Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Private 'penalty' notices with a threat not to remove
FightBack Forums > Queries > Council Tickets & Clamping and Decriminalised Notices
zamzara
I have noticed that some of these online do it yourself parking-ticket-packs contain penalty notices which look exactly like yellow and black council tickets, even down to the wording: "Penalty Charge Notice. Warning: it is an offence for any person other than the driver to remove this notice".

The parking ticket companies have obviously done this to make the tickets look as though they have some official status which they do not. Unfortunately for them, the Administration of Justice Act 1970 says this:

QUOTE
Section 40 of the act provides that a person commits an offence if, with the object of coercing another person to pay money claimed from the other as a debt due under contract, he or she:

...

(d) utters a document falsely represented by him to have some official character or purporting to have some official character which he knows it has not.


Very naughty.
g_attrill
Yes, most of the large private ticketing companies seem to be very careful to stay just on the legal side of printing pseudo-legal notices but not using the official words and phrases and not implying that any laws have been broken. The dodgiest one I have been had a generic crest and a Royal town name where the ticket was issued.

Gareth
KEV2007
are these diy tickets enforcable even if correcty issued ?

Is there any burden of proof the ticket i am fighting at the mo from uk p.a.o was issued i since found out by a guard who i have had issues with in the past (long story)

just sitting on it at the mo is there any thing else i need to be doing

cheers

kevin
g_attrill
QUOTE (KEV2007 @ Tue, 27 Jun 2006 - 09:38) *
are these diy tickets enforcable even if correcty issued ?


I still haven't seen any references to cases where the legality of the ticket itself has been challenged. I have heard that Euro Car Parks have taken some people to court but I don't know on what basis, or how the driver/RK responded. If the RK admitted being the driver but fought the case on a seperate issue and didn't dispute the legality then it's not much use to us.

The "ultimate" answer would be to write back requesting proof that the RK was the driver, and insist that there is no proof that a contract was formed. It is of course important for the RK not to deny they were driving.

One snag is that the case will be decided on the balance of probabilities, and the judge might decide that since the RK hasn't provided any more information then they are more likely to be the driver than not. However I'm sure that a decent solicitor could easily counter this and say that it is incorrect to make such an assumption and that if such a thing was allowed it would post wider questions on contractual issues.

Gareth
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.
Invision Power Board © 2001-2019 Invision Power Services, Inc.