy for it to be ripped apart. It’s not a contract term though, is it? It’s simply a mechanism for enforcement of contractual terms, it’s not a term any party is required to follow. -------------------- Moderator
Any comments made do not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon. No lawyer/client relationship should be assumed nor should any duty of care be owed. |
|
|
Fri, 15 Jun 2018 - 19:28
Post
#23
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 838 Joined: 7 Jun 2010 From: planet earth Member No.: 38,027 |
I really do want to stick it them I just havnt the overall knowledge to contracrually turn it on its head and have em bang to rights
|
|
|
Tue, 19 Jun 2018 - 13:11
Post
#24
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 838 Joined: 7 Jun 2010 From: planet earth Member No.: 38,027 |
I believe the vehicle has been ghost ticketed.
The driver of the vehicle had been called out on an emergency to attend during the day and to respond ASAP. I have spoken with the driver who told me that the appropriate people had been made aware .A permit was placed in the window; the permit does say MAY be ticketed not Will be ticketed which is ambiguous and vexatious and is not a contractual term. A member of staff took a photograph of two parking offices putting a ticket on the car but when the driver arrived the ticket was no longer present on the car. The driver was not aware of being ticketed. The keeper was made aware at a later date that the car was ticketed. I am appealing on the grounds of that no one was aware of any pcn ticket. That the ticket was ghosted to affect any appeal process. Schedule 4 paragraph 7 of the PoFA The wording on the permit ambiguous and vexatious. The word May does not form a contractual term and is open to interpretation. |
|
|
Thu, 21 Jun 2018 - 00:34
Post
#25
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 2,356 Joined: 30 Jun 2008 From: Landan Member No.: 20,731 |
Sounds like we're not in Kansas anymore? Perhaps a new thread in the PPT&C forum would be appropriate.
The permit is unlikely to be part of the contract; the signs are the contract or, rather, the contractual offer that was allegedly accepted by the driver when he or she decided to park in that location. (Is that the sign in post #7 by typefish? Not sure why he posted it and not you. In any case, that sign says nothing about permits.) So, what do the signs where the driver parked say? Let's start there, and then move on to the wording of the actual PCN. Ghost ticketing won't be easy to prove and may be irrelevant to achieve your ends. --Churchmouse |
|
|
Thu, 21 Jun 2018 - 02:58
Post
#26
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 838 Joined: 7 Jun 2010 From: planet earth Member No.: 38,027 |
Sounds like we're not in Kansas anymore? Perhaps a new thread in the PPT&C forum would be appropriate. the sign that is posted is nothing to do with the case!The permit is unlikely to be part of the contract; the signs are the contract or, rather, the contractual offer that was allegedly accepted by the driver when he or she decided to park in that location. (Is that the sign in post #7 by typefish? Not sure why he posted it and not you. In any case, that sign says nothing about permits.) So, what do the signs where the driver parked say? Let's start there, and then move on to the wording of the actual PCN. Ghost ticketing won't be easy to prove and may be irrelevant to achieve your ends. --Churchmouse I will post up the relevant one later today. |
|
|
Thu, 21 Jun 2018 - 15:08
Post
#27
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 838 Joined: 7 Jun 2010 From: planet earth Member No.: 38,027 |
Sounds like we're not in Kansas anymore? Perhaps a new thread in the PPT&C forum would be appropriate. the sign that is posted is nothing to do with the case!The permit is unlikely to be part of the contract; the signs are the contract or, rather, the contractual offer that was allegedly accepted by the driver when he or she decided to park in that location. (Is that the sign in post #7 by typefish? Not sure why he posted it and not you. In any case, that sign says nothing about permits.) So, what do the signs where the driver parked say? Let's start there, and then move on to the wording of the actual PCN. Ghost ticketing won't be easy to prove and may be irrelevant to achieve your ends. --Churchmouse I will post up the relevant one later today. |
|
|
Thu, 21 Jun 2018 - 15:27
Post
#28
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 3,306 Joined: 4 Mar 2017 Member No.: 90,659 |
Why don't you park in an area not signed as a no parking zone?
Even if you have a permit they are unlikely to be valid in areas where all parking is prohibited. |
|
|
Thu, 21 Jun 2018 - 16:06
Post
#29
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 9,985 Joined: 20 Aug 2008 Member No.: 21,992 |
Strange sign.
It says no parking, and then it says you CAN park, but the charge is £70, regardless of whether you're a permit holder or not. It also forbids blue badge holders from doing ANYTHING. Dunno what to make of it to be honest!! -------------------- Sometimes I use big words I don't understand in an effort to make myself sound more photosynthesis.
|
|
|
Thu, 21 Jun 2018 - 16:26
Post
#30
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 41,510 Joined: 25 Aug 2011 From: Planet Earth Member No.: 49,223 |
It says no parking, and then it says you CAN park, but the charge is £70, regardless of whether you're a permit holder or not. So it's not forbidding. It makes a genuine offer to park if you agree to the charge. Premiership footballers may actually think £70 is a reasonable sum. -------------------- RK=Registered Keeper, OP=Original Poster (You!), CoFP=Conditional Offer of Fixed Penalty, NtK=Notice to Keeper, NtD=Notice to Driver
PoFA=Protection of Freedoms Act, SAC=Safety Awareness Course, NIP=Notice of Intended Prosecution, ADR=Alternative Dispute Resolution PPC=Private Parking Company, LBCCC=Letter Before County Court Claim, PII=Personally Identifiable Information, SAR=Subject Access Request Private Parking - remember, they just want your money and will say almost anything to get it. |
|
|
Thu, 21 Jun 2018 - 18:25
Post
#31
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 38,006 Joined: 3 Dec 2010 Member No.: 42,618 |
It says no parking, and then it says you CAN park, but the charge is £70, regardless of whether you're a permit holder or not. So it's not forbidding. It makes a genuine offer to park if you agree to the charge. Premiership footballers may actually think £70 is a reasonable sum. It's only £35 if you pay promptly, which is cheaper than all day parking in some central London car parks. -------------------- If you would like assistance with a penalty charge notice, please post a thread on https://www.ftla.uk/index.php
|
|
|
Thu, 21 Jun 2018 - 23:31
Post
#32
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 2,356 Joined: 30 Jun 2008 From: Landan Member No.: 20,731 |
It says no parking, and then it says you CAN park, but the charge is £70, regardless of whether you're a permit holder or not. So it's not forbidding. It makes a genuine offer to park if you agree to the charge. Premiership footballers may actually think £70 is a reasonable sum. "No Parking Zone" is unambiguously forbidding. So it is forbidding. But the terms go on to contradict one another by seeming to then offer parking in exchange for a fee/charge/penalty (whatever we're calling it these days). So it's not forbidding? What it is, is a nonsense. It is a clumsy attempt to dress up a trespass claim as a breach of contract, and any jurist who cannot see that does not belong on the bench. --Churchmouse |
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: Friday, 29th March 2024 - 10:45 |